Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2013-12-17_COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2013 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER 11. 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 December 3, 2013 and Work Session of December 3, 2013 B. Receive Payment of Claims as Per: Pre -List Dated, 12/05/2013, TOTAL $767,244.92 and Pre -List Dated, 12-/12/2013 TOTAL $773,456.17 C:— Resolution -No- 2013=1 -37- Accepting -Blue Card Training Grant D. Resolution No. 2013 -138 Authorizing The Removal Of A Senior Citizen Special Assessment Deferral By Hennepin County E. Request For Purchase - Contract for Construction Management Services for the Sports Dome, Outdoor Refrigerated Ice Rink and Braemar Arena Improvements, RJM Construction F. Traffic Safety Report, November 6, 2013 G. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Application For Reauthorization H. Renew Community Health Services Agreement With Bloomington Public Health Division I. Renew Public Health Emergency Preparedness Services Agreement With Bloomington Public Health Division J. On -Sale 3.2 Beer and Wine Licenses, Makers Cafe 1, LLC dba Makers Cafe, 4920 West 77th Street K. Request For Purchase — Edina Liquor Grandview Store Remodel V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Nate Behlen — 2013 Operator of the Year — Sewer & Water Operation Association B. Memorial Blood Centers Award — Edina Police Department Battle Of The Badges Agenda/Edina City Council S December 17, 2013 Page 2 ' V1. PUBLIC HEARINGS During "Public Hearings," the' Mayor will ask for public testimony after City staff members make their presentations. If you wish to testify on -the topic, you are welcome to do so as long as your testimony is relevant to .the discussion. To ensure fairness to all speakers and to allow the efficient conduct of a public hearing, speakers must observe the following guidelines: • individuals must .limit _their testimony to three minutes. The Mayor may modify times, as deemed necessary. • Try not to,repeat remarks or points of view made by prior speakers and limit testimony to the matter under consideration. • In . order to : maintain a respectful ,environment for all those in attendance, the use of signs, . clapping, cheering or booing or, any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. A. _ PUBLIC HEARING — 2014 Building Fees, Second Reading Ordinance No. 2013-11 Amending Schedule 1851 Setting Fees for 2014 (Second Reading: Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote -of four Council Members to pass.) 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 some issue in the interest of time and topic Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not `be addressed during Community Comment Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments tonight Instead the Council might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VIII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Resolution No. 2013 -135 Setting 2014 Tax Levy And Adopting 2014 Operating Budget B. Resolution No. 2013 -136 Accepting Various Donations C. Ordinance No. 2013 -13 Temporarily_ Prohibiting Smoking Lounges And Vapor Lounges (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading. Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members.to pass.) D. Ordinance No. 20.13 -14 Enacting New Code For City of Edina (First Reading. Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading. Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading. Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members to pass.) E. Ordinance No. 2013 -15 Amending The Edina City Code Concerning The Community Health Committee (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only. Second Reading: Favorable rollcall vote of three Council Members to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: Affirmative rollcall vote of four Council Members to pass.) F. Accept Report and Authorize Professional Services — Trunk Sanitary Sewer Lining ., Agenda/Edina City Council December 17, 2013 Page 3 IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence B. Minutes 1. Heritage Preservation Board, December 9, 2013 2. Planning Commission, November 13, 2013 X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE XI. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS XII. MANAGER'S COMMENTS A. Southdale TIF B. Golf Enterprise Planning 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 COMMUNITY ROOM COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 17 Work Session —50 & France Parking Update 5:00 P.M. Tues Dec 17 Closed Session — Real Estate Acquisition 6:00 P.M. Tues Dec 17 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Tues Dec 24 CHRISTMAS EVE HOLIDAY OBSERVED —City Hall Closed at Noon Wed Dec 25 CHRISTMAS DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Dec 31 NEW YEAR'S EVE HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed at Noon Wed Jan 1 NEW YEAR'S DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED —City Hall Closed Tues Jan 7 Work Session — Meeting With Legislative Delegation 5:30 P.M. Tues Jan 7 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Jan 20 REV. DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR., HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Jan 21 Work Session — Grandview Advisory Team 5:30 P.M. Tues Jan 21 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Feb 3 Work Session — Residential Redevelopment Update 5:30 P.M. Mon Feb 3 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Mon Feb 17 PRESIDENTS DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED —City Hall Closed Tues Feb 18 Work Session - TBD 5:30 P.M. Tues Feb 18 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS COMMUNITY ROOM COUNCIL CHAMBERS �r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 3, 2013 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:12 p.m. 11. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Ill. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, approving the meeting agenda. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, approving the consent agenda, as follows: W.A. Approve regular, closed, and work session meeting minutes of November 19, 2013 IV.B. Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated November 21, 2013, and consisting of 38 pages; General Fund $347,070.27; Police Special Revenue $362.93; Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety $94,232.35; PIR Debt Service Fund $237.44; Working Capital Fund $790,259.52; Equipment Replacement Fund $94,929.58; Art Center Fund $3,067.38; Golf Dome Fund $6,200.37; Aquatic Center Fund $2,149.63; Golf Course Fund $12,963.03; Ice Arena Fund $58,588.26; Edinborough Park Fund $17,283.73; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $1,813.54; Liquor Fund $170,983.54; Utility Fund $30,905.81; Storm Sewer Fund $139,595.13; Recycling Fund $34,192.80; PSTF Agency Fund $25,976.54; Centennial TIF District $62,246.99; Grandview TIF District $48.00; Payroll Fund $7,955.52; TOTAL $1,901,062.36 and for receipt of payment of claims dated November 27, 2013, and consisting of 26 pages; General Fund $708,688.29; Police Special Revenue $744.07; Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety $538.75; PIR Debt Service Fund $94.93; Working Capital Fund $29,009.70; Art Center Fund $2,179.57; Golf Dome Fund $9,064.80; Aquatic Center Fund $408.17; Golf Course Fund $7,019.11; Ice Arena Fund $19,819.72; Edinborough Park Fund $9,168.23; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $3,943.30; Liquor Fund $224,558.91; Utility Fund $71,837.47; Storm Sewer Fund $629.89; Centennial TIF District $350.00; TOTAL $1,088.054.91; and, Credit Card Transactions dated September 26, 2013 — October 25, 2013; TOTAL $33.341.57 IV.C. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -115 Authorizing a One -Year Master Grant Contract Extension with Minnesota Department of Health IV.D. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -121 Approving Ambulance and Miscellaneous Fire Fees for 2014 IV.E. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -122 Approving 2014 Park and Recreation Fees IV.F. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -123 Approving Senior Citizen Special Assessment Deferrals IV.G. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -124 Approving Hennepin County Electronic Proprietary Data Base Conditional Use License Agreement IV.H. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -125 Receiving Feasibility Studies for 2014 Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Projects IV.I. Authorize Nine Mile Creek Cooperative Agreement — Promenade Phase 4 IV.J. Authorize Agreement with Expert T Billing for Ambulance Billing Services IVX Approve Technical Correction to minutes of December 4, 2012 IV.L. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -127 Approving Official Comments to the Pipelines and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHSMA) Page 1 Minutes /Edina Citv Council /December 3. 2013 IV.M. Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -126 Calling for Public Hearing Date for Pentagon Park TIF District IV.N. Request for Purchase, Multi- function Copier /Printer Administration Department, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Metro Sales at $23,385.32. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS None. Vt. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD — Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. 2014 OPERATING BUDGET REVIEWED Assistant Finance Manager Roggeman presented the budget work plan, timeline, biennial process that included citizen engagement, 2014 -2015 work plan themes, challenges that were addressed, and spending by department and category. He described the change in the book budget design and then presented the 2014 operating budget reflecting a 2.7% increase. The City's portion of taxes on a median market value home of $400,000 would increase $34, or 3.1 %. For a median market value commercial property of $1,611,400, the City's portion of taxes would increase $194, or 2.29 %. It was noted that 34% of residential single - family properties in Edina would have a decrease or no change in the total tax bill and 19% of commercial properties would have a decrease in their total tax bill. Mr. Roggeman presented a tax per capita comparison and total revenue comparison with neighboring communities. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:38 p.m. Public Testimony Frank Lorenz, 7101 York Avenue South, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Manager Neal addressed issues raised during public testimony, indicating the City completed development and implementation of a new pay plan. He explained why Edina does not position itself or aspire to be a pay leader. The Council and Mr. Neal discussed the level of staffing, how many positions were paid from matching revenue sources, and the City's fiscal restraint. The Council acknowledged its responsibility to be good stewards of the City's resources while delivering high quality services. Informational; action scheduled on December 17, 2013. VI.B. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT, SPALON MONTAGE, 3909 49N STREET AND 4936 FRANCE AVENUE —RESOLUTION NO. 2013-116 ADOPTED Community Development Director Teague presented the application of Spalon Montage to divide its property at 4936 France Avenue and 3909 West 49%: Street into two lots and the Planning Commission's unanimous recommendation for approval. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Page 2 I Minutes /Edina -City Council /December 3, 2013 Motion carried. Member Bennett introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -116, Approving a Subdivision of 4936 France Avenue and 3909 49% Street, based on the findings as detailed in the resolution and conditioned on the following: 1. Prior to filing of the approving resolution, all building code requirements required by the Building Official shall be met, specifically the construction of a fire_wall between the buildings. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI.C. PRELIMINARY PLAT AND VARIANCES — DENIED, GRETCHEN SHANIGHT, 5612 TRACY AVENUE — RESOLUTION NO. 2013-117 ADOPTED Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague presented the revised request of Gretchen Shanight to subdivide the property at 5612 Tracy Avenue, with variances for lot width, lot depth, and lot area. He indicated the Planning Commission found the variance criteria was not met, specifically that the driveway proposal was not consistent with the essential character of the neighborhood, and recommended denial on a 6 -1 vote. Mr. Teague answered the Council's questions related to median lot area and size of variances under consideration. Proponent Presentation Rod Helm, representing the proponent, presented the request and addressed concerns that had been expressed. He suggested there was a disproportionate distribution of median sized lots within this neighborhood that impacted the lot size calculation and created a practical difficulty. Gretchen Shanight, proponent, read a prepared statement indicating there were sufficient grounds to approve their application. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8 -7:31 p.m. Public Testimony Bruce McLellan, 5709 Hawkes Drive, addressed the Council. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Attorney Knutson explained that Chapter 810 regulated subdivision variances and Chapter 850 regulated zoning variances. He clarified this request was for a zoning variance and that ordinance allowed discretion for the Council to determine whether the variance criteria were met. The Council discussed the inability to meet required variance criteria, finding the requests were too great to maintain the character of the neighborhood. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -117, Denying a Preliminary Plat with Lot Width and Lot Area Variances at 5612 Tracy Avenue, based on the findings as detailed in the resolution. Member Sprague seconded the motion. ` Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI.D. SITE PLAN WITH VARIANCES, THINK MUTUAL BANK, 3655 HAZELTON ROAD — RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -118 ADOPTED Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /December 3, 2013 Community Development Director Presentation Community Development Director Teague presented the site plan and variance requests of HTG Architects, on behalf of Think Mutual Bank, to tear down the existing vacant restaurant and build a two - story 8,441 square foot bank /office at 3655 Hazelton Road. He also presented the unanimous recommendation of the Planning Commission for approval as the variance criteria were met. Proponent Presentation Jeff Pflipson, HTG Architects, described the architectural changes to address the Council's request relating to the facade facing the Promenade. He presented the request and exterior materials board and stated he agreed with staff's recommendation. The Council discussed the request and asked questions of Mr. Pflipson. The Council acknowledged the importance of good design to assure the building engaged the 80 -foot wide Promenade, minimizing the sense of encroachment from a shorter setback. Concerns were expressed that the blue exterior building material would be too dominant as proposed and should be lowered to three feet above the building height; that the elevation facing the Promenade should contain larger windows or spandrel glass; and, that the east elevation needed larger windows to match the window sizes on the north side. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:26 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -118, Approving a Site Plan with Variances at 3655 Hazelton Road to Build a Two -Story 8,441 Square Foot Bank /Office based on the findings as detailed in the resolution and subject to the following conditions: 1. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped November 7, 2013 • Grading plan date stamped November 7, 2013 • Landscaping plan date stamped November 7, 2013 • Building elevations date stamped November 7, 2013 • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council meeting 2. A total of thirty (30) parking stalls shall initially be constructed on the site. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, final landscape plan must be submitted, subject to staff approval. Landscape plan must meet all minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. 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. 4. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 5. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the District's requirements. 6. Compliance with the conditions required by the City Engineer in his memo dated November 4, 2013. 7. Building plans are subject to review and approval of the Fire Marshal at the time of building permit. 8. The applicant must enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City to ensure the necessary parking space will be provided, if needed. Should parking become a significant problem, staff will require the proof of parking stalls be constructed by adding the adyletion to the Pa" '('Rg Fame 9. Bike racks must be provided to meet minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. 10. Garbage collection areas must occur within the building. Page 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /December 3. 2013 11. Landscaping along the east property line, adjacent to the drive - through area, shall be increased to provide year round screening of car lights moving through the drive - through. Landscaping shall be subject to review and approval of City staff at the time of building permit application. 12. A three -foot reduction in height of blue panel so it does not exceed two feet above the building. 13. Increase size of windows and /or inclusion of spandrel glass on the north end of the east elevation, upper and lower levels, to match the window size in the north elevation. 14. Landscape plantings to have three - sea_ son interest. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VI.E. ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -12 MINOR REVISIONS FOR CLARIFICATION TO SECTION 850 REGARDING DEVELOPMENT IN THE R -1 ZONING DISTRICT — ADOPTED Community Development Director Teague presented the ordinance revision, including revisions suggested by the Council, and the Planning Commission's unanimous recommendation for approval. He noted correspondence from Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, supporting more substantive changes. The Council supported a revision to Page 5, top line, to indicate: "1. Single dwelling units buildings and attached structures accessory thereto." Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:37 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared to comment. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Swenson made a motion to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2013 -12 Amendment Regarding the R -1, Single- Dwelling Unit District, and R -2, Double Dwelling Unit District Requirements for Building Coverage, Setback, Height and General Regulations, as revised and amended above. Member Sprague seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Vll. COMMUNITY COMMENT ' Frank Lorenz, 7101 York Avenue South, expressed concern relating to Metropolitan Council and State legislative actions that would push Edina's population from 44,000 to 77,000 by 2035. Ben Berg, 4222 Grimes Avenue South, advocated revoking or revising the seasonal overnight parking ban. Vlll. REPORTS / RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -11 AMENDING SCHEDULE 185A SETTING FEES FOR 2014 — GRANTED FIRST READING Finance Director Wallin presented amendments to Schedule 185A as contained within Ordinance No. 2013 -11 and stafrs recommendation to schedule a public hearing for the December 17, 2013 Council meeting. Member Swenson made a motion to grant First Reading to Ordinance No. 2013=11 Amending Schedule 185A Setting Fees for 2014. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /December 3, 2013 VIII.B. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-120 FINAL PLAT & PRESERVATION EASEMENT, 5 MERILANE —ADOPTED Mr. Teague described the Final Plat and Preservation Easement for 5 Merilane and indicated the Final Plat was the same as the Preliminary Plat approved by the Council on October 1, 2013. He advised that the Johnson study contained an error; it switched the lot width and lot depth, which slightly changed the median. He stated the correct lot width was 195 feet and the correct lot depth was 279 feet. The Council discussed the revised language and supported adding language to the Declaration of Preservation Easement and Covenants, 2. Covenants. (b), to include the elimination of buckthorn. Tom Owens, lawyer representing the proponent, stated the covenant language already resulted in precluding buckthorn. The Council agreed with the suggestion of Attorney Knutson that staff revise the language to address the Council's concern related to buckthorn. Member Sprague introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -120 Approving a Final Plat at 5 Merilane based on the findings as detailed in the resolution and subject to the following conditions: 1. Park dedication fee of $10,000 must be paid prior to release of the Final Plat 2. 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 construction of the new homes. e. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the City Engineer. 3. Preservation easements established along the east lot lines, subject to approval of the City Council. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Attorney Knutson addressed correspondence from a Rolling Green resident and explained this case involved a variance from the zoning ordinance (not the subdivision ordinance) and the Council had more discretion to apply the criteria and objective standards when considering approval of this type of variance. VIII.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-119 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 Brindle Bennet i introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2013 -119 accepting various donations. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.D. DATE FOR CITY COUNCIL 2014 ANNUAL DINNER MEETING SELECTED The Council discussed availability and set the 2014 Annual Dinner Meeting on Monday, March 17, 2014, at the Hughes Pavilion, Centennial Lakes, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. VIII.E. DATE FOR 2014 VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION RECEPTION SELECTED The Council discussed availability and set the 2014 volunteer recognition reception on Tuesday, April 29, 2014 at Braemar Clubhouse. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS W.A. CORRESPONDENCE Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. Page 6 r Minutes /Edina City Council /December 3. 2013 IX.B. MINUTES: 1. ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION, OCTOBER 10, 2013 2. EDINA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, OCTOBER 24, 2013 3. VETERANS MEMORIAL COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 20, 2013 Informational; no action required. X. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE— Received Xi. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received The Council congratulated Clerk Mangen for being complimented by the Secretary of State as the best election clerk in the nation. X11. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received XII.A. E- CIGARETTES ORDINANCE The Council agreed with the recommendation of Mr. Neal to consider an interim ordinance regulating e- cigarettes at the December 17, 2013, meeting. XII.B. INTERVIEW DATES The Council scheduled Board and Commission interview dates on Thursday TuesdayR, February 6; Monday, February 10; and, Wednesday, February 19, 2014, and asked staff to provide a list of vacancies. XIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 10:51 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, December 17, 2013. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the December 3, 2013, meeting available. Page 7 MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL DECEMBER 3, 2013 5:32 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the work session of the Edina City Council to order at 5:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were: Members Brindle, Sprague and Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Member Bennett arrived at 5:33 p.m. Edina City Staff attending the meeting: Annie Coyle, City Manager Intern; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; Scott Neal, City Manager; Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Director; Joyce Repya, Associate Planner; and Cary Teague, Community Development Director. Edina Housing Foundation members attending included: Jeff Huggett, Doug Mayo, Mary Kay McNee, Jim Nelson and Jack Rice. Mayor Hovland welcomed members of the Edina Housing Foundation and stated the Council looked forward to an interesting presentation on housing issues and strategies. SOUTHWEST LRT CORRIDOR — WIDE HOUSING STRATEGY UPDATE Associate Planner Repya introduced Cathy Bennett of the Urban Land Institute. Ms. Bennett stated Kerri Pearce Ruch of Hennepin County would also join in the presentation on the Southwest LRT Corridor wide housing strategy. Topics included in the corridor -wide housing strategy included: Southwest LRT Community Works, why housing strategy is important, key points- completed housing inventory and next steps. Ms. Bennett and Ms. Ruch reviewed the key topic going over the housing inventory in greater detail and outlined the next steps that they hoped could be accomplished. The Council discussed the presentation with Ms. Bennett and Ms. Ruch noting the impact the changing demographics might have on housing, and reviewing aspects of the report on the area within .5 miles of a station. It was noted that Edina would most likely need to connect with transit stations via buses. Staff will continue to keep the council informed of development within the area. AFFORDABLE HOUSING POSSIBILITIES — STRATEGY FOR SUPPORT OF A FULL RANGE OF HOUSING CHOICES — EDINA HOUSING FOUNDATION PRESENTATION Members of the Edina Housing Foundation presented what affordable housing looks like in Edina currently and then presented some affordable projects from neighboring communities. The Foundation and Council discussed the role of city council in the development of affordable housing, minimum thresholds necessary to qualify for federal financing, important components of affordable rental housing, possible steps Edina could utilize to encourage affordable housing, the potential development of an affordable housing policy for the Council to adopt and whether or not tax increment financing could be used to incentivize inclusion of affordable housing in Edina developments. Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City.Council, December 17, 2013. Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013.10:21:44 . R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 1 Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 -- 12/5/2013 x Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377839 1215/2013 100613 AAA 1,859.65 TE PLATES FOR NEW VEHICLE 330394 112613 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,859.65 377840 12/512013 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 27.60 330124 1743124 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 83.60 330125 1742160 5862.5515 COST OF_GOODS'SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING. 87.60 330259 1742159 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX- YORK SELLING 34.00 330260 1743123 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 54.00 330261 1743122 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 286.80' 377841 121512013 105162 ADT SECURITY SERVICES 104.21 ALARM MONITORING 330322 260462451 5111.6250 ALARM SERVICE ART CENTER BLOG/MAINT 104.21 377842 121512013 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 859.03 FOOD 330209, 2028968 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL - 859:03 377843 121512013 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 98.21 COFFEE 330210 428589 5210.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GOLF DOME PROGRAM 98.21- 377844 121512013 118758 ASTLEFORD_ INTERNATIONAL 187.88 -. VEHICLE REPAIRS ' 330395 `W267991 1553.6180 .- CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 187.88 - - -- 377845 12/512013 119206 AZTECA SYSTEMS INC. 185.00 CITYWORKS SUPPORT 00002540 330396 8845 1263.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ENVIRONMENT 185.00 377846 121512013 100638 BACHMAN'S 203.96 TREETOPS 330397 112013 5422.6275 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION MAINT OF COURSE 8 GROUNDS 203.96 377847 12/512013 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 49.51 BATTERIES 330323 020 - 281517 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 49.51: 377848 121512013 120517 BEITEL, DAWN R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 2 Council Check Register and Summary 12/512013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377848 121512013 120517 BEITEL, DAWN Continued... 61.81 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330324 112713 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 61.81 377849 121612013 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 343.62 330126 89385600 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 42.55 330127 40694400 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 36.39 330128 40694800 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 284.65 330129 40694900 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 109.05 330130 89385700 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 91.41 330131 89385900 5860.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 1,840.10 330366 40694300 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,747.77 377850 121512013 101191 BENNEROTTE, JENNIFER 86.40 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330059 JURY DUTY 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 86.40 377851 121512013 133275 BERGREN, PERRY 118.72 OVERPAID SPECIAL ASSESSMENT 330060 06- 116- 21 -14 -00 18602.1232 SP ASSESS RE DEFERRED BA -387 VALLEY ESTATES 59 118.72 377852 121512013 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 168.35 COFFEE 330038 1133785 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 168.35 377853 121512013 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 342.39 OFFICE SUPPLIES 330039 WO- 893606 -1 7410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 159.31 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003033 330061 WO- 893848 -1 1400.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 48.31 PENS 330325 WO- 894689 -1 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 66.04 HAND SANITATION 330326 WO- 894689 -2 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 616.05 377854 121512013 101375 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS INC. 324.41 DOOR CORES 00006047 330398 S82107 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 324.41 377855 121512013 102545 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MN 157,978.50 PREMIUM 330036 DEC 2013 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 26,597.00 DEC 2013 COBRA 330037 112513 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 1213/2013 10:21:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 3 Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 — 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377855 121512013 102545- BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MN Continued... 184,575.50 377856 121512013 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 372.50 330367 116869 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 372.50 377857 1215/2013 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 9,780.70 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING - 330211` 378063 01246.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION OLD PW BLDG DEMOLITION - 9,780.70 377858 121512013 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 836.83 NEWSLETTER 60008292 330212 32899 1628.6575 PRINTING SENIOR CITIZENS 836.83 377859 121`512013 120541 CANNON RIVER WINERY 102.00 330368 6080 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 102.00 377860 121612.013 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 1,986.65 330132, 395852 5042.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 37.10 330133 395853 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 36.55 330262 395855 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 1,293.50 330263 395854 5822.5514, COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING - 3,353.80 377861 121512013 101307 CAREER TRACK 199.00 REGISTRATION- ESSENTIAL SKILLS 330327 LORI LOHMANN 5902.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS , UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE 199.00 377862 121512013 '102372 CDW GOVERNMENTINC. 740.83 DISPATCH DISPLAYS 00004365 330062 GX61169 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 740.83 377863- 121512013 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 72.08 5596524 -8 330063 5596524 -11113 5430.6186 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 1,875.43 5546504 -1 330064 5546504 -11/13 1470.6186 HEAT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 4,096.29 5591458 -4 330065 5591458 -11/13 1551.6186 HEAT CITY HALL GENERAL 24.28 5584310 -6 330066 5584310 -11/13 7413.6186 HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER 850.94 5584304 -9 330067 5584304 -11113 7411.6186 HEAT PSTF.000UPANCY 38.31 5590919 -6 330068 5590919 -11/13 7413.6582. FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 4 Council Check Register and Summary 12/512013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377863 121512013 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY Continued... 1,124.32 8034001 -1 330213 8034001 -11/13 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING 32.92 9546705-6 330214 9546705 -11/13 5913.6186 HEAT DISTRIBUTION 31.59 9941026 -8 330215 9941026 -11/13 9232.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 17.61 9941021 -9 330216 9941021 -11/13 9232.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 8,163.77 377864 121612013 132405 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 73.04 PERMIT REFUND 330217 ED127322 1495.4115 MECHANICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS 73.04 377865 121512013 123898 CENTURYUNK 69.07 952 922 -2444 330399 2444 -11/13 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 58.49 952 920 -1586 330400 1586 -11/13 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 123.51 952 831 -0024 330401 0024 -11/13 1552.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING 251.07 377866 121512013 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 4,033.37 LAB SERVICES 00001228 330402 112713 5915.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER WATER TREATMENT 4,033.37 377867 121512013 133283 CNS TRUST LLN 200.00 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 330403 6604 WARREN AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 200.00 377868 121512013 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 164,20 330134 0128062733 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 164.20 377869 121512013 120433 COMCAST 20.40 8772 10 614 0373022 330069 373022 -11113 1400.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 13.60 8772 10 614 0023973 330070 23973 -10/13 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 34.00 377870 121512013 100695 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 200.60 GLAZE 00009285 330328 R200390228 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 60.02 KILN PARTS 330329 INV000082383 5111.6530 REPAIR PARTS ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 771.52 CERAMIC SUPPLIES 330330 INV000082503 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1,032.14 377671 121512013 129165 CREW 2 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 5 Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377871 121512013 129165 CREW 2 Continued... 111.40 PERMIT REFUND 330040 ED126275 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS INSPECTIONS 111.40 377872 121512013 100130 DAKOTA COUNTY 280.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 330071 112513 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 280.00 377873 121612013 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 1,161.60 330135 728960 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 89.60 330136 728961 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 110.20 330137 728957 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,587.80 330138 728956 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 59.20 330264 728959 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 403.60 330265 728958 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 3,412.00 377874 121612013 120327 DELUXE FOR BUSINESS 6.92 ENDORSEMENT STAMP 330331 2029276418 5110.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 6.92 377875 121512013 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 47.28 BAKERY 330218 482642 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 47.28 377876 12/512013 100737 E. H. RENNER & SONS 61,195.31 WELL #13 EMERGENCY REPAIR 00001227 330219 133910000 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 61,195.31 377877 121512013 133284 EAGLE POINT CORPORATION 728.38 PINNACLE SOFTWARE 330406 0267177 -IN 1261.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 728.38 377878 121512013 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 133.33 EDINA LIQUOR AD 330041 48267 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 133.33 EDINA LIQUOR AD 330041 48267 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 133.34 EDINA LIQUOR AD 330041 48267 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 700.00 GOLF COURSE AD 330220 1435345 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 3,100.00 GOLF DOME AD 330221 48268 5210.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 4,200.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Council Check Reglster by GL Page - 6 Council Check Reglsler and Summary 12/5/2013 — 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377879 121512013 101656 EDINA CHORALE Continued... 150.00 CONCERT PROGRAM AD 330332 ART CENTER 5110.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 150.00 377880 121512013 103594 EDINALARM INC. 2,736.51 ALARM INSTALLATION 330404 84650 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 2,736.51 377881 121512013 104185 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. 266.00 330139 W- 861917 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 268.00 377882 121512013 100756 FEDEX 90.48 SHIPPING CHARGES 330405 2-476 -09876 1400.6235 POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 90.48 377883 121512013 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 4,151.82 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 17 330222 120613 05536.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WATER METER REPLACEMENT 4,151.82 377884 121512013 133274 GIERTSEN COMPANY OF MINNESOTA _ 434.20 PERMIT REFUND 330042 ED127112 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS INSPECTIONS 434.20 377885 121512013 130052 GLOWSHOT TARGETS LLC 386.19 RANGE TARGETS 330333 286 7414.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC PROGRAMS 386.19 377886 121612013 103866 GRAHN, LEON 340.13 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330223 112613 5410.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GOLF ADMINISTRATION 340.13 377887 12/612013 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 716.50 330140 159996 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 642.25 330141 159998 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 314.50 330266 159496 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,386.00 330267 159997 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,059.25 377888 121512013 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE 153.68 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330407 120213 5840.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE LIQUOR YORK GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 — 12/512013 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 7 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377888 12/512013 101518 GRAUSAM, STEVE Continued... 153.68 377889 121512013 121536 GRAY MATTER CREATIVE LLC 2,000.00 WINTER ACTIVITY GUIDE 330224 13239 -1130.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS 2,000.00 - 377890 121612013 125270 HARTFORD -PRIORITY ACCOUNTS 3,555.23 DEC 2013 PREMIUM 330043 _6539287 -0 9900.2033.16 LTD - 99 PAYROLL CLEARING 3,555.23 377891 121512013 122093 HEALTH PARTNERS 10,324.50 DEC 2013 PREMIUM 330044 44956410 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,581.20 COBRA 330045 44953297 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 11,905.70 3.77892 - 121512013 127071 HELMER PRINTING INC. 135.00 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 330046 149256 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 135.00 377893 121512013 106371 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 2,475.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 330334 32002 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,475.08 377894 121512013 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 700.00 ACE 330047 1000036653 1190.6105 .. DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING 700.00 377895 121512013 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY - 359.10 REPLACEMENT MONITORS 00004363 330072 53563665 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 60.92 DISPLAY PORT TO DVI 00004366 330073 53568333 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 420.02 ' 377896 1215/2013 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 312.92 CLEANING SUPPLIES 330048 700107812 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES- ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 312.92 377897 121512013 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 749.50 330142. 676948 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 773.50 330268 677283 - 5622.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 615.50 330269 677246 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 -- 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 377897 121512013 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 56.00 330270 677247 5862.5515 2,194.50 377898 121512013 126816 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 27.74 NETWORKASSESS 16.01 PW /ENG SUPPLIES 330408 111313 52.09 PW /ENG SUPPLIES 330408 111313 66.48 PW /ENG SUPPLIES 330408 111313 134.58 5822.5514 377903 121512013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 377899 121512013 129508 IMPACT PROVEN SOLUTIONS 120.00- YORK SELLING 3,399.45 MAIL NOV BILLS 330074 83878 3,399.45 5842.5514 4,729.90 YORK SELLING 377900 12/512013 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY 99.21- 840.00 330143 15652 420.00 330144 15508 720.00 330145 15509 294.00 330369 15746 377901 121512013 119808 INTEGRA 27.74 NETWORKASSESS 27.74 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 377902 1216/2013 129635 JESSE JAMES CREATIVE INC. 600.00 ROAD CLOSURE WEB FORM 600.00 WEBSITE MAINTENANCE 1,500.00 WEBSITE MAINTENANCE 100.00 FIRE E- PERMITS UPDATE 2.800.00 5822.5514 377903 121512013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 2,357.05 5842.5514 120.00- YORK SELLING 78.80 5842.5515 4,602.53 YORK SELLING 4,348.45 5842.5514 4,729.90 YORK SELLING 17.55 99.21- 330049 11479110 1260.6406 1262.6406 5511.6406 5902.6103 Subiedger Account Description Continued... COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX GENERALSUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES GENERALSUPPLIES 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 8 Business Unit' VERNON SELLING ENGINEERING GENERAL TRANSPORTATION ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 7411.6188 TELEPHONE YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING PSTF OCCUPANCY 330226 JJ5289 1280.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 330226 JJ5289 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 330335 JJ5271 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 330335 JJ5271 1470.4325 FIRE FEES -ALL OTHER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 330146 2146166 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 330225 2153974 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 330271 2156606 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 330272 2156601 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 330273 2156605 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 330274 2156612 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 330275 2156613 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 330276 2156611 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation P.O # 377903 121512013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 15,915.07 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 - 12/5/2013 Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Continued... 12/3/2013-10:21:414 Page- 9 Business Unit 377905 121512013 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 3,623.94- 330147 1720859 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 199.40 330148 1720843 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,303.67 330149 1720845 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,373,44 330150 1720850 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 841,17 330151 1720852 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,767.63 i 330152 1723213 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 378.47 330153 1723211 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,677.20 330154 1723212 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 290.30 330155 1723216 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 639.41 330156 1723217 5862.5512. COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,792.57 330157 1723215 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,338.87 330158 1723214 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 29.12- 330159 599418 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS.SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 56.29- 330160 599097 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,658.58 330277, 1725189 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,320.92 330278 1725192 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE, YORK SELLING 1.68 330279 1725180 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,378.77 330280 1725194 5842.5513 COST_ OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 662.95 330281 1725184 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,600.35 330282 1725183 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,178.86 330283 1725181 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 160.97 330284 1725182 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 263.09 330285 1725185 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR SOTH ST SELLING 1,001.76 330286 1725178 5822.5512 !COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 377.35 330287 - 1725179 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 900.29: 330288 1725193 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,516.99 330289 1725191 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 3,140.69 330290 1725190 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK, SELLING 71.83 330370 1721207 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 36.375.74 377906 121512013 129918 JOHNSON, BRIAN 25.00 STAPLERS 330336 201308377 7414.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC PROGRAMS 25.00 377907. 1215.12013 131439 - KAPLAN KIRSCH &,ROCKWELL LLP 1,853.00 'FLIGHT TRACK CHANGES 330227 15047 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - CONTINGENCIES R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CENT SERV GEN - MIS GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 CITY OF EDINA CITY WIFI PROJECT SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF DOME PROGRAM GENERAL SUPPLIES Council Check Register by GL SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS DATA PROCESSING Council Check Register and Summary DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 12/5/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 377907 121512013 131439 KAPLAN KIRSCH & ROCKWELL LLP 1,853.00 377908 121512013 130789 KATZ, DAVID 78.00 HOMETOWN HERO STORY FOR WEB 330421 154 1130.6124 46.00 ABOUT TOWN STORY 330421 154 1130.6123 490.00 HOMETOWN HEROES STORIES 330422 #154 1130.6124 614.00 377909 1215/2013 111018 KEEPRS INC. 7,103.98 GLOCKS 330228 228648 2320.6406 7,103.98 377910 1215/2013 105887 KOESSLER, JOE 336.00 AQUARIUM SERVICE- OCT /NOV 330337 113013 1628.6103 336.00 377911 121512013 129813 LA VALLEUR, BARBARA 52.00 PROMENADE SCULPTURE BOOK 330338 112513 5101.4413 52.00 377912 121512013 100605 LANDS' END BUSINESS OUTFITTERS 800.00 LOGO SHIRTS 330423 SIN1250688 5822.6406 1,500.00 LOGO SHIRTS 330423 SIN1250688 5842.6406 1,108.05 LOGO SHIRTS 330423 SIN1250688 5862.6406 3,408.05 377913 121512013 100858 LOGIS 1,856.25 IT CONSULTING 330075 37564 1554.6103 148.50 NETWORK CHANGES 330075 37564 2310.6406 297.00 ROSLAND WIFI 330075 37564 4413.6103 272.25 IT CONSULTING 330075 37564 5210.6230 49.50 IT CONSULTING - NEW SWITCH 330075 37564 7411.6406 248.17 CISCO SMART NET 330424 37539 1554.6230 2,155.39 PD SWITCH POWER 330424 37539 1400.6160 50.00 ADMIN CHARGE 330424 37539 1554.6160 2,694.07 NEW SWITCH POWER CH 330424 37539 1554.6710 1,611.14 WIFI GOLF DOME 330424 37539 4413.6103 18,382.50 BACKUP TAPE LIBRARY 330424 37539 421554.6710 1,611.14 WIFI SOUTH METRO 330424 37539 7411.6406 436.59 NEW SWITCH CONNECTIONS 330424 37539 7411.6406 Subledger Account Description Continued... 12/312013 10:21:44 Page - 10 Business Unit WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS MAGAZINEINEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES FED DRUG FORFEITURE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS ART WORK SOLD ART CENTER REVENUES GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS GENERAL SUPPLIES E911 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF DOME PROGRAM GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT IT CENTRAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 11 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 288.54 CITY OF EDINA 330077 608182453 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 288.54 Council Check Register by GL 377917 1216/2013 Council Check Register and Summary 1215/2013 - 12/5/2013 250.00 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 377913 12/5/2013 100858 LOGIS SOFTWARE UPGRADE/SERVICE AGOMM9302 Continued... 5100.1730 29,812.50 ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET 1,163.00 377914 121512013 00009302 102722 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY 5100.1730 OFFICE FURN & EQUIPMENT ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET 102.30 EVIDENCE ROOM SUPPLIES 330339 282336 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 102.30 377918 121512013 377915 121512013 133146 MCGIVERN, MICHAEL 132657 MAGERS & QUINN 15.73 STRENGTH FINDER EDITION 330076 2384 1120.6405 BOOKS & PAMPHLETS 15.73 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 377916 121512013 32.77 101146 MATRIX 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 11 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ADMINISTRATION 288.54 330077 608182453 1554.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SERV GEN - MIS 288.54 377917 1216/2013 102560 MAXIMUM SOLUTIONS INC. 250.00 REFRESHER TRAINING 330050 14899 5510.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ARENA ADMINISTRATION 7,875.00 SOFTWARE UPGRADE/SERVICE AGOMM9302 330340 14829 5100.1730 OFFICE FURN & EQUIPMENT ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET 1,163.00 POS HARDWARE 00009302 330341 14912 5100.1730 OFFICE FURN & EQUIPMENT ART CENTER BALANCE SHEET 9,288.00 377918 121512013 133146 MCGIVERN, MICHAEL 32.77 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330425 120213 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE COMMUNICATIONS 32.77 377919 121512013 101928 MCKENZIE, THOMAS 152.69 . REIMBURSE TRAVEL EXPENSES 330078 112113 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 152.69 377920 121512013 113023 MEGGITT TRAINING SYSTEMS INC. 91.13 CARBON BRUSHES 330051 24685 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 91.13 377921 121512013 101483 MENARDS 131.73 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001185 330342 40985 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 124.92 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001246 330343 41345 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 114.45 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001259 330344 41527 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS 2.66 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001266 330345 41646 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 81.37 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001272 330346 42032 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 11.72 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001275 330347 42193 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 12.30 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 330348 42283 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 1,542.45 CITY OF EDINA 377922 Council Check Register by GL 101987 MENARDS Council Check Register and Summary 62.88 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001266 12/5/2013 - 12/512013 27139 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 377921 121512013 101483 MENARDS 377923 Contlnued... 17.94 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001282 330349 42369 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.84 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001282 330350 42383 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 776.45 SNOW STAKES 00001301 330351 42834 1318.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 258.07 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001301 330351 42834 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 12 Business Unit ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS SNOW & ICE REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS P21 50TH&FRANCE CENTER RAMP P21 50TH&FRANCE CENTER RAMP SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS MACHINERY 8 EQUIPMENT LIQUOR BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING EDUCATION PROGRAMS PSTF ADMINISTRATION 1,542.45 377922 121512013 101987 MENARDS 62.88 LIBRARY SUPPLIES 00001266 330352 27139 5511.6406 62.88 377923 12/512013 133282 MERIT CONSTRUCTION SERVICES INC. 19,496.00 PARKING RAMP REPAIRS 00001039 330409 174R2 44008.6710 735.00 SUPPLEMENTAL STEEL RISER 00001039 330410 178 44008.6710 20,231.00 377924 121612013 100885 METRO SALES INC 41.68 QUARTERY MAINT - SENIOR CTR 330079 560190 1554.6230 142.68 MONTHLY USAGE -ART CENTER 330080 562432 1554.6230 2,658.59 QUARTERLY USAGE - POLICE 330081 562846 1554.6230 221.24 MONTHLY USAGE - EDINBOROUGH 330082 562720 1554.6230 3,064.19 377925 121612013 104650 MICRO CENTER 571.73 HARD DRIVES 330083 4740094 1554.6406 571.73 377926 121512013 127639 MIDWAY FORD 28,080.00 2012 FORD TRUCK 00004032 330411 96718 5800.1740 28,080.00 377927 12/512013 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT. INC. 10.69 WINDOW WASHING 330353 928017451 5821.6180 10.69 377928 121512013 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 219.00 330161 86311 5842.5513 219.00 377929 121512013 100374 NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY 19,200.00 SUPERVISION- POLICE PERSONNEL 330052 1849 COURSE 7410.6218 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 12 Business Unit ARENA BLDGIGROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS SNOW & ICE REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS P21 50TH&FRANCE CENTER RAMP P21 50TH&FRANCE CENTER RAMP SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS MACHINERY 8 EQUIPMENT LIQUOR BALANCE SHEET CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING EDUCATION PROGRAMS PSTF ADMINISTRATION CITY OF EDINA 1213/2013 10:21:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by'GL Page - 13 - Council Check Register and Summary - 1215/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc.No Inv No Account No Subledger. Account Description Business Unit 377929 121512013 100374 NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY Continued... 19,200.00 377930 121512013 163578 OFFICE DEPOT 12.31 DESKPAD CALENDARS 330229 683011935001. 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 398.94 CHAIRS, CHAIR MATS 330230 683010937001 5210.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 411.25 377931 1216/2013 133280 O'GARA, LAURIE " 719.00 AD SALES COMMISSIONS' 330354 0001 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 719:00 ' 377932 121512013 129485 PAPCO INC. 113.61 TOWELS, LINERS 330355 81920 7411.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 113.61 377933 121512013 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 293.26 330162 8425482 -1N 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 900.17 330163 8426178 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS' SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 161.25 330164 8425735 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD,WINE YORK SELLING 872.85 330165 8426167 -1N 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 161.25 330166 84257384N 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 95.00- 330167 8425325 -CM 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS'SOLD -WINE - VERNON SELLING 1,578.17 330291 8426173 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD, WINE 50TH ST SELLING 165.25 330292 8426186 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 4,037.20 377934 121512013 100945 PEPSI -COLA CO_ MPANY _ 902.12 330053 18289090 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 340.90 330168 17609654 .5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 126.40- 330231 18289172 5421.5510 COST OF. GOODS SOLD GRILL 1,116.62 377935 121512013 117087 PETERSON COMPANIES 10,145.76 - GARDEN PARK RENOVATION 330412 25987 47085.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT GARDEN PK BASEBALL FIELD 10,145.76 377936 121612013 122417 PETTY CASH 20.00 USED CABINET 330356 112613 ,.- 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY ' 10.77 REFRESHMENTS FOR GUN CLASS 330356 112613 7414.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ' PUBLIC PROGRAMS 18.77 REFRESHMENTS FOR MEETING 330356 ,112613 7410.6106 MEETING EXPENSE. PSTF ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING Council Check Register by GL COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING Council Check Register and Summary 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 1215/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 377936 121512013 122417 PETTY CASH 49.54 377937 12/5/2013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 648.49 330169 2520991 5862.5512 1,253.21 330170 2520992 5862.5513 285.36 330171 2519507 5822.5513 213.01 330172 2519511 5822.5513 928.71 330173 2519510 5822.5512 57.12- 330174 3516669 5842.5513 1,834.79 330293 2522385 5842.5512 97.07 330294 2522383 5842.5512 252.37 330295 2522381 5822.5513 604.3S 330296 2522379 5822,5513 136.18 330297 2522380 5822.5512 1,371.14 330298 2522384 5842.5513 1,732.31 330299 2522386 5842.5513 59.99- 330300 3516560 5822.5512 9,239.88 377938 12/5/2013 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS 4,190.00 ACTIVITIES DIRECTORY POSTAGE 330357 112513 1600.6235 4,190.00 377939 121612013 129727 PRIOR LAKE WINDJAMMERS 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 12/08/13 330084 102513 5710.6136 150.00 377940 121512013 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 546.71 TISSUE, WIPES, LINERS 00002054 330358 6655 5761.6511 546.71 377941 121512013 105690 PRO -TEC DESIGN INC. 8,586.32 GOLF DOME SECURITY CAMERAS 330085 65075 5210.6230 5,949.26 GOLF DOME CARD ACCESS 330086 65076 5210.6230 14,535.58 377942 12/5/2013 100974 RAYMOND E. HAEG PLUMBING 1,233.25 RPZTESTING 00001279 330413 16212 5913.6103 1,233.25 Subledger Account Description Continued... 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page- 14 Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING POSTAGE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION CLEANING SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF DOME PROGRAM SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF DOME PROGRAM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 15 Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 — 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger ' Account Description Business Unit 377943 121512013 106324.. READY.INATT ELECTRIC - Coritlnued... 625.00 LIGHTING FOR SCULPTURES. 00002055 330359 97823 5765.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PROMENADE EXPENSES • 625.00 377944 121512013 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 60.38 . BUSINESS CARDS 330054 79179 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 113.82 BUSINESS CARDS 330360 79293. 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ..CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 174.20 377945 1215/2013 129348 SAFETY ON SITE LLC 980.00 SCISSOR AND BOOM TRAINING 330414 112113 1281.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TRAINING 980.00 377946 121512013 104788 SANDY'S PROMOTIONAL STUFF 377.74 SOLICITOR WINDOW CLINGS 330087 SH2193 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 377.74 377947 121512013 — 133281 SCHWARZ, JAMES -82.67 UTILITYOVERPAYMENT REFUND 330361 6054 BLAKE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND ' UTILITY BALANCE SHEET RIDGE 82.67 377948 121512013 100995 SEH 4,150.33 RICHMOND HILLS ROADWAY IMPROV.- 330232 275452 01388.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 2,874.56 RICHMOND HILLS ROADWAY IMPROV 330232 275452 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK -. 2,688.70 RICHMOND HILLS ROADWAY IMPROV 330232 275452 05525.1705.21. CONSULTING INSPECTION ' RICHMOND HILLS PK 2,165.39 RICHMOND HILLS ROADWAY IMPROV 330232 275452 04387.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 11,878.96 377949 121512013 104098 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP . 90.12: ACROBAT UPGRADE 00004362 330088= B01468902 1495.6160 DATA PROCESSING- INSPECTIONS 337.92 VISO PRO 00004364 330089 801476368 - 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 428.04 377951 - 121512013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 5,694.40 330175 1101111 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS. SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,598.10 330176 1103879 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 8,562.98 330177 1103878 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING_ - 1,386.50 330178 , 5003483, 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE . YORK SELLING 261.50 330179 1103221 5842.5512 COST.OF GOODS'SOLD LIQUOR, YORK SELLING 1,092.50 330180 1103222 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE' YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 16 Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377951 121512013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS Continued... 4,963.20 330301 1103875 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 350.50 330302 1104504 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 10,831.30 330303 -1104501 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,525.58 330304 1104502 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2.00 330305 1104500 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,532.92 330306 1104503 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 470.26 330307 1103876 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 184.48 330371 1105408 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 593.50 330372 5003507 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,454.98 330373 1105410 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 232.00- 330374 9013930 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 23.84- 330375 9014056 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 24.00- 330376 9018792 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 20.00- 330377 9018793 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 80.00- 330378 9020315 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 11.88- 330379 9017116 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 44.00- 330380 9017117 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 8.67- 330381 9017990 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 100.00- 330382 9014094 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 20.00- 330383 9013989 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 14.00- 330384 9013987 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 43,926.31 377952 12/512013 122455 SPRING LAKE ENGINEERING 1,200.00 SCADA PROGRAMMING 00005430 330090 1331 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS 1,200.00 377953 121512013 104672 SPRINT 35.24 330091 873184124 -132 1190.6188 TELEPHONE ASSESSING 399.90 330091 873184124 -132 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 17.52 330091 873184124 -132 1490.6188 TELEPHONE PUBLIC HEALTH 120.08 330091 873184124 -132 1495.6188 TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS' 317.70 330091 873184124 -132 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 882.74 330091 873184124 -132 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 236.92 330091 873184124 -132 1301.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL MAINTENANCE 426.93 330091 873184124 -132 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 239.64 330091 873184124 -132 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL . 65.93 330091 873184124 -132 1553.6188 TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 196.78 330091 873184124 -132 1322.6188 TELEPHONE STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 148.77 330091 873184124 -132 1240.6188 TELEPHONE PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 17 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING PLANNING CENT SVC PW BUILDING 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL (BILLING) PSTF OCCUPANCY PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT CONSTR. IN PROGRESS EQUIPMENT RENTAL SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100. 377954 121612013 102639 STROHMYER, TOM Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 12/12113 330092 102513 1215/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 377953 121512013 104672 SPRINT 377955 121612013 Continued... 112,10 330091 873184124 -132 1552.6188 TELEPHONE 50.02 330091 873184124 -132 1140.6188 TELEPHONE 85.45 330091 873184124 -132 1552.6188 TELEPHONE 63.65 330091 873184124 -132 4090.6188 TELEPHONE 3.04 330091 873184124 -132 5422.6188 TELEPHONE 17,52 330091 873184124 -132 5511.6188 TELEPHONE 34.39 330091 873184124 -132 5720.6188 TELEPHONE 509.19 330091 873184124 -132 5910.6188 TELEPHONE 7296 330091 873184124 -132 7411.6188 TELEPHONE 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 17 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING PLANNING CENT SVC PW BUILDING 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL (BILLING) PSTF OCCUPANCY PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT CONSTR. IN PROGRESS EQUIPMENT RENTAL SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 4,036.47 377954 121612013 102639 STROHMYER, TOM 150.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 12/12113 330092 102513 5710.6136 150.00 377955 121612013 104349 STRUCTURED NETWORK SOLUTIONS 340.42 CABLING FOR WIFI YORK LIQUOR 330093 17175 4413.6103 340.42 377956 121512013 101758 SUNDE LAND SURVEYING LLC. 7,800.00 SPORTS DOME SURVEY 330233 45533 5550.1705 7,800.00 377957 121512013 101171 SUPERIOR SHORES RESORT 90.84 RENTAL OF EQUIPMENT 330362 WOW WATERCOLOR 5110.6151 90.84 377958 121512013 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 4,020.05 330308 791330 5862.5514 4,020.05 377959 121512013 128347 TKO WINES INC. 558.00 330181 513642 5862.5513 103.20 330385 479469 5842.5513 661.20 377960 121612013 123989 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PC 224.40 FITNESS FOR DUTY EXAM 330415 102143246 1550.6121 224.40 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Page - 17 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING PLANNING CENT SVC PW BUILDING 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL (BILLING) PSTF OCCUPANCY PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT CONSTR. IN PROGRESS EQUIPMENT RENTAL SPORTS DOME BALANCE SHEET ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 1215/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 377961 121512013 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 201.60 CAR WASH DOOR PARTS 330094 403699 1552.6406 201.60 377962 121512013 123957 TWINCITIESGOLF.COM 400.00 GOLF DOME ADS 330234 7305 5210.6122 400.00 377963 1215/2013 103048 U.S. BANK 425.00 PAYING AGENT 330416 3548759 5510.6103 425.00 PAYINGAGENT 330417 3548734 5510.6103 425.00 PAYING AGENT 330418 3548731 5902.6103 425.00 PAYING AGENT 330419 3547087 3301.6103 425.00 PAYING AGENT 330420 3547086 3101.6103 2,125.00 377964 1216/2013 119476 USPCA REGION 12 60.00 K9 CERTIFICATION 330363 J. BEHR 1400.6104 60.00 377965 1215/2013 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 689.48 LIQUOR BAGS 330235 292290 -00 5862.6512 86.54 PLATES, UTENSILS, CLEANER 330235 292290 -00 5862.6406 83.58 PLATES, ROLL TOWELS 00007512 330364 293791 -00 5842.6512 859.60 377966 1215/2013 133278 VETERANS DAY ORGANIZATION BOOK 150.00 GOLF DOME AD 330236 2013 5210.6122 150.00 377967 1215/2013 119454 VINOCOPIA 237.33 330309 0088396 -IN 5822.5512 103.00 330310 0088480 -IN 5862.5512 147.50 330386 0088479 -IN 5822.5512 487.83 377968 121612013 101973 WILMOT, SOLVEI 97.75 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330095 JUL- AUG•SEP -OCT 1490.6107 40.68 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330095 JUL -AUG- SEP -OCT 1490.6107 24.86 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330095 JUL -AUG- SEP -OCT 1490.6107 87.01 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330095 JUL -AUG- SEP -OCT 1490.6107 Subledger Account Description Continued... GENERAL SUPPLIES ADVERTISING OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1213/2013 10:21:44 Page- 18 Business Unit CENT SVC PW BUILDING GOLF DOME PROGRAM ARENA ADMINISTRATION ARENA ADMINISTRATION UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE PIR DS REVENUES GENERAL DEBT SERVICE REVENUES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PAPER SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES PAPER SUPPLIES ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING GOLF DOME PROGRAM COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PUBLIC HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 19 Council Check Register and Summary ' 12/5/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377968 121512013 101973 WILMOT, SOLVEI Continued... 11.30 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330095 JUL -AUG- SEP -OCT - 5952.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE RECYCLING 31.64 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330095 JUL -AUG- SEP -OCT 5952:6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE RECYCLING 293.24 377969 1216/2013 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 982.85 330182 346272 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE _ 50TH ST SELLING 318.30 330183 346147 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING_ r 1,311.10 330184 346824 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING _ 1,008.50 330185 346822 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS'SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,507.10 330311 346825 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5,127.85 ' 377970 121512013 101312 WINE MERCHANTS_ 954.08 330186 480406 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 717.39 330187 480913 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,222.17 330312 481297 5842.5513 COST-OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING - 1,183.17 330313 481295 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 92.00 330387 481415 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 646.72 330388 481595 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,815.53 377971 121512013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 1,235.20 330192 1080111176 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE -. 50TH ST SELLING 98.58 330193 1080111177 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 56TH ST SELLING 162.30 330194 1080112424 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,359.11 330195 1080113944 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,376.00- 330196 2080022335 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 95.00- 330197 2080022289 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 322.30- 330198 2080018831 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 81.15- 330199 2080021608 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 40.00- 330200 2080019464 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,714.40 330314 1080113948 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 151.85 330315 1080113950 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 4,095.83 .330316 1080113949 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,568.20 330317 1080113945 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 45.15 330318 1080113947 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 3,901.15 330319 1080113946 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 5,542.13 330321 1080113893 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 392.65 330389 1080114617 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 41.15- 330390 2080015495 5842.5513 COST-OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 20 Council Check Register and Summary 12/5/2013 - 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377971 121512013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA Continued... 20,310.95 377972 121512013 124629 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 21.50 330201 1090143868 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 73.80 330202 1090143867 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,972.05 330203 1090143866 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 2,295.10 330204 1090145002 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 21.50 330205 1090145004 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 227.75 330206 1090145003 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 2,950.40 330207 1090145001 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 7.50- 330208 2090041979 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 3,732.00 330391 1090146664 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 361.50 330392 1090146665 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 129.00 330393 1090146666 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 11,777.10 377974 1215/2013 101726 XCEL ENERGY 14.29 51- 6050184 -2 330096 391601783 4086.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AQUATIC WEEDS 124.24 51- 9608462 -5 330097 391813585 5921.6185 LIGHT & POWER SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 650.14 51- 9011854 -4 330098 391805518 5913.6185 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION 17.86 51- 0193479 -4 330099 391663972 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT 2,502.46 51- 0010060454 -7 330100 391828225 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER GOLF DOME PROGRAM . 42.30 51- 0010103585 -7 330101 391817780 5210.6185 LIGHT & POWER GOLF DOME PROGRAM 51.30 51- 8976004 -9 330102 391802476 '1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 26.13 51- 0010118404 -0 330103 391655489 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 778.17 51- 0010166207 -2 330104 391651752 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 36.34 51- 0160483 -1 330105 391501790 1330.6185 LIGHT & POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS . 39.43 51- 0194596 -8 330106 391502460 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 44.77 51- 0223133 -2 330107 391502446 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 623.81 51- 4621797 -2 330108 391573925 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 57.54 51- 8997917 -7 330109 391635096 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 26.92 51- 9770163 -6 330110 391653903 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 33.47 51- 6541084 -2 330111 391614443 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 253.84 51- 8987646 -8 330112 391806532 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 111.44 51- 9770164 -7 330113 391653935 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 6,511.01 51- 6955679 -8 330114 392126353 1551.6185 LIGHT & POWER CITY HALL GENERAL 9,649.54 51- 6644819 -9 330117 391771366 5720.6185 LIGHT & POWER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 1,602.24 51- 5547446 -1 330118 391759951 1628.6185 LIGHT & POWER SENIOR CITIZENS 1,287.76 51- 5107681 -4 330120 391746594 5111.6185 LIGHT & POWER ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT 62.07 51- 4420190 -3 330122 391905982 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/3/2013 10:21:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 21 Council Check Register and Summery 12/5/2013 — 12/5/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377974 121512013 101726 XCEL ENERGY Continued... 9,129.39 51- 9603061 -0 330123 391970308 1552.6185 LIGHT 8 POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 46.45 51- 0010033667 -7 330237 391498180 9232.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 2,353.87 51- 4159265 -8 330365 391735939 7411.6185 LIGHT & POWER PSTF OCCUPANCY 36,076.78 377975 121612013 132553 YALE MECHANICAL 45,300.00 WATER HEATER REPLACEMENTS 00002209 330238 13 -1514 5300.1705 CONSTR. IN PROGRESS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET 45,300.00 377976 121512013 120099 Z WINES USA LLC . 370.00 330320 12533 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 370.00 767,244.92 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 767,244.92 Total Payments 767,244.92 R55CKS2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 1215/2013 - 12/5/2013 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 262,977.74 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 7,993.31 03100 GENERAL DEBT SERVICE FUND 425.00 03300 PIR DEBT SERVICE FUND 543.72 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 46,634.29 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 18,382.50 05100 ART CENTER FUND 11,761.87 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 24,560.65 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 45,300.00 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 1,991.43 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 3,227.92 05550 SPORTS DOME FUND 7,800.00 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 9,983.93 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 1,171.71 05800 LIQUOR FUND 209,891.45 05900 UTILITY FUND 82,999.62 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 2,183.25 05950 RECYCLING FUND 42.94 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 25,722.70 09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 95.65 09900 PAYROLL FUND 3,555.23 Report Totals 767,244.92 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing policies and proved 12/3/2013 10:21:50 Page- 1 CITY OF EDINA 12/101201312:29:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 1 Council Check Register and Summary 12/1212013— 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377977 1211212013 101304 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY 26.22 TIE DOWN STRAP 00005755 330659 0138139 -IN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 26.22 377978 12/1212013 124613 ABM JANITORIAL -NORTH CENTRAL INC. 2,885.36 DEC 2013 SERVICE 330747 6022687 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY HALL GENERAL 2,885.36 377979 1211212013 131033 ACE HYDRO SEEDING INC. 4,875.00 HYDROSEEDING 330501 12713 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES . PATHS & HARD SURFACE 4,875.00 377980 1211212013 131688 ADLER, LAURA 331.08 MNAFPM CONFERENCE EXPENSES 330502 120313 1263.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS ENVIRONMENT 119.78 MNAFPM CONFERENCE EXPENSES 330502 120313 1263.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ENVIRONMENT 450.86 377981 1211212013 103357 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO INC. 14,818.22 COMPIX 00004035 330802 INV91909 421130.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT 14,818.22 377982 1211212013 105991 AL'S COFFEE COMPANY 310.87 COFFEE 330748 155654 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 310.87 - 377983 1211212013 100627 AMERICAN TEST CENTER INC. 150.00 T90 ANNUAL INSPECTION 330660 2133270 1470.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 377984 1211212013 100666 AMSAN 6.82 BEARING CLIPS 00001250 330503 299594689 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 58.23 MINI PROMAX JETS 00001250 330504 299694364 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 3.41- RETURN 330505 299781252 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 61.64 377985 1211212013 101601 AMUNDSON, ERIK 148.50 TRAINING EXPENSE 330803 120413 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 148.50 377986 1211212013 133291 ANDERSON, BRIANA 84.00 12/07/13 PERFORMANCE 330889 MUSIC 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS R55CKR2 L0GIS100 120113 1551.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CITY OF EDINA 330664 120113 1301.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 330664 120113 Council Check Register by GL RUBBISH REMOVAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING 330664 120113 1470.6182 Council Check Register and Summery FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 330664 120113 1481.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK FIRE STATION 1211212013- 12/12/2013 120113 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 377986 1211212013 5111.6182 133291 ANDERSON, BRIANA ART CENTER BLDGIMAINT 330664 120113 Continued... RUBBISH REMOVAL CLUB HOUSE 84.00 120113 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF..COURSE & GROUNDS 330664.. 377987 1211212013 RUBBISH REMOVAL 119976 AP LAWN 1,166.28 FALL CLEANUP SERVICE 00002058 330661 CTLKPK1113F 5761.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,166.28 377988 1211212013 102172 APPERTS FOODSERVICE 510.05 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330749 2028856 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 893.08 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330750 2030356 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,403.13 377989 1211212013 - 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 458.09 COFFEE _ 330426 1099807 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 458.09 377990 1211212013 114475 ARMOR SECURITY INC. . 154.38 MONITORING SERVICE 330662 175080 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 102.92 MONITORING SERVICE 330663 175081 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 257.30 377991 1211212013 132031 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 1,462.00 330577 34864 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 1,640.00 330578 34865 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 642.00 330579 -34863 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 21.84- 330580 6939 5842.5514 ,COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 360.00 330891 35338 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 377992 1211212013 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 207.79 208.31 208.32 66.29 33.28 26.04 68.66 44.71 131.26 153.82 295.86 12/10/201312:29:44 Page- 2 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE BUILDING MAINTENANCE YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 330664 120113 1551.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CITY HALL GENERAL 330664 120113 1301.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 330664 120113 1552.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING 330664 120113 1470.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 330664 120113 1481.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK FIRE STATION 330664 120113 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL 330664 120113 1628.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL SENIOR CITIZENS 330664 120113 5111.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ART CENTER BLDGIMAINT 330664 120113 5420.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL CLUB HOUSE 330664 120113 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF..COURSE & GROUNDS 330664.. 120113 5511.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CITY OF EDINA 12/10/k�- 12:29:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 3 Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 377992 1211212013 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS Continued... 646.03 330664 120113 5720.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 99.35 330664 120113 5861.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL VERNON OCCUPANCY 186.79 330664 120113 5841.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL YORK OCCUPANCY 33.00 330664 120113 5821.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 261.94 330751 DEC2013 7411.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL PSTF OCCUPANCY 2,671.45 377993 1211212013 102817 ASSOCIATED BAG COMPANY 98.85 PLASTIC BAGS 330506 N232829 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 98.85 377994 1211212013 100256 AT&T MOBILITY 25.93 IPAD SERVICE 330665 287240706569X11 1130.6160 DATA PROCESSING COMMUNICATIONS 1713 25.93 377995 12/1212013 101195 AUTO ELECTRIC OF BLOOMINGTON INC. 48.09 BRUSH KIT. 330427 154417 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 48.09 377996 12112/2013 133029 AUTO NATION 77.93 REGULATOR KIT 330666 3259114 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 77.93 377997 12/12/2013 126019 B & B PRODUCTS I RIGS AND SQUADS 300.00 VEHICLE CHANGES 330428 3962 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 300.00 377998 1211212013 129624 BARNA GUZY & STEFFEN LTD 304.00 GENERAL LABOR CONSULTING 330667 124128 1170.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HUMAN RESOURCES 304.00 377999 1211212013 102195 BATTERIES PLUS 21.35 BATTERIES 00005578 330429 018 - 100587 -01 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 26.71 LITHIUM BATTERIES 330430 018 - 322623 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 119.66 REBUILD KITS 00001293 330507 018 - 100600 -01 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE, - 167.72 378000 1211212013 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 712.70 330581 40595300 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 4 Council Check Register and Summary 12/1212013- 12/1212013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger .:,Account Description Business Unit 378000 1211212013 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION. Continued... 712.70 378001 12/12/2013 101191 BENNEROTTE, JENNIFER 117.32 EXPENSES REIMBURSEMENT 330804 120413 1130.6106 MEETING EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 37.71 EXPENSES REIMBURSEMENT 330804 120413 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 4.59 EXPENSES REIMBURSEMENT 330804 120413 1130.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS COMMUNICATIONS 159.62 378002 12/1212013 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC. 648.00 PIZZA 330752 D20IN1455 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 216.00 PIZZA 330806' D28IN1454 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 144.00 PIZZA 330807 D28IN1370 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 1,008.00 378003 1211212013 125139 BERNICK'S 153.40 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330808 97235 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 153.40 378004 12/1212013 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 67.00 S COFFEE 330809 1135876 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 160.50 COFFEE 330810 1135853 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 227.50 378005 1211212013 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 165.66 WARMING HOUSE SUPPLIES 330431 WO- 894487 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 27.68 WARMING HOUSE SUPPLIES 330432 WO- 895217 -1 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 10.13 WORKSTATION FILE 330508 OE- 338493 -1 1262.6406 - GENERAL SUPPLIES TRANSPORTATION. 152.30 BINDERS /DIVIDERS 330508 OE- 338493 -1 01416.1705.31 MATERIALS /SUPPLIES 54TH ST BRIDGE&STREET REPAIR 355.77 378006 1211212013 101296 BERTRAND, MIKE 137.30 SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 330805 120413 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 137.30 378007 1211212013 100853 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC. 3,391.50 WIDEN COUNTRYSIDE PARK PATH 330672 21816 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PATHS & HARD SURFACE 3,391.50 378008 1211212013 102645 BLUE CROSS &BLUEISHIELD OF MN 1,895.00 PREMIUM 330811 120213 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 378016 1211212013 112843 C. R. FISCHER & SONS INC. 12/10/201312:29:44 Page- 5 Business Unit INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS CENT SVC PW BUILDING CENT SVC PW BUILDING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING UTILITY BALANCE SHEET INSPECTIONS COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATE UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 50TH ST SELLING OLD PW BLDG DEMOLITION CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 378008 12/1212013 102545 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MN Continued... 1,895.00 378009 12/1212013 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 181.01 OFFICE SUPPLIES 330509 91478 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 38.58 PENS 330510 91478.1 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 22.41 . STAPLES 330511 91895 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 83.32 OFFICE SUPPLIES 330512 92191 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 55.53 TAPE REFILLS 00001457 330668 92414 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 213.76 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00001457 330669 92472 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 186.63 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003714 330670 92567 1470.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 5.76- RETURN 330671 6102CM 1470.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES 22.42 STAPLER 00001457 330753 92577 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 797.90 378010 1211212013 133293 BOEN, SUSAN 79.80 UTILITY CREDIT REFUND 330812 4813 RUTLEDGE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND 79.80 378011 1211212013 131967 BOLLIG & SONS 2,500.00 DEMO ESCROW REFUND 330795 ED126869 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT 2,500.00 378012 1211212013 132444 BOLTON & MENK INC. 1,667.00 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 330673 0161784 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 4,395.97 UTLY PARK RENOVATION 330674 0161934 47083.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 6,062.97 378013 1211212013 102648 BOOSALIS, DAVID 60.68 TRAINING EXPENSES 330813 120913 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 60.68 378014 1211212013 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 304.50 330582 116864 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 304.50 378015 1211212013 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 3,363.60 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 330754 378788 01246.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 3,363.60 378016 1211212013 112843 C. R. FISCHER & SONS INC. 12/10/201312:29:44 Page- 5 Business Unit INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS CENT SVC PW BUILDING CENT SVC PW BUILDING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING UTILITY BALANCE SHEET INSPECTIONS COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATE UTLEY PK BATHROOM RENOVATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 50TH ST SELLING OLD PW BLDG DEMOLITION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 1211212013 CITY OF EDINA 161.78 Council Check Register by GL - 330796 E0125528 161.78 Council Check Register and Summary 378020 1211212013 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger. Account Description 378016 1211212013 112843 C. R. FISCHER & SONS INC. Continued... 378021 8,849.96 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 330886 121313 07112.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 486.88 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 330886 121313 5960.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 00524552 9,336.84 192.00 378017 1211212013 1211212013 116114 CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA INC. 123898 CENTURYLINK 100.48 OCE MAINTENANCE 00001229 330675 988115589 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8861 -11/13 100.48 57.03 952 929 -0297 330514 378018 12/1212013 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 952 920 -8632 00001235 330677 12/10/201312:29:44 Page- 6 Business Unit S112 INDUSTRIAL PARK SIDEWALK ENGINEER SERVICES - STORM CENT SVC PW BUILDING 51.05 330583 399222 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 9,675.50 330584 399223 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING °OA 7^ 330585 0001 61 22 5 5 55 4 COST OD 0 330586 399225 378019 1211212013 124515 CARDINAL EXTERIORS INC 161.78 PERMIT REFUND 330796 E0125528 161.78 378020 1211212013 102372 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. 217.56 MONITOR FOR DISPATCH 00004367 330433 HC43121 217.56 378021 1211212013 102804 CENTURY COLLEGE 192.00 CERTIFICATION CARDS 330676 00524552 192.00 378022 1211212013 123898 CENTURYLINK 345.70 . 952 927 -8861 330513 8861 -11/13 57.03 952 929 -0297 330514 0297 -11113 57.21 952 920 -8632 00001235 330677 8632 -11/13 41.47 952 922 -9246 330755 9246 -11/13 501.41 378023 12/12/2013 123148 CHRISTIANSEN, STEVEN 143.73 VIDEO EDITING 330515 110113 143.73 378024 12/1212013 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 8. 1 OF GOS SOLD. BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5822.5515. COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 1495.4111 BUILDING PERMITS INSPECTIONS 2310.6406 1470.6104 1554.6188 4090.6188 5913.6188 1400.6188 1130.6103 730.42 00113607- 0342163045 330678 342163045 -11/13 1470.6189 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES J SEWER & WATER E911 FIRE DEPT. GENERAL -CENT SERV GEN- MIS 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COMMUNICATIONS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 378031 12/1212013 101915 COUNTRY FLAGS Council Check Register by GL 161.44 FLAGS 00003711 330682 6541 1470.6406 Council Check Register and Summery 378032 1211212013 1211212013— 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 378024 12/1212013 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 378033 12/12/2013 133169 DAIKIN APPLIED Continued... 730.42 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 330756 2609659 5720.6180 378025 1211212013 330815 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD 5511.6136 1,188.91 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 330816 2610039 2,380.00 OCT 2013 INSPECTIONS 330516 11113 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,008.00 NOV 2013 INSPECTIONS 330679 12113 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,388.00 378026 1211212013 114639 CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 7,558.00 COST SHARE FOR STORM SEWER 00001231 .330517 23927 5932.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 7,558.00 378027 12112/2013 100087 CITY OF ST. PAUL 119.00 REPORT WRITING TRAINING 330814 120313 1400.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS 119.00 378028 12112/2013 105693 CITYSPRINT 20.11 -. SHIP ELECTION SUPPLIES 330518 30517 1180.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 20.11 - 378029 12112/2013 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 177.80 330587 0118576119 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 177.80 378030 12112/2013 120433 COMCAST 90.90 8772 10 614 0164959 330680 164959 -11/13 5430,6188 TELEPHONE 68.88 8772 10 614 0177449 330681 177449 -11/13 5420.6188 TELEPHONE 159.78 378031 12/1212013 101915 COUNTRY FLAGS 161.44 FLAGS 00003711 330682 6541 1470.6406 161.44 378032 1211212013 100703 CUSTOM FIRE APPARATUS 28.62 DOOR SWITCH 00005787 330683 15142 1553.6530 28.62 378033 12/12/2013 133169 DAIKIN APPLIED 3,391.44 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 330756 2609659 5720.6180 1,469.00 ANNUAL INSPECTION 330815 79880 5511.6136 1,188.91 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 330816 2610039 5511.6180 GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 7 Business Unit INSPECTIONS . INSPECTIONS GENERAL STORM SEWER POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ELECTION YORK SELLING RICHARDS GOLF COURSE CLUB HOUSE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GIL Council Check Register and Summery 12!12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No. Subledger.', Account Description 378033 12112/2013 133169 DAIKIN APPLIED Continued... 6,049.35 378034 1211212013 122095 DAKOTA COUNTY LUMBER CO. 1,793.40 LUMBER FOR CANOE DOCKS 00001317. 330519 170145 1646.6577 LUMBER 1,793.40 378035 1211212013 104020 DALCO 246.95 TOWELS, FLOOR CARE 00001454 330684 2682040 1552.6.406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 246.95 378036 1211212013 123132 DAVE'S SPRINKLER. REPAIR 100.00 REPAIR LEAK 330520 2017 01398.1705721 CONSULTING INSPECTION i 100.00 330521 2018 01398.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 100.00 330522 2019 01398.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 100.00 330523- 2020 01398.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 100.00 - 330524 2021 01398.1705:21 CONSULTING +INSPECTION 100.00 ', `330525 '2022 01398.1705:21 CONSULTING`INSPECTION 100.00 330526 2023 01398.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 100.00 330527 2024 01398.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 100.00 330528 2025 01398.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 100.00 REPAIR SPRINKLER BREAKS 330529 2026 5924.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,000.00 378037 1211212013 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 3,545.75 330588 729789. 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 240.00 330589 729296 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 22.40 330590 729790 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 591.30 330591 729791 5822.5514 ' . COST OF. GOODS SOLD BEER 4,492.75 330592 729792 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 417.00 330892 730490 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 9,309.20 378038 1211212013 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 453.44 JACK 00005754 330685 854487 1553.6556 TOOLS 453.44 378039 1211212013 133298 DELGEHAUSEN, JOSEPH 70.00 . EMT TEST FEE 330817 120413 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 70.00 12/101201312:29:44 Page - 8 Business Unit BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B LAKE EDINA B ENGINEER SERVICES - WATER VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 9 Council Check Register and Summary 12112/2013— 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378040 1211212013 118189 DEM -CON LANDFILL LLC Continued... 192.12 HAUL DEMOLITION MATERIAL 00001308 330530 120213 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATI 192.12 378041 12112/2013 132510 DERING PIERSON GROUP 77,754.93 APPLICATION #5 330686 67 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATI 77,754.93 378042 12/12/2013 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 1,455.21 110311893 330687 110311893 -11/13 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 89.00 650243624 330688 650243624 -11/13 5760.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 1,544.21 378043 1211212613 123995 DICK'SILAKEVILLE SANITATION INC. 3,543.72 REFUSE 330757 DT0000646908 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 2,536.21 REFUSE 330758 DT0000646909 4095.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 50TH STREET RUBBISH 6,079.93 378044 1211212013 133296 DINIUS PLUMBING 79.28 PERMIT REFUND 330818 ED127825 1495.4112 PLUMBING PERMITS INSPECTIONS 79.28 378045 1211212013 124438 DONNAY HOMES 2,500.00 '' DEMO ESCROW REFUND 330797 ED126054 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 378046 1211212013 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC. 133.33 EDINA LIQUOR AD 330689 50529 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 133.33 EDINA LIQUOR AD 330689 50529 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 133.34 EDINA LIQUOR AD 330689 50529 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 400.00 378047 1211212013 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 184.36 POLARIS LUGS 00001288 330434 10457100 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 107.54 TAPE MEASURE, ELEC COATING 00001288 330434 10457100 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 291.90 378048 12112/2013 105224 EDINApOLICE RESERVES 2,800.00 HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL GAMES 330819 FALL 2013 1428.6010- SALARIES REGULAR EMPLOYEES OFF DUTY EMPLOYMENT 2,800.00 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 10 Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378049 12/1212013 129947 EHLERS INVESTMENT PARTNERS I Continued... 91.60 MANAGEMENT FEE 330759 113013 1550.6155 BANK SERVICES CHARGES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 91.60 378050 12/1212013 100746 ELECTRIC MOTOR REPAIR 801.54 EQUIPMENT REPAIR .00001217 330435 408134 5915.6180, CONTRACTED. REPAIRS WATER TREATMENT 801.54 378051 12/1212013 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC. 2,235.04 ALARM 00003693 330690 1601366 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 707.18 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003695 330691 1604029 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2.942.22 378052 12112/2013 104004 ESSIG, CRAIG 110.26 HOTEL EXPENSE FOR CONFERENCE 330692 120313 1470.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 110.26 378053 12112/2013 100018 EXPERT T BILLING 6,136.00 NOV. BILLINGS 330820 1068 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 6,136.00 378054 12/12/2013 104195 EXTREME BEVERAGE LLC. • 33.50 330593 259 -14 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX - 50TH ST SELLING 33.50 378055 1211212013 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 52.97 HALOGEN CAPSULES 330821 69- 119799 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 67.27 BALL JOINTS 330822 69- 119841 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 124.32 ROTOR ASSEMBLIES 330823 69- 120078 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 224.58 BATTERIES 330824 1- 4325718 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 189.62 CONTROL ARMS 330825 1- 4325835 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 44.78 DRAIN PANS 330826 1- 4326584 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 22.39 DRAIN PAN 330827 1- 4326577 1553.6530. REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 41.37 RESISTOR 330828 69- 120321 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 41.37 RESISTOR 330829 70- 168701 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 12.86 CABLE 330830 69- 120711 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 82.28 BATTERY 330831 69- 120669 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 289.01- CREDIT 330832 1- 4311982 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 147.18- CREDIT 330833 1- 4312720 - 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 91.78- CREDIT 330834 1- 4312721 1553.6530 - REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 33.07- CREDIT 330835 1- 4312723 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 378061 1211212013 102727 FORCE AMERICA 445.27 GPS UNITS 445.27 378062 1211212013 120776 GAGE, NATHALIE 20.68 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 51.64 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 72.32 Subledger Account Description Continued... REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 11 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATF EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PACS IS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 330893 7831 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 00005719 330436 01416064 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 330537 120313 1132.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 330537 120313 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR ENVIRONMENT YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN' CABLE COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 378055 1211212013 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 5.75- CREDIT 330836 1- 4312724 1553.6530 230.23- CREDIT 330837 14315268 1553.6530 106.79 378056 1211212013 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY 43.55 HOCKEY RINK PARTS 00001289 330693 MNTC2120954 47078.6710 43.55 378057 12112/2013 133295 FEED THE DOG 7,766.09 LIVING STREETS DEVELOPMENT 330838 111113_LS 2501.6710 7,766.09 378058 12/1212013 126004 FERGUSON.WATERWORKS 28.87 REGISTER 00001221 330531 0061417 5917.6180 383.75- CREDIT 330532 CM005638 5917.6180 871.62 METER, FLANGE KITS 00001230 330533 0062645 5917.6180 6,542.92 METERS, FLANGE KITS 00001230 330534 0063025 5917.6180 3,200.22 METERS 00001230 330535 0061944 5917.6180 64.42 CURB WRENCH 00001221 330694 0063070 5917.6180 874.88 FITTINGS 00001229 330695 0064417 5917.6180 939.39 METERS 330696 0064407 5917.6180 672.36 METER, FLANGE KIT 330697 0063645 5917.6180 12,810:93 378059 12112/2013 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. 425.00 ROWAY 330536 2461411 1263.6103 425.00 378060 1211212013 129500 FLAT EARTH BREWING CO. 378061 1211212013 102727 FORCE AMERICA 445.27 GPS UNITS 445.27 378062 1211212013 120776 GAGE, NATHALIE 20.68 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 51.64 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 72.32 Subledger Account Description Continued... REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 11 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATF EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PACS IS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS CONTRACTED REPAIRS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 330893 7831 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 00005719 330436 01416064 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 330537 120313 1132.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 330537 120313 1130.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR METER REPAIR ENVIRONMENT YORK SELLING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN' CABLE COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY, OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 - Council Check Register by GL' - Page- 12 Council Check Register and Summary 12112/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Data Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378062 1211212013 120776 GAGE, NATHALIE Continued... i 378063 12/12/2013 127515 GILGENBACH, JORDAN 99.73 AMBASSADORS LUNCHEON 330839 SUPPLIES 1130.6106 MEETING EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS . 99.73 378064 12/12/2013 118941 GLOBALSTAR USA 57.56 R -91 PHONE 330698 5209807 1470.6188 TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 57.56 378065 1211212013 100780. GOPHER STATE ONE -CALL INC. 902.80 NOV 2013 SERVICE 330538 83927 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION -i 902.80 ? 378066 12/1212013 101103 GRAINGER 32.52 COUPLERS; WASHER,' ;_ `. 00005747. 330437 9295336243 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 115.14 DOOR HOLDERS 00005748 " 330438 9300441293 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 100.00 LEATHER DRIVING GLOVES' 00005594 330439 ' 9300101228 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT - GENERAL MAINTENANCE 26.84 LEATHER DRIVING GLOVES 00005594 330439 9300101228 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN { 56.85 GAS CAN 330440 9298605388 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 56.85- RETURN 330441 9298583734 1553.6556 TOOLS EQUIPMENT.OPERATION GEN 128.51 TOW STRAPS 00001138 330539 9292579597 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 76.85 FUNNELS, CLEANERS 00005751 330699 9302912051 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 71.22 TOOLS 330760 9298909178 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 135.22. LEVER DOOR HOLDERS 00002253 330761 9298909166 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 686.30 378067 12N212013 124711 GRANDVIEW TIRE & AUTO - CAHILL 54.95 ALIGNMENT 00005729 330700 60133 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 54.95 378068 1211212013 120201 GRANICUS INC. 4,833.53 WEBSTREAMING 330762 48910 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS ' 4,833.53 378069 12112/2013 102217 .GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 2,880.75 330894 160315 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,880.75 378070 1211212013 130849: GRIFFIN, GINNIFER 200.00 CLASS REFUND 330840 120513 5511.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 378080 1211212013 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Subledger Account. Description Continued... . 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 13 Business Unit GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PAT/ SOD & BLACK DIRT GENERAL TURF CARE GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES COURT CHARGES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEGAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013— 12/1212013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 378070 12/1212013 130849 GRIFFIN, GINNIFER 200.00 378071 12112/2013 100787 GRUBER'S POWER EQUIPMENT 12.80 MOWER HANDLE KITS 00001305 330540 126394 1643.6406 12.80 378072 1211212013 104482 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 1,517.26 HOCKEY RINK ELECTRICAL WORK 330701 130571 47078.6710 1,517.26 378073 1211212013 129108 HAAG COMPANIES INC. 292.87 BLACK DIRT, SOD 330763 113013 1643.6543 60.73 BLACK DIRT, SOD 330763 113013 1314.6406 353.60 378074 1211212013 100797 HAWKINS INC. 2,837.64 CHLORINE, LPC -4 00001250 330702 3539558 5915.6586 2,837.64 378075 1211212013 133292 HAZELTINE NATIONAL GOLF COURSE - 270.00 CONTINUING EDUCATION 330841 CODE UPDATE 5410.6104 270.00 378076 1211212013 106371 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 2,475.08 MEDICAL DIRECTOR SERVICES 330842 32376 1470.6103 2,475.08 378077 1211212013 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 4,307.78 OCT 2013 ROOM & BOARD 330442 1000036816 1195.6225 4,307.78 378078 12/12/2013 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 715.41 NOV 2013 BOOKING FEES 330766 1000037003 1195.6170 715.41 378079 1211212013 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER . 3,892.76 TNT NOTICES 330843 120213 1503.6915 3,892.76 378080 1211212013 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Subledger Account. Description Continued... . 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 13 Business Unit GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PAT/ SOD & BLACK DIRT GENERAL TURF CARE GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES COURT CHARGES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEGAL SERVICES SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS R55CKR2 LOGIS100 GENERALSUPPLIES 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. CITY OF EDINA 5862.6406 12/10/201312:29:44 45.00 PROFESSIONAL'SERVICES 330594 678020 Council Check Register by GL 920.00 Page - 14 330595 678016 595.84 Council Check Register.'and Summary 330596 678017 2,217.25 330597 12/1212013- 12/12/2013 3,778.09 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378080 12/12/2013 43,884.00 105436 - HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 330703 Continued... 43,884.00 160.31 TECHNICAL SUPPORT 330541 ;1000036975 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING 160.31 BUNDLED SERVICE 330764.. 1000036974 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 610.11 2,641.70 RADIO ADMIN FEE 330765 131038016 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 2,962.32 280.24 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330845 120313 378081 1211212013 133294 .HERFORT NORBY 378087 1211212013 132938 HOT DISH ADVERTISING LLC 6,655.00 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES 330844 1892 5410.6103 PROFESSIONAL'SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 21374 6,655.00 SHELF CLIPS 330704 21374 378082 1211212013 330704 103753 HILLYARD INC - ,MINNEAPOLIS 1,375.00 BRANDING/MARKETING CONSULTING 330705 21375 306.87 OT PLUS, SANITIZER 00002251 330767 600936387 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 2,062.50 263.51 GFCI POWER CORD 00002251 330768 600942256 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 570.38 378083 12112/2013 GENERALSUPPLIES 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 45.00 PROFESSIONAL'SERVICES 330594 678020 5860.6103 920.00 330595 678016 595.84 330596 678017 2,217.25 330597 678178 3,778.09 378084 12112/2013 125176 HORIZON AGENCY INC. 43,884.00 WORKER'S COMP POLICY 330703 161476 43,884.00 378085 12112/2013 100417 HORIZON COMMERCIAL POOL SUPPLY 610.11 HYPOCHLORITE, ACID MAGIC 00002252 330769 13111821 610.11 378086 1211212013 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 280.24 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330845 120313 280.24 378087 1211212013 132938 HOT DISH ADVERTISING LLC 85.00 SHELF CLIPS '330704 21374 185.28 SHELF CLIPS 330704 21374 185.28 SHELF CLIPS 330704 21374 1,375.00 BRANDING/MARKETING CONSULTING 330705 21375 2,062.50 BRANDING/MARKETING CONSULTING 330705 21375 2,062.50 BRANDING/MARKETING CONSULTING 330705 21375 5862.5515 '5862.5514 5822.5514. 5842.5514 1550.6200 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER INSURANCE 5720.6545 CHEMICALS 1644.6107' MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 5822.6406 - GENERALSUPPLIES 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5820.6103' PROFESSIONAL'SERVICES 5840.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5860.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS TREES & MAINTENANCE 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON•LIQUOR GENERAL R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12112/2013— 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv, No Account No 378087 1211212013 132938 HOT DISH ADVERTISING LLC 1,125.00 MEDIA PLAN CONSULTING 330706 21376 5820.6103 1,687.50 MEDIA PLAN CONSULTING 330706 21376 5840.6103 1,687.50 MEDIA PLAN CONSULTING 330706 21376 5860.6103 10,455.56 378088 12112/2013 133290 HUNT, LAURA 25.00 PARK & REC PROGRAM REFUND 330542 REFUND 1600.4390.56 25.00 378089 1211212013 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 62.76 IRRIGATION REPAIR PARTS 00001299 330443 810260 47078.6710 62.76 378090 1211212013 133301 INFINITY CUSTOM BUILDERS LLC 2,500.00 DEMO ESCROW REFUND 330798 ED124973 1495.4109 2,500.00 378091 1211212013 100818 INTERSTATE POWER SYSTEMS INC 64.96 HOSE ASSEMBLY 00005790 330707 0001091792:01 1553.6530 64.96 378092 1211212013 100823 J & F REDDY RENTS INC. 752.04 RENT FANS FOR PAINTING 3308.46 03- 369530 -04 5500.1720 752.04 378093 12/1212013 132105 JAY JOHNSON. CONSTRUCTION 32,238.25 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 330885 121313 9234.6103 32,238.25 378094 1211212013 102157 JEFF ELLIS & ASSOCIATES INC. 750.00 ANNUAL RETAINER FEE 330770 20065359 5311.6103 750.00 378095 1211212013 129635 JESSE JAMES CREATIVE INC. 350.00 MAGENTO STORE ENHANCEMENTS 330543 JJ5319 1130.6124 2,690.00 WEBSITE MAINT - JULY 330544 JJ5272 1130.6124 400.00 LOUDSPEAKER PERMIT CHANGES 330544 JJ5272 1120.6103 3,440.00 378096 12/12/2013 102146 JESSEN PRESS Subledger Account Description Continued... PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BREAKFAST WITH SANTA 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 15 Business Unit 50TH STREET GENERAL LIQUOR YORK GENERAL VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL PARK ADMIN. GENERAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATE CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS REPAIR PARTS BUILDINGS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WEB DEVELOPMENT WEB DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ICE ARENA BALANCE SHEET GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT POOL OPERATION COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS ADMINISTRATION R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 16 Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier!_ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378096 12112/2013 102146 JESSEN PRESS Continued... 858.21 WINDOW ENVELOPES 330545 39738 1495.6575 PRINTING INSPECTIONS 858.21 378097 12/1212013 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 3,402.79 330598 2156635 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5,193.95 330599 2156642 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,964.85 330600 2156644 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER BOTH ST SELLING 40.00 330895 2156654 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 9,073.30 330896 2156653 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 20,674.89 378098 1211212013 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 71.13 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001302 330546 66726845 1643.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL TURF CARE 71.13 378100 12/1212013 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 281.84 330601 1730882' _ 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 125.48 330602 1730880 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 215.99 330603 1730879: 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,774.43 330604 1730876 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,379.11 330605. 1730877 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,133.17 330606 1730860 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 115.40 330607 1704655 5822.5513 COST OF•GOODS SOLD WINE' BOTH ST SELLING 2,940.96 330608 1726513 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 7,129.60 330609 1725614 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 11,140.00 330610 1725615 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 18.80- 330611 598087 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1.00 330612 588135 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2.02- _330613 598084 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 16.20- 330614 , 598085 5862.5612 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 15.44 330615 599419 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 52.21- 330616 599096 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,496.08 330897 1730859 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,659.80 330898 170867 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,516.62 330899'' 1730970 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,398.36 330900 1730873 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 20.99 330901 1730874 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,042.34 330902 1730875 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.40 330903 1730862 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 9,906.46 330904 1730872 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING R55CKR2. LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 17 Council Check Register and Summary 12112/2013- 12112/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378100 12112/2013 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. Continued... 1.12 330905 1730857 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,571.80 330906 1730868 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 98.11 330907 1730869 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,742.98 330908 1730871 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 162.24 330909 1732068 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 889.70 330910 1732067 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,856.70 330911 1730878 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5.60 330912 1730861 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,186.14 330913 1730881 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 60,686.75 378101 12111212013 111018 KEEPRS INC. 579.95 UNIFORMS 00003673 330708 230091 1470.6558 DEPT.UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 620.75 00003691 330709 230087 -02 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 190.88 00003690 330710 229989 -01 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 40.79 00003690 330711 229989 -02 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 130.19 00003673 330712 230091 -01 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,562.56 378102 12112/2013 104979 KOCON; ED 177.97 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330847 120413 5410.6017 VACATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION 177.97 378103 1211212013 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 815.19 WASHERS, FITTINGS, SCREWS 00005575 330444 9302057504 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 696.13 PINS, COUPLERS, SEALANT 00005724 330713 9302076177 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,511.32 378104 12/1212013 105726 LINDMAN, DAVID 561.27 HARD DRIVES, PRINTER INK 330848 120613 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 561.27 378105 12112/2013 129583 LIVING ROOM STUDIOS 1,416.09 LIVING STREETS PHOTOS 330849 1230 2501.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PACS IS 1,416.09 378106 12/12/2013 110888 LOPEZ, ELIZABETH 47.18 MAAP MEETING EXPENSE 330850 120913 1190.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE ASSESSING 47.18 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 18 Council Check Register and Summary 1 2/1 212 0 1 3- . 12/12/2013 ' Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378107 1211212013 101792 LUBE -TECH Continued... 896.35 OIL 00006056 330447 2296265 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,338.51 -_. OIL 00005756 330714 2300355 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 3,234.86 378108 1211212013 101078 LUBE -TECH ESI 440.06 FUEL PUMP REPAIRS 330445 2392 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 228.41 LUBRICANTS 00005753 330446 3066 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 668.47 378109 1211212013 133297 LUCAS- SILVIS,:GREG 130.00 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 330851 5917 KILLARNEY 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 130.00 378110 1211212013 131685 MAILFINANCE INC. 209.16 POSTAGE MACHINE RENTAL 330771 N4356543 1400.6235 POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 209.16 378111 12/1212013 124000 MARTIN, KAYLIN 36.49 ARENA PHOTOS - DIVISION 1 330772 120613 5510.6575 PRINTING ARENA ADMINISTRATION 36.49 378112 '1211212013 101483 MENARDS 20.17 SHELVING 00006364 330448 42970 5210.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF DOME PROGRAM 100.87 BUILDING MATERIALS 00001291 330547 42654 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATI 54.35 NAILS, REBAR 00001296 330548 42751 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATI 49.03 FURNACE FILTERS 00001315 330715 43338 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 31.94 MONITOR INSTALLATION PARTS 00001319 330716 43424 .5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 41.78 MONITOR INSTALLATION PARTS 00001323 330717 43522 _ 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 5.33 EPDXY 00001334 330718 43909 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 19.40 ANTIFREEZE 330719 43899 5921.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 322.87 378113 1211212013 102281 MENARDS 19.37 LUMBER 00001309 330549 40771 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATI 19.37 378114 1211212013 102607 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS 171.00 OFFICIATING FEES 330852 443.4 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 171.00 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/, ..1,2:29:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 19 Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378115 12/1212013 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAIRIE Continued... 214.40 VEHICLE REPAIRS 330720 231569 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 214.40 378116 1211212013 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & WATER 1,347.50 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001232 330550 34612 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,102.50 REPLACE STANDPIPE 00001238 330773 34613 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 857.50 REPAIR STANDPIPE 00001239 330774 34614 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 3,307.50 378117 1211212013 103216 MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPARTMENT 17,046.61 WATER PURCHASE 330721 431- 0005.300 -12 5913.6601 WATER PURCHASED DISTRIBUTION /13 17,046.61 378118 1211212013 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 34.63 CO2, METHAIR 330775 171083287 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 34.63 378119 1211212013 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 47.03 DISCS, BODIES, CAPS 00005749 330449 0102088 -IN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 426.43 BALL VALVE 00005786 330450 0102087 -IN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 36.38 CAM LOCK, PVC HOSE 00005723 330451 0102086 -IN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 32.95 CAMLOCKS, COUPLING 330776 0102148 -IN 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS. EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN , 542.79 378120 1211212013 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 52.56 HOCKEY POSTERS 330551 14446 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 38.62 POSTER 330777 14447 1400.6408 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 91.18 378121 1211212013 132597 MIXMI BRANDS INC. 140.00 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330853 212913283 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 140.00 378122 1211212013 102812 MN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 70.06 PRESSURE VESSEL PERMITS 330854 ABR00826331 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 40.00 PRESSURE VESSEL PERMITS 330855 ABR00825621 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 10.00 PRESSURE VESSEL PERMIT 330856 ABR00826721 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 30.00 BOILER PERMITS 330857 ABR00813361 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 10.00 PRESSURE VESSEL PERMIT 330858 ABR00814821 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN R55CKR2 LOGIS100 121`1212013 104350 NIKE USA INC. CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 64.61 RAIN SUIT 330722 955267074 Council Check Register by GL Page - 20 378128 Council Check Register and Summary 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPPLY 316.91 PIPE 00005750 12/12/2013 -- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit i 378122 1211212013 102812 MN DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT REFUND 330552 120213 Continued... 1,200.00 10.00 PRESSURE VESSEL PERMIT 330859 ABR00815171 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 130.00 PRESSURE VESSEUBOILER PERMITS 330860 ABR00826341 5511.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG /GROUNDS 3,135.00 300.00 378123 1211212013 133302 MODERN PIPING INC. 17,920.00 PLUMBING WORK @ CITY GARAGES 330861 1167526 44008.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT P21 50TH&FRANCE CENTER RAMP 17,920.00 ,.j 378124 12112/2013 108668 MORRIS, GRAYLYN 200.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 12/19/13 330746 '120113 5710.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 200.00 378125 12/1212013 - 130988 NEUENDORF, BILL 43.91 REIMBURSE EXPENSES 330778 120613 9232.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 226.00 REIMBURSE EXPENSES 330778 120613 9232.6106 MEETING EXPENSE CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 301.60 REIMBURSE EXPENSES 330778 120613 9232.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS - CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 204:00 REIMBURSE EXPENSES 330778. 120613 9234.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT I 9.00 REIMBURSE EXPENSES : 330778 120613 9234.6106 MEETING EXPENSE GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT 784.51 378126 1211212013 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. inn sn 330617 86524 5822 5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 330618 86525 378127 121`1212013 104350 NIKE USA INC. 64.61 RAIN SUIT 330722 955267074 64.61 378128 1211212013 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPPLY 316.91 PIPE 00005750 330452 275502 316.91 378,129 1211212013 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 1,200.00 HYDRANT METER DEPOSIT REFUND 330552 120213 1,200.00 378130 1211212013 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 3,135.00 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 330887 121313 3,135.00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1553.6530 5901.4626 01253.1705.30 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SALE OF WATER UTILITY REVENUES CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A253 RT TURN ON VERNON&HANSEN 864.29 378133 1211212013 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 1,345.00 330619 8427367 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CITY OF EDINA 275.22 12/10/201312:29:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 50TH ST SELLING 4,484.63 330621 8427354 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 166.25 330622 8427395 -IN 5842.5512 Council Check Register by GL YORK SELLING Page - 21 330623 8426615 -CM 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING Council Check Register and Summary 378135 1211212013 110832 PC2 SOLUTIONS INC. 1211212013— 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378130 1211212013 1,190.00 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. Continued... 378131 12/1212013 115669 ON CALL SERVICES 4,000.00 INDOOR MAZE MATERIALS 330779 2414 5720.6530 REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 4,000.00 378132 1211212013 100940 OWENS COMPANIES INC. 864 29 HVAC REPAIRS 00002056 330723 53812 5761.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 864.29 378133 1211212013 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 1,345.00 330619 8427367 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 275.22 330620 8427363 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 4,484.63 330621 8427354 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 166.25 330622 8427395 -IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 36.81- 330623 8426615 -CM 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE CENT SERV GEN - MIS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS GOLF DOME PROGRAM ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS 246.72 330624 2524160 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,422.17 330625 2526033 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,830.26 330626 2526035 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 6,234.29 378134 1211212013 125492 PAYPAL INC. 39.95 MONTHLY FEE 330453 27939759 5902.6155 BANK SERVICES CHARGES 39.95 378135 1211212013 110832 PC2 SOLUTIONS INC. 1,190.00 IT CONSULTING 330454 112313001 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,190.00 378136 12/12/2013 131163 PECK, RANDY 275.00 BREAKFAST WITH SANTA 330455 DEC 7 1600.4390.56 BREAKFAST WITH SANTA 275.00 378137 1211212013 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 229.06 330780 18289170 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 365.80 330781 18289215 5210.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 152.78 330862 18289174 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 894.06 330863 18289198 5520.5510 - COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,641.70 378138 12/1212013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS UTILITY BILLING - FINANCE CENT SERV GEN - MIS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS GOLF DOME PROGRAM ARENA CONCESSIONS ARENA CONCESSIONS 246.72 330624 2524160 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,422.17 330625 2526033 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,830.26 330626 2526035 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING R55CKR2 LQGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10 @01312:29:44 R Council Check Register by GL Page - 22 Council Check Register and'Suinmary' " 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No 'Account No Subledger . -Account Description Business Unit 378138 1211212013 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS Continued... 2.24 330627 2526025 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 136.23 330628 2526026 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,969.08 330914 2526030 5842.5513 COST,OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,537.70 330915 2526032 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD,WINE YORK SELLING 3.36 330916 2526024 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,810.72 330917 2526031 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1,077.44 330918 2526827 5842.5513 COST OF :GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 842.56 330919 2526036 5862.5513 COST OF'GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 179.36 330920 2526034 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 14,057.84 378139 12/1212013 111779 PIONEER RESEARCH CORPORATION 1,583.70 SEWER DEGREASER 00001210 330553 236433 5923.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER COLLECTION SYSTEMS 1,583.70 378140 1211212013 100958 PLUNKETTS PEST CONTROL 46.30 PEST CONTROL 330456 3986905 - 7411.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ; PSTF OCCUPANCY 46.30 378141 12112/2013 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC.. 155.00 SCRAP TIRE FEE 00005573 330724 210093090 1553.6583 TIRES -& TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 201.10 TIRES 00005573 330725 210089742 1553,6583 TIRES &TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,362.04 TIRES 00005573 330726 210092742 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,718.14 378142 1211212013 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY 66.87 GLOVES 00005579 330727 52048 1301.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL MAINTENANCE 66.88 GLOVES 00005579 330727 52048 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 133.75 378143 1211212013 129693 PROFESSIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING 125.00 TRAINING 330864 Q994 1400.6104 CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 125.00 ,y 378144 1211212013 108640 PROFESSIONAL TURF & RENOVATION 8,750.00 COUNTRYSIDE BALLFIELD PROD 330457 201574 47078.6710. EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATE 8,750.00 378145 1211212013 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 382.55 TOWELS, DISINFECTANT 00002249 330782 6651 - 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 378155 12/1212013 118168 SANSIO Subledger Account Description Continued... REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 12/10/2W312:29:44 Page - 23 Business Unit MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CITY HALL GENERAL DISTRIBUTION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING MECHANICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER CITY OF EDINA R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 1211212013 -- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 378145 1211212013 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 382.55 378146 1211212013 100466 R & R PRODUCTS INC. 4,485.60 BEARINGS 00006059 330458 CD1740999 5422.6530 4,485.60 378147 1211212013 120783 R E CARLSON INC. 2,439.23 EQUIPMENT UPGRADE 00001262 330783 0034671 1551.6406 2,439.23 378148 1211212013 100974 RAYMOND E. HAEG PLUMBING 194.25 PLUMBING REPAIR 00001206 330554 16187 5913.6180 194.25 378149 1211212013 108659 RICHTER, BRIAN 100.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 12/22/13 330865 120113 5710.6136 100.00 378150 1211212013 118658 RIGHTW_AY GLASS INC. 227.03 TINT WINDSHIELD 00005722 330459 69041 1553.6180 227.03 378151 1211212013 101000 RJM PRINTING INC. 113.82 BUSINESS CARDS 330728 79333 1550.6406 113.82 378152 12112/2013 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 179.84 SOFTENER SALT 00001298 330729 00291740 1551.6406 179.84 SOFTENER SALT 00001297 330730 00291736 1552.6406 359.68 378153 1211212013 102716 RON'S MECHANICAL 54.32 PERMIT REFUND 330799 ED127636 1495.4115 54.32 378154 1211212013 124809 RPU INC. 6,255.00 INSTALL SUMP DRAIN 00001225 330784 1546 5932.6103 6,255.00 378155 12/1212013 118168 SANSIO Subledger Account Description Continued... REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 12/10/2W312:29:44 Page - 23 Business Unit MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CITY HALL GENERAL DISTRIBUTION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING MECHANICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA CounclI.Check Register, by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv.No Account No- Subledger Account Description 378155 1211212013 116168 SANSIO Continued... 50.00 EMS FAXING 330731 -INV- 13802 -2013 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING 753.00 EMS SUBSCRIPTION 330732 INV- 13968 -2013 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 24 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATI COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATI CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDSPATI CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 803.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 378156 12112/2013 VERNON SELLING 105442 SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO.. YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 35.48 LUMBER 00001270 `330555 41166479 47078.6710 31.51 HARDWARE 00001295 330556 41168313 - 47078.6710 66.99 378157 1211212013 104689 SERIGRAPHICS SIGN SYSTEMS INC. 47.73 NAMEPLATE 330557 44134 1100.6103 48.27 NAME PLATE 330558 44159 1100.6103 96.00 378158 12112/2013 103219 SGN WENDEL 1,955.00 CONSTRUCTION ADMIN 330460 3719 _ 47078.6710 1,955.00 378159 12/12/2013 103237 SHIRLEY, TOM. 140.12 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 330866 120313 5760.6107 140.12 378160 1211212013 120784 SIGN PRO 197.72 DASHERBOARD AD 330785 7264 5510.6103 999.66 MENU BOARD 330867 6784 5511.6136 1,197.38 378161 1211212013 131885 SISINNI FOOD SERVICES INC. 67.00 HOT DOG BUNS 330868 _230580 5520.5510 54.40 330869 231603 5520.5510 56.50 330870 231749 5520.5510 177.90 378162 12/12/2013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 677.68 330629 1106833 5822.5512 1.00 330630 1104505 5862.5512 1,435.20 330631 1106837 5862.5512 10,379.66 330632 1106836 5862.5513 2,017.65 330633 1106835 - 5842.5512 8,612.19 330634 1106834 5842.5513 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 24 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATI COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDBPATI CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUNDSPATI CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ARENA ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE` VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 12110/201312:29:44 Page - 25 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM CITY OF EDINA YORK SELLING R55CKR2 LOGIS100 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 12112/2013- 12/1212013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 378162 1211212013 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 722.35 330635 1106020 5842.5512 .50 330636 1106208 5842.5512 723.00 330637 1106021 5842.5513 1,721.18 330921 1106832 5822.5513 1,128.50 330922 1108272 5842.5513 27,418.91 378163 1211212013 103658 ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY BAND 75.00 EP ENTERTAINMENT 12/15/13 330745 120113 5710.6136 75.00 378164 12/1212013 128187 ST PAUL POLICE DEPARTMENT 965.00 MOTORCYCLE OPERATOR COURSE 330871 EDINA- MOTOR -1 1400.6104 965.00 378165 1211212013 101007 STAR TRIBUNE 869.33 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 330559 113013 5822.6122 869.33 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 330559 113013 5842.6122 869.34 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 330559, 113013 5862.6122 2,608.00 378166 1211212013 101015 STREICHERS 264.97 UNIFORM 330786 11055328 1401.6203 ' 11.99 UNIFORM 330787 11055330 1401.6203 49.99 UNIFORM 330788 11056435 1401.6203 26.71 UNIFORM 330789 11056664 1401.6203 353.66 378167 12112/2013 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 126.27 LAMP 00005789 ;330461 1511891 1553.6530 17.79 SWITCH 00005792 330733 1512584 1553.6530 1,000.00 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005667 330734 636983 1553.6180 1,144.06 378168 12H2/2013 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC. 556.61 TIRES 00005788 330462 10122150 1553.6583 . 556.61 378169 1211212013 133299 SULLIVAN RENOVATIONS INC. 2,500.00 DEMO ESCROW REFUND 330800 ED125856 1495.4109 12110/201312:29:44 Page - 25 Subledger Account Description Business Unit Continued... EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCES 8 SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM UNIFORM ALLOWANCE EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS R55CKR2 LOGIS1o0 577.00 TRIP EXPENSES CITY OF EDINA 1100.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CITY COUNCIL Council Check Register by GL Council Check Register and Summary 378172 1211212013 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 12112/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 378169 1211212013 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 133299 SULLIVAN RENOVATIONS INC. Continued... 3,208.25 2,500.00 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 378170 1211212013 155.88 110674 SUPERIOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS 330640 792390 5862.5514 111.80 CELL PHONE CHARGERS 330790 35141 1280.6188 TELEPHONE 3,791.13 111.80 378171 1211212013 127938 SWENSON, ANN 12/10/201312:29:44 Page - 26 Business Unit SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 577.00 TRIP EXPENSES 330888 120913 1100.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CITY COUNCIL 577.00 378172 1211212013 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 427.00 330638 00771499 5420.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER CLUB HOUSE' 3,208.25 330639 792389 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 155.88 330640 792390 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,791.13 378173 1211212013 104347 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC. 301.77 VIDEO CONFERENCE UPGRADE 330735 657322 421460.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CIVIL DEFENSE EQUIPMENT 8,647.03 VIDEO CONFERENCE UPGRADE 00003544 330736 657320 421460.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CIVIL DEFENSE EQUIPMENT 619.71 VIDEO CONFERENCE UPGRADE- 00003544 330737 657328 421460.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CIVIL DEFENSE EQUIPMENT 9,568.51 378174 1211212013 120700 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC. 330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 330463 2013 -88743 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 330463 2013 -88743 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 330.00 MAGAZINE ADVERTISING 330463 2013 -88743 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 990.00 378175 12112/2013 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL INC. 172.90 PARK BOARD MINUTES 330464 M20182 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 160.95 VETERANS MEM MEETING MINUTES 330465 M20185 1600.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 140.95 GRANDVIEW TASK FORCE MINUTES 330560 M20181 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 204.85 NOV 19 COUNCIL MINUTES 330561 M20183 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 679.65 378176 1211212013 103277 TITAN MACHINERY 62.85 SWITCH _ 00005793 330738 2696567GP 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 62.65 378177 1211212013 131040 TLO LLC CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page- 27 i Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013— 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378177 1211212013 131040 TLO LLC Continued... 146.00 NOV 2013 USAGE 330466 269634 -12/13 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 146.00 378178 12/1212013 116535 TRAVELERS 6,392.50 DEDUCTIBLE 330791 000451068 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL .892.50 DEDUCTIBLE 330792 000451496 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,102.50 DEDUCTIBLE 330793 000451495 1550.6200 INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 8,387.50 378179 12/1212013 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 126.27 MOWER PARTS 00001260 330562 SI35661 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 126.27 378180 1211212013 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 22.98 - CAR WASH TRANSFORMER 00001283 330467 403990 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 22.98 378181 12/12/2013 101360 TWIN CITY HARDWARE CO. 53.64 HANDICAP DOOR PUSH BUTTON 330563 613514 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 53.64, 378182 1211212013 101051 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 978.24 UNIFORMS 330872 103113 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 162.40 UNIFORMS 330873 180641 1419.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE RESERVE PROGRAM 726.88 UNIFORMS 330874 180127 1419.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE RESERVE PROGRAM 1,867.52 1 378183 12/12/2013 131957 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC SERVICE INC. j 85.39 PYLON BAGS 00001995 330739 1501 - 001221 1644.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES 8 MAINTENANCE 85.39 378184 1211212013 100410 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC. 145.04 PAGERS 330794 W0319246K 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 145.04 378185 1211212013 119476 USPCA REGION 12 10.00 DUES - JASON BEHR 330890 BAL DUE 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 10.00 378186 12112/2013 101058 VAN PAPER CO. i R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA _ 12110/201312:29:44 Council Clieck Register by GL Page - 28 Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No S_ ubl_edger Account Description Business Unit 378186 1211212013 101058 VAN PAPER CO. Continued..: 727.39 CAN LINERS 00001287 330564 293343 -00 1645.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL LITTER REMOVAL -. 727.39 - 378187 1211212013 102734 VEIT COMPANIES 1,200.00 HYDRANT DEPOSIT REFUND 330875 120613 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 1,200.00 378188 1211212013 106308 VEITH; MICHELLE - 625.00 ARBLE BROCHURE DESIGN 330468 2013 -3 1629.6575 PRINTING ADAPTIVE RECREATION 625.00 378189 1211212013 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 2013.73 FITTINGS 00001304 330469 7854476 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 253.18 JUNCTION BOX, SENSORS 00001316 330740 7866227 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 461.91 378190 1211212013 119454 VINOCOPIA 114.50 330641 0088478 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS'SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 114.50 378191 1211212013 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 819.73 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330876 38148789 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 59.66 - .CONCESSION PRODUCT 330877 38167762 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 759.34 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330878. 38209579 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 237.60 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330879 38234775 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS j 168.57 CONCESSION. PRODUCT 330880 38234774 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS i 930.96 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330881 38250173 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 2,975.86 378192 1211212013 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 317.26 LIGHT BULBS 00001290 330470 15236706 -00 1322.6530 REPAIR PARTS STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 317.26 378193 1211212013 130574" WATSON COMPANY I 1,231.32 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330882 832781 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 322.52 CONCESSION PRODUCT 330883 832866 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 8.91- CREDIT 330884 833220 5520.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 1,544.93 378194 1211212013 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 R55CKR2 LOGIS100 Council Check Register by GL Page - 29 Council Check Register and Summary 12/1212013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378194 1211212013 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE Continued... 907.55 330642 347571 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,237.45 330643 347401 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,145.00 378195 1211212013 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 5,089.49 330644 482367 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 154.24 330645 482364 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3.36 330923 482363 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,332.75 330924 482366 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 9,579.84 378196 1211212013 117482 WINECONNECT INC. 159.24 WEB - DEC 2013 330471 1169 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 159.24 378197 1211212013 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 7,993.90 330646 1080114887 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4,118.51 330647 1080116387 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,665.94 330648 1080116390 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 12,045.10 330649 1080116392 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 15,166.52 330650 1080114889 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 103.23 330651 1080116464 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 7,537.71 330652 1080116388 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,728.30 330653 1080114888 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 146.30 330654 1080116389 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,149.40 330655 1080116393 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 106.51- 330656 2080021557 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 30.00- 330657 2080022357 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 252.15 330925 1080117572 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 55,770.55 378198 1211212013 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER INC 2,723.55 330658 1090146667 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 455.50 330926 1090148138 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5,536.50 330927 1090148137 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 4,164.34 330928 1090150282 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 12,879.89 378199 1211212013 101082 WITTEK GOLF SUPPLY - 134.81 RANGE PAILS 330741 306333 5210.6590 RANGE BALLS GOLF DOME PROGRAM R55CKR2 LOGIS100 CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 Council Check Register by GL Page - 30 Council Check Register and Summary 12/1212013- 12/12/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 378199 12112/2013 101082 WITTEK GOLF SUPPLY Continued... 134.81 378200 1211212013 133300 WOODVIEW BUILDERS & REMODELERS LLC 2,500.00 DEMO ESCROW REFUND 330801 ED125387 1495.4109 CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT INSPECTIONS 2,500.00 378201 12112/2013 101726 XCEL ENERGY 36,068.10 51- 4621797 -2 330472 392270459 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 312.05 51- 6046826 -0 330565 392466186 5422.6185 LIGHT & POWER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,739.89 . 51- 6229265 -9 330566 392469449 1470.6185 LIGHT & POWER FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 444.20 51- 6229265 -9 330566 392469449 1481.6185 LIGHT & POWER YORK FIRE STATION 141.39 51- 5938955 -6 330567 392462404 4086.6185 LIGHT & POWER AQUATIC WEEDS 408.54 51- 5634814 -2 330568 392459048 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT 6,703.72 51- 0837548 -4 330569 392543648 5915.6185 LIGHT & POWER WATER TREATMENT 45.62 51- 7567037 -0 330570 392485393 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 23.47 51- 4151897 -6 330571 392437643 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 256.16 51- 9337452 -8 330572 392511327 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 969.27 51- 9251919 -0 330573 392507080 5765.6185 LIGHT & POWER PROMENADE EXPENSES 477.35 51- 4827232 -6 330574 392444692 5311.6185 LIGHT & POWER POOL OPERATION 40.43 51- 8102668 -0 330575 392320140 1321.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING REGULAR 101.76 51- 6692497 -0 330576 392347944 1460.6185 LIGHT & POWER CIVILIAN DEFENSE 47,731.95 378202 12/1212013 100568 XEROX CORPORATION 235.45 NOV 2013 USAGE -PARK & REC 00004322 330742 071315625 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL - 235.45 378203 1211212013 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. 5,434.41 UNLEADED FUEL 00005752 330743 594039 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 5,434.41 378204 1211212013 120099 Z WINES USA LLC 979.00 330929 12548 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 378205 12/1212013 101091 ZIEGLER INC 430.60 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 330744 SW140136028 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 430.60 773,456.17 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals CITY OF EDINA 12/10/201312:29:44 R55CKR2 LOGI5100 Council Check Register by GL Page- 31 Council Check Register and Summary 12/12/2013 -- 12112/2013 Check # Date Amount Supplier /.Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 773,456.17 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 773,456.17 Total Payments 773.456.17 R55CKS2 LOGIS100 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 198,853.15 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 217.56 02500 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLIST SAFETY 21,167.14 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 125,194.42 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 24,386.73 05100 ART CENTER FUND 44.71 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 658.08 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 1,227.35 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 15,188.65 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 11,896.11 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 12,773.01 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 3,302.68 05800 LIQUOR FUND 261,457.48 . 05900 UTILITY FUND 49,015.05 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 14,708.42 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND - 342.87 09232 CENTENNIAL TIF DISTRICT 571.51 09234 GRANDVIEW TIF DISTRICT 32,451.25 Report Totals 773,456.17 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summery 12/12/2013- 12/12/2013 12/101201312:29:55 Page- 1+ We confirm to the; best of our knowledge and, belief, that these: claims comply, in all. material: respects with there ' ulrements of the City of Edina purchasing polici s d procedures; i nager O To: ' Edina City Council Agenda Item #: 'IV. C. From: Darrell Todd, Interim Fire Chief Action Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -137 Accepting Blue Card Training Grant Action Requested: Motion adopting Resolution No. 2013 -137 accepting the Blue Card Regional Training Grant. Information / Background: This is a Federal Assistance to Firefighters (AFG) Regional Training Grant being administered through the St. Paul Fire Department. The grant amounts to $791 5.74. Blue Card is an emergency scene management system that is being adopted by many Fire Departments in the metropolitan area. Along with our neighboring departments, we have adopted this system so that we are all using the same terminology, tactics and communication protocol. This allows us to act as one department while operating on emergency scenes. The grant covers the cost of the class, as well as overtime and back -fill expenses. I recommend adopting a resolution accepting the Blue Card Training Grant. City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -137 EDINA FIRE DEPARTMENT BLUE CARD TRAINING GRANT Page 2 WHEREAS, The City of Edina and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), through St. Paul Fire Department, have agreed to enter into an agreement for training Edina Fire Department personnel in the Blue Card incident management system. The City of Edina agrees that the FEMA program funds are for the enrollment and associated costs of participating in the Blue Card training program. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota hereby accepts the agreement and documents relating to Blue Card Regional Training Grant EMW -20 1 1 -00427 in the amount of $7915.74. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the Agreement and any amendments to the Agreement. Passed and adopted this 17' day of December, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)SS CITY OF EDINA James B. Hovland, Mayor CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2013 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , City Clerk To: MAYOR & COUNCIL 0/ loll1` tt U) O �y �P Go N.— Agenda Item A. IV. D. From: Robert C. Wilson Action City Assessor Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information O Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -138 Authorizing The Removal Of A Senior Citizen Special Assessment Deferral By Hennepin County Action Requested: Adopt Resolution No. 2013 -138 Information / Background: A senior citizen special assessment deferral was approved for a street improvement project on January 3, 2001. The deferred assessment was in the amount of $2,366.09 and was to accumulate interest at a rate of 8.5 percent until which time the applicant no longer qualifies or the property loses its eligibility. The property sold on December 28, 2012 at which time the principle and accrued interest was to be collected by Hennepin County. The lien was missed by the County and the amount due was not received. A. special assessment search was recently done on the property for a pending sale and the special assessment deferral omission was brought to our attention. Since the deferral should have been collected when the property sold in December 2012 and was missed, and remains a lien on the property, a resolution is required to direct the County to remove the deferred principal and all accrued interest. Attachments: Resolution No. 2013 -138 Copy of 2001 Application and Authorization for Tax Deferral City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -138 Authorizing The Removal Of A Senior Citizen Special Assessment Deferral By Hennepin County WHEREAS, a senior citizen special assessment deferral was approved on January 3, 2001. WHEREAS, the property sold on December 28, 2012 at which time the special assessment along With accrued interest became payable. WHEREAS, the special assessment deferral was missed and not collected by Hennepin County when the property sold in 2012: WHEREAS, the deferral still exists as a tax lien on the property, WHEREAS, a resolution is required to direct Hennepin County to remove the principle and accrued interest charges. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the following senior citizen special assessment deferral and all accrued interest is to be removed by Hennepin County: Levy No PID To Remove 14961 29- 117 -21 -31 -0009 $ 2,366.09. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of December, 2013 ATTEST: City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA )SS CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK Mayor I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2013 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of ,20 . Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk 337 7 9 t3 HC 227 APPLICATION AND AUTHORIZATION FOR TAX DEFERRAL (t -Stl Special Assessments for Senior Citizens' Homestead Laws 1976, Chapter 195 State of Minnesota DATE County of Hennepin APPLICANT: Submit 4 notarized copies of this application . to your municipality or taxing district. •�O` /� /�� PRINT OR TYPE NAME HIRE L. 1, the undersigned, declare: � "i✓%t�Jvl Thet 1 by'. I am not Ions than 65 years of age reside at 5 120 jar fYL) b 1 • �, and chat tho dato of my birth is That 1 am the owner of the property legally described as: (Give legal description) PROPERTY I.D. QAbstract OTorrens rvt�rror LOUV -es LA dlru� t` Additional Sheet Attached That my interest in the ownership of the above ,property was acquired on 13' a d is as follows: =SOLE OWNERSHIP Q OTHER UNDIVIDED INTEREST — Specify [ 6JOINTTENANCY — HELD WITH Jdf(A Q „S&�� That QQn January 2, 1911 or June 1, 19— , I owned f �'and occupied the above property as my homestead and that such occupancy began on That the assessment charges duly adopted by ordinance which have been allocated against the subject property would create undue personal-hard- ship on my behalf and I respectfully request that payment be delayed and that such taxes be deferred. APPLICANT: Complete unshaded areas — For assistance contact your municipal clerk. Levy No. Date of First Annual Payment Total Amt, of Levy Remaining Amt. of Levy Interest Rate of Levy Amount Deferred MCI Lf I 45$• 13 Ip-09 ,3&& -D 7 Notorial Stamp or Seal STATE OF N� Coun of � The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this m daY of fig ( By 7 CANOICE L FIEDLER (Applicant) ty I certify the above to be true and correct. NaTARY PL;&.S*b10 ar yfrx.- .:•..•; __(llotaryaf'ubdi M County, Minnesota �--'_ISi/gJnat(u /r /e PV /Ap��I Cant) rnn •.......•,ppY,00t�'frrli99i0h expires �¢0.5 ` ✓�TC� Y • _. _(/��/'.- 2a[.G�� AUTHORIZATION I, Clerk of the of _ a jnck, in Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that this poication has been duly reviewed an that in accordance with the minutes of official. record in said cham bers was duly EZ3 APPROVED 0 DENIED as of I I _C;C7 39e?_Q0P (Seal) That in accordance with approval granted that the taxes on the affiants subject property levied for collection as described should be so defer- red in the TOTAL AMOUNT OF Sand compounded at the additional interest rate of.L- % until such time as it is deemed the appli cant no longer qualifies or the property loses its eligibility. Clerk or q n- �-A n, In/}� Date of Approval I'� —�� Authorized Deputy — ORDER �J^`YLI ORDER OF DEFERRAL 11 REGISTER OF DEEDS I certify that I have reviewed this application and that it has J*en duly approved and that assessment charges levied for special assessments under the subject ordi- nance have been officially deferred as stipulated by the above `subdivision and re- corded in the Register of Deeds, office in this county'as noted,"'and it is so ordered. DATE OF ORDER I COUNTY A- UDITOR MINATION The above order terminated this day of 'REASON: DATE OF TERMINATION COUNTY AUDITOR r M r� M OPPICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF TITLES HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA CERTIFIED FILED ON APR 12 2001. =TrrLES Al I fsyl mpur y ah , , -- s — 31A q)-19,D 4KN- ~1 e,eapdnp LI -8 411g S- vwq ID ao nll. o'r :a•���i::cula� 8j, 0, b 111 -18 A 2! fG::.;:1 To: Mayor and City Council From: Ann Kattreh Parks & Recreation Director Dater December 17, 2013 awe v Eq �y 0 I Be Agenda Item #: IV.E. The Recommended Bid is ❑ Within Budget ® Not Within. Budget Subject: Request for Purchase - Contract For Construction Management Services For The Sports Dome, Outdoor Refrigerated Ice Rink And Braemar Arena Improvements, RJM Construction Date, Bid Opened or Quote Received: Thursday, December 12, 2013 Company: RJM Construction Recommended Quote or Bid: RJM Construction Bid or Expiration Date: NA Amount of Quote or Bid: $242,000 - 2.85% of the total construction costs General Information: On October 14, 2013 the City Council directed staff to proceed with the development of plans and specifications for a sports dome, arena improvements and an outdoor refrigerated rink at the Braemar Arena site. Staff has worked with RJM Construction, Inc., since 2012 to determine the feasibility, location and anticipated costs of these projects. Attached is an AIA Document C 132 — 2009 contract for construction management services for the sports dome, arena improvements and outdoor refrigerated rink. This contract has been reviewed and approved by City Attorney Roger Knutson. The fee of 2.85% represents $242,000 of the $10,378,600 total projected project cost. On November 4, 2013 the city entered into a contract with the Cuningham Group for architectural services for this project. The Cuningham Group fee represents 7.4% or $627,000. In addition to this current project, RJM Construction provided architectural and engineering services to the City of Edina Parks & Recreation Department for the Hornets Nest and Golf Dome construction projects. Staff began working with Mark Ruff, Senior Financial Advisor /Principal from Ehlers regarding the financing for this project. This contract would be paid as part of the funding package for the sports dome, outdoor rink, arena improvements and Pamela Park renovation projects. Attachments: Edina Sports Dome and Outdoor Ice Rink at Braemar Addendum to Feasibility Study AIA Document C 132 — 2009 — Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Adviser City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 •_ Edina Sports Dome and Outdoor Ice Rink at Braemar Addendum to Feasibility Study October 8, 2013 Consultant Team: Cuningham Group Architecture, Inc. ( Cuningham) Anderson- Johnson Associates (AJA) Hallberg Engineering, Inc. (Hallberg) Stevens Engineers (Scott Ward) RJM Construction (RDA) Purpose 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 items. This memo and attached images are the result of this study. Caveats Study was based on the available site topographic and utility information. However, we anticipate finding some discrepancies when the site is surveyed. This planning also made certain assumptions related to zoning, fire code and engineering. If/when the project moves forward into design, direct discussions with authorities having jurisdiction will be needed to confirm assumptions. 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 be taken 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 comer, also covered with trees and shrubs. Program of Spaces and Amenities These are laid out in Plan Diagram on page 5 Dome and Support Structures: • 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 corner. 0 2400 sf Lobby /Support building connected to the dome DEB CUNINGHAM G R 0 U P AIA 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 www.cuningham.com N IF • Enclosure for mechanical equipment and off - season storage of some dome C U N I N G H A M components. G R O. U P • Additional fabric liner to achieve a higher insulating value for Dome. This more than doubles the R- value, from approximately R1.5 to R4 AM Minnesota 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. coninghari 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 Suite 325 Two indoor changing/bench areas for skaters Minneapolis; MN • Toilets remodeled to meet ADA codes for use by outdoor rink skaters 55414 SUStalnablllty Enhancem ents 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 dome during the winter and returns heat to the ground from ice - making during the www.cuningham.com summer could be an effective system for this 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 of geothermal 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 minimize 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 '1 B9B features that will need to be removed include the playground and the picnic gazebo north of C U N 1 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 stoimwater issues with a holding area within the dome AM Minnesota Firm 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 comer. • 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. • 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 corner 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 S -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 www.cuningham.com 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 -$2.2 million, including A/E fees and geotechnical costs. Payback time frame is likely, to be similar to the system life expectancy, or 20 -30 years. • Seepage 4 for description of geothermal system and costs Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink - Braemar Location Page 3 I mA @E Edina Snorts Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink — Braemar K c U N I N G H A M v: Location — Geothermal Heating /Cooling G R 0 U P AIA Minnesota Intent: Provide Ground Source Heat Pump System sized to heat the proposed dome; also Firm Award Recipient used during May- October to augment ice making for existing ice sheets (when the seasonal dome is-dowri). 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 • Dome load side piping, pumps, and controls 201 Main street SE site 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 • Electrical work required www.cuningham.com • 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 re-1 quire 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; $1OK 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 informeddecision 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 1 Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink — Braemar C U N I N G H A M G R Location — Exhibits 0 U P Plan Diagram Showing Proposed Dome and Ice Rink Layout Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink - Braemar.Location 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 Page 5 Image of Outdoor Ice Rink between East Arena and Dome White flat areas are concrete paving providing walks and spectator areas around the Ice. Long white boxes in Dome represent Batting Cages. Image of Dome and Ice Rink (Covered) from Northwest CUNINGHAM G R 0 U P 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 6 I Image of Canopy Link (tan) between Dome and East Arena Lower Level Door Image Showing Extent of North Retaining Walls (orange w/ red stripes) Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Rink - Braemar Location OCT, CUNINGHAM G R O U P A/A 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 www.cuningham.com Page 7 1r"Jl; /F" - f�frriri/','+Irl i/r i�r Ijl'Jrr;' }f, /J, "r�I, i. r1�/(.f�Jl)'r;1/lj�. HiNN�APOii3 r F,110EW!X 1; bENViLk CONSTRUCTION October 8, 2013 Edina Sports Dome Dome Layout (250'x 400' Dome) Owner Costs 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 $250,000 $100,000 $150,000 Quantities 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 5% Owner Contingency 4% $205,000 Total Alternates: $205,000 Upgrade fabric from PVDF coating to a Tedlar Total coating 100,000 SF $2.50 Added Dome Liner for Higher Insulating Value 100,000 SF $1.00 Sports Lighting (4 EA) (Pole Mounted) 4 EA $37,500 Owner Costs 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 $250,000 $100,000 $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 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. .,i ff /JJj1J / /�%� /f f/• F91Niu @nNOlis i F'FIOE =AIIX i' nEP1VE:fi CONSTRUCTION October 8, 2013 Edina Sports Dome, Outdoor Ice Sheet and Interior Renovation of East Arena Dome Layout (250' x 400' Dome) 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 Feld (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% $243,000 Total $5,108,000 Outdoor Ice Sheet Quantities Cost/Unit Total Earthwork 40,000 SF $5 $200,000 Retaining walls 170 LF $650 $110,500 Utilities 40,000 SF $4 $160,000 Demo existing East Rink refrigeration system 1 LS $20,000 $20,000 New indirect ammonia refrigeration system 1 LS $725,000 $725,000 Concrete footing around rink 1 LS $22,000 $22,000 Concrete paving around rink 6,600 SF $5 $33,000 Outdoor concrete rink floor with subfloor heating system 1 LS $375,000 $375,000 Exterior dasher boards with full boxes and glass 1 LS $160,000 $160,000 Roof structure w/ fabric roof 24,200 SF $28 $677,600 Covered walk -way w/ fabric roof 2,500 SF $80 $200,000 Walk off mats 2,500 SF $22 $55,000 Construction Contingency 50/0 $137,000 Total $2,875,100 Interior Renovation of East Arena 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 0/0 $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 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. 1( i � Document C132 nx - 2009 Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Adviser IAGREEMENT made as of the Twenty- -fifth day-of October in the year Two.Thcusand This document is Intended to be used Thirteen ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS: (In words, indicate day, month and year.) The author of this document has added information needed for its BETWEEN the Owner: completion. The author may also (Name, legal status, address and other information) have revised the text of the original (Name, legal status, address and other information) ALA standard form. An AddRlons and City of Edina Deletions Report that notes added 4801 West 50" Street information as well as revisions to the Edina, MN 55424 standard form text Is available from Minneapolis, MN 55414 the author and should be reviewed. A and the Construction Manager: vertical line in the left margin of this (Name, legal status, address and other information) document indicates where the author has added necessary information RJM Construction, LLC and where the author has added to or 701 Washington Avenue North, #600 deleted from the original AIA text. Minneapolis, MN 55401 This document has Important legal consequences. Consultation with an for the following Project: attorney Is encouraged with respect (Name, location and detailed description) to its completion or modification. Edina Sports Dome This document is Intended to be used 7501 Ikola Way In conjunction with ALA Documents Edina, MN 55439 A132Tm -2009, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and The Architect: Contractor, Construction Manager as Adviser Edition; A232"A -2009, (Name, legal status, address and other information) General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, Construction Cuningham Group Architecture Manager as Adviser Edition; and 201 Main Street, Suite 325 B132Tm -2009, Standard Form of Minneapolis, MN 55414 Agreement Between Owner and Architect, Construction Manager as The Owner and Construction Manager agree as follows. Adviser Edition. AIA Document A232'm -2009 Is adopted In this document by reference. Do not use with other general conditions unless this document is modified. AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly 8801 TMCMa- 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document, or any portion of it, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under 1 the law. This document was produced byAlA software at 15:29:09 on 12/1012013 under Order No.6119555428_1 which expires on 1012912014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) TABLE OF ARTICLES 1 INITIAL INFORMATION 2 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 3 SCOPE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S BASIC SERVICES 4 ADDITIONAL SERVICES 5 OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES 8 COST OF THE WORK 7 COPYRIGHTS AND LICENSES 8 CLAIMS AND DISPUTES 9 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISI6NS 11 COMPENSATION 12 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 13 SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT ARTICLE 1 INITIAL INFORMATION' § 1.1 This Agreement is based on the Initial Information set forth in this Section 1.1. (Note the disposition for the following items by inserting the requested information or a statement such as "not applicable, " "unknown at.time`of execution "or "to be determined later by mutual agreement.') § 1,1.1 The Owner's program for the Project: (Identify documentation or state the manner in which the program will be developed.) IThe program for the project will be developed' by Cuningham and is reflected in their construction documents, Edina Sports Dome. § 1.1.2 The Project's physical characteristics: (Identify or describe, if appropriate, size,, location, dimensions, or other pertinent information, such as geotechnical reports; site, boundary and topographic surveys; traffic and utility studies; availability ofpublic and private utilities and services; legal description of the site etc.) The project characteristics areas reflected in Cuningbam Group's contract documents, Edina Sports Dome, § 1.1.3 The Owner's . budget for the Cost of the Work, as defined in Section 6.1: (Provide total and, ifknown, a line item breakdown) § 1.1.4 The Owner's anticipated design and construction schedule: .1 Design phase milestone dates, if any: .2 Commencement of construction: May 1, 2014 AIA Document C132TM = 2008 formerly B801TMCMa — 1992). Copydghl ®1073,1880, 1892 and 2008 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved: WARNING: This AIA� Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties, Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 2 this AIA® Document, or any portion of It, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under / the law. This document was produced byAIA software at 15:28:08 on 12/1012013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) .3 Substantial Completion date or milestone dates: December 31, 2014 .4 Other: § 1.1.5 The Owner intends the following procurement method for the Project: (Identify method such as competitive bid, negotiated Contract or multiple Prime Contracts.) Multiple prime contracts. § 1.1.6 The Owner's requirements for accelerated or fast -track scheduling, multiple bid packages, or phased construction are set faith below: (List number and type of bid/procurement packages.) § 1.1.7 Other Project information: (Identify special characteristics or needs of the Project not provided elsewhere, such as environmentally responsible design or historic preservation requirements) N/A § 1.1.8 The Owner identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 5.5: (List name, address and other information) 49 Ann Kattreh Parks & Recreation Director City of Edina 4801 West 501s Street Edina, MN 55424 § 1.1.9 The persons or entities, in addition to the Owner's representative, who are required to review the Construction Manager's submittals to the Owner are as follows: (List name, address and other information) N/A § 1.1.10 Unless provided by the Construction Manager, the Owner will retain the following consultants and contractors: (List name, legal status, address and other information.) .1 Land Surveyor: .2 Geotechnical Engineer: .3 Civil Engineer: .4 Other: (List any other consultants retained by the Owner, such as a Project or Program Manager, or construction contractor.) N§ 1.1.11 The Construction Manager identifies the following representative in accordance with Section 2.4: AIA Document C132Ta — 2009 formerly B801TMCMa — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This Ale Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 3 this AIA° Document, or any portion of It, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced byAlA software et 15:29:09 on 12110/2013 under Order No.6111555428 1 which expires on 10/2912014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) A (List name, address and other information.) Paul Kolias Project Executive RJM Construction, LLC 701 Washington Avenue North, #600 Minneapolis, MN 55401 § 1.1.12 The Construction Manager's staffing plan as required under Section 3.3.2' shaft include: (List any'specific requirements . and personnel to be included in the staffing plan; if known.) IRJM will have a superintendent on site during construction, as well as periodic visits from their general superintendent and safety director. a 1 1:1.13 The Construction Manager's consultants retained under Basic Services, if any. - .1 Cost Estimator: (List name, legal status, address and other information.) N/A .2 Other consultants: N/A § 1.1.14 The Construction Manager's consultants retained under Additional Services: N/A § 1.1.15 Other Initial Information on which the Agreement is based: N/A § 1.2 The Owner and Construction Manager may rely on the Initial Information. Both parties, however, recognize that . such information may materially change and, in that event, the Owner and the Construction Manager shall appropriately adjust the schedules, the Construction Manager's services and the Construction Manager's compensation. ARTICLE 2 CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S RESPONSIBILITIES § 2.1 The Construction Manager shall provide the services as set forth in this Agreement. § 2.2 The Construction Manager shall perform its services consistent with the skill and care ordinarily provided by construction managers practicing in the same or similar locality under the same or similar circumstances. The Construction Manager shall perform its services as expeditiously as is consistent with such skill and care and the orderly progress of the Project. § 2.3 The Construction Manager shall provide its services in conjunction with the services•of an Architect as described in AIADocument B132Tm-2009, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect, Construction Manager as Adviser Edition. The Construction Manager shall not be responsible for actions taken by the Architect. § 2.4 The Construction Manager shall identify a representative authorized to act on behalf of the Construction Manager with respect to the Project. § 2.5 Except with the Owner's knowledge and consent, the Construction Manager shall not engage in any activity, or accept any employment, interest or contribution that would reasonably appear to compromise the Construction Manager's judgment with respect to this Project. AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly 8801 TMCMa — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. resery ed. WARNING: This AIA� Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Lew and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 4 this AIA® Document, or any portion of4t, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under t the law. This document was produced by AIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/1012013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) § 2.6 The Construction Manager shall maintain the following insurance for the duration of this Agreement. If any of the requirements set forth below exceed the types and limits the Construction Manager normally maintains, the Owner shall reimburse the Construction Manager for any additional cost. § 2.6.1 Comprehensive General Liability with policy limits as defined in the supplemental conditions of the project for bodily injury and property damage.. § 2.6.2 Automobile Liability covering owned and rented vehicles operated by the Construction Manager as defined in the supplemental conditions of the project, bodily injury and property damage.. § 2,6.3 The Construction Manager may use umbrella or excess liability insurance to achieve the required coverage for Comprehensive General Liability and Automobile Liability, provided that such umbrella or excess insurance results in the same type of coverage as required for the individual policies. § 2.6.4 Workers' Compensation at statutory limits and Employers Liability with a policy limit as defined in the supplemental conditions of the project. § 2.6.5 Professional Liability covering the Construction Manager's negligent acts, errors and omissions in its performance of services with policy limits of not less than N/A ($ N/A ) per claim and in the aggregate. RJM will not provide professional liability coverage for this project. § 2.6.6 The Construction Manager shall provide to the Owner certificates of insurance evidencing compliance with the requirements in this Section 2.6. The certificates will show the Owner as an additional insured on the Comprehensive General Liability, Automobile Liability, umbrella or excess policies. ARTICLE 3 SCOPE OF CONSTRUCTION MANAGER'S BASIC SERVICES § 3.1 Definition The Construction Manager's Basic Services consist of those described in Sections 3.2 and 3.3 and include usual and customary'construction coordination and scheduling, constructability review, cost estimating, and allocation of construction activities among the Multiple Prime Contractors. § 3.2 Preconstruction Phase § 3.2.1 The Construction Manager shall review the program furnished by the Owner and any evaluation of the Owner's program provided bythe Architect, to ascertain the requirements of the Project and shall arrive at a mutual understanding of such requirements with the Owner and Architect. § 3.2.2 The Construction Manager shall provide a preliminary evaluation of the Owner's program, schedule and construction budget requirements, each in terms of the other. § 3.2.3 The Construction Manager shall prepare, and deliver to the Owner, a written Construction Management Plan that includes, at a minimum, the following: (1) preliminary evaluations required in Section 3.2.2, (2) a Project schedule, (3) cost estimates,.(4) recommendations for Project delivery method, and (5) Contractors' scopes of Work, if multiple Contractors or fast -track construction will be used. The Construction Manager shall periodically update the Construction Management Plan over the course of the Project. § 3.2.4 Based on preliminary design and other design criteria prepared by the Architect, the Construction Manager shall prepare preliminary estimates of the Cost of the Work or the cost of program requirements using area, volume or similar conceptual estimating techniques for the Architect's review and Owner's approval. If the Architect suggests alternative materials and systems, the Construction Manager shall provide cost evaluations of those alternative materials and systems and may also provide its own suggestions. § 3.2.5 The Construction Manager shall expeditiously review design documents during their development and advise the.Owner and Architect on proposed site use and improvements, selection of materials, and building systems and equipment.' The Construction Manager shall also provide recommendations to the Owner and Architect on constructability, availability of materials and labor, sequencing for phased construction, time requirements for N procurement, installation and construction, and factors related to construction cost including, but not limited to, costs of alternative designs or materials, preliminary budgets, life -cycle data, and possible cost reductions. AIA Document ment C132 — 2009 formerly 8801 TMCMa — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights 101t. _ reserved. WARNING: This AIA� Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Lew and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this Ale Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be•prosacuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced byAIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) § 3.2.6 The Construction Manager shall prepare and periodically update the Project schedule included in the Construction Management Plan for the Architect's review and the Owner's acceptance. The Construction Manager shall obtain the Architect's approval for the portion of the Project schedule relating to the performance of the Architect's services. The Project schedule shall coordinate and integrate the Construction Manager's services, the .Architect's services, other Owner consultants' services, and the Owner's responsibilities and highlight items that could affect the Project's timely completion. § 3.2.7 As the Architect progresses with the preparation of the Schematic Design, Design Development and Construction Documents, the Construction Manager shall prepare and update, at appropriate intervals.agreed to by the Owner, Construction Manager and Architect, estimates of the Cost of the Work of increasing'detail and refinement. The Construction Manager shall include appropriate contingencies for design, bidding or negotiating, price escalation, and market conditions in the estimates of the Cost of the Work. Such estimates shall be provided for the Architect's review and the Owner's approval. The Construction Manager shall advise the Owner and Architect if it appears that the Cost of the Work may exceed the Owner's budget and make recommendations for corrective action. § 3.2.8 As the Architect progresses with the preparation of the Schematic Design, Design Development and Construction Documents, the Construction Manager, shall consult with the Owner and Architect and make recommendations whenever the Construction Manager determines `that design details _adversely affect constructability, cost or schedules. § 3.2;9 The' Construction Manager shall provide recommendations and information to_ the :Owner and-Architect regarding the assignment of responsibilities for temporary Project facilities and-equipment,' materials and services'for common use of the Contractors. The Construction Manager shall 'verify that such requirements and assignment of responsibilities are included in the proposed Contract Documents. § 3.2.10 The Construction Manager shall provide recommendations and information to the Owner regarding the allocation of responsibilities for safety programs! among the Contractors. § 3.2.11 The Construction Manager shall provide recommendations to the Owner on the division of the Project into individual Contracts for the construction of various categories of Work, including the method to be used for selecting Contractors and awarding Contracts. If multiple Contracts are to be awarded, the Construction Manager shall review the'Drawings and Specifications and make recommendations as required to provide.that (1) the Work of the Contractors is coordinated, (2) allyequirements for the Project are assigned,to the appropriate Contract, (3) the likelihood of jurisdictional disputes is minimised, and (4) proper coordination is provided for phased construction. § 3.2.12 The, Construction Manager'" update the Project schedule to include the components of the Work, including phasing of construction, times of commencement and completion required of each Contractor, ordering "and delivery of products, including those that must be ordered well in advance of construction, and the occupancy requirements of the Owner. § 3.2.13 The Construction Manager shall expedite and coordinate the ordering and delivery of materials, including those. that must be ordered well in advance of construction. § 3.2.14 The Construction Manager shall assist the Owner in selecting, retaining and coordinating the professional services of surveyors, special consultants and testing laboratories required for the Project. § 3.2.15 The Construction Manager shall provide an analysis of the types and quantities of labor required for the Project and review the availability of appropriate categories of labor required for critical phases. The Construction Manager shall make recommendations for actions designed to minimize adverse effects of labor shortages. § 3.2.16 The Construction Manager shall assist the Owner in obtaining information regarding applicable requirements for equal employment opportunity programs, and other programs as may be required by governmental and for quasi governmental authorities for inclusion in the Contract Documents. AIA Document C132M —.2009 formerly 8901 TMCMa — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980. 1992 and 2008 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: Thls Ale Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 6 this AIA® Document, or any portion of It, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced byAIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2013 under Order No.61 116354281 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for . resale. User Notes: (1769222486) § 3.2.17 Following the Owner's approval of the Drawings and Specifications, the Construction Manager shall update and submit the latest estimate of the Cost of the Work and the Project schedule for the Architect's review and the Owner's approval. § 3.2.18 The Construction Manager shall submit the list of prospective bidders for the Architect's review and the Owner's approval. § 3.2.19 The Construction Manager shall develop bidders' interest in the Project and establish bidding schedules. The Construction Manager, with the assistance of the Architect, shall issue bidding documents to bidders and conduct pre -bid conferences with prospective bidders. The Construction Manager shall issue the current Project•schedule with each set of bidding documents. The.Construction Manager shall assist the Architect with regard to questions from bidders and with the issuance of addenda. § 3.2.20 The Construction Manager shall receive bids, prepare bid analyses and make recommendations to the Owner for the Owner's award of Contracts or rejection of bids. § 3.2.21 The Construction Manager shall assist the Owner in preparing Construction Contracts and advise the Owner on the acceptability of Subcontractors and material suppliers proposed by Multiple Prime Contractors. § 3.2.22 The Construction Manager shall assist the Owner in obtaining building permits and special permits for permanent improvements, except for permits required to be obtained directly by the various Multiple Prime Contractors. The Construction Manager shall verify that the Owner has paid applicable fees and assessments. The Construction Manager shall assist the Owner and Architect in connection with the Owner's responsibility for filing documents required for the approvals of governmental authorities having jurisdiction over the Project, § 3.3 Construction, Phase Administration of the Construction Contract § 3.3.1 Subject to Section 4.3, the Construction Manager's responsibility to provide Construction Phase Services commences with the award of the initial Contract for Construction and terminates on the date the Architect issues the final Certificate for Payment. § 3.3.2 The Construction Manager shall provide a staffing plan to include one or more representatives who shall be in attendance at the Project site whenever the Work is being performed. § 3.3.3 The Construction Manager shall provide on -site administration of the Contracts for Construction in cooperation with the Architect as set forth below and in AIA Document A232T"x -2009, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction, Construction Manager as Adviser Edition. If the Owner and Contractor modify AIA Document A232 -2009, those modifications shall not affect the Construction Manager's services under this Agreement unless the Owner and the Construction Manager amend this Agreement. § 3.3.4 The Constructi on Manager shall provide administrative, management and related services to coordinate scheduled activities- and responsibilities of the Multiple Prime Contractors with each other and with those of the Construction Manager, the Owner and the Architect. The Construction Manager shall coordinate, the, activities of the Multiple Prime Contractors in accordance with the latest approved Project schedule and the Contract Documents. § 3.3.5 Utilizing the construction schedules provided by the Multiple Prime Contractors, the Construction Manager shall update the Project schedule, incorporating the activities of the Owner, Architect, and Multi ple Prime Contractors on the Project, including activity sequences and durations, allocation of labor and materials, processing of Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, and delivery and procurement of products, including those that must.be ordered well in advance of construction. The Project schedule shall include the Owner's occupancy requirements showing portions of the Project having occupancy priority. The Construction Manager shall update and reissue the Project schedule as required to show current conditions. If an update indicates that the previously approved Project schedule may not be met, the Construction Manager shall recommend corrective action, if any, to the Owner and Architect. § 3.3,6 The Construction Manager shall schedule and conduct meetings to discuss such matters as procedures, progress, coordination, and schedilling of the Work The Construction Manager shall prepare and promptly distribute minutes to the Owner, Architect and Multiple Prime Contractors: AIA Document C132TM'— 2009 formerly B801TMCMa — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2008 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIAS Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this AIA® Document,.or any portion of It, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the•law. This document was produced by AIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/2912014, and la not for resale. User Notes: (1789222488) § 3.3.7 Utilizing information from the Multiple Prime•Contractors, the Construction Manager shall schedule and coordinate the sequence of construction and assignment of space,m areas where the Multiple Prime Contractors are performing Work,'in accordance with the Contract Documents and the latest approved Project schedule, § 3.3.8 The Construction Manager shall schedule all tests and inspections required by the Contract Documents or governmental authorities, and arrange for the delivery of test and inspection reports to the Owner and Architect. § 3.3.9 The Construction Manager shall endeavor to obtain satisfactory performance from each of the Multiple Prime Contractors. The Construction Manager shall recommend courses of action to the Owner when requirements of a Contract are not being fulfilled § 3.3.10 The Construction Manager shall monitor and evaluate actual costs for activities in progress, and estimates for sj uncompleted tasks and advise the Owner'aud Architect as to variances between actual and budgeted or estimated. costs. If the. Contractor is required to submit a Control Estimate, the Constrrictioin•Manager shall meet with the Owner and Contractor to review the Control Estimate. The Construction Manager shall promptly notify the Contractor if there are any inconsistencies or inaccuracies in,the information presented. The Construction Manager shall also report the Contractor's cost control infoimation to the Owner. § 3.3,11 The Constructi on Manager shall develop cash flow reports and forecasts for the Project. § 3.3.12 The Construction Manager shall maintain accounting records on authorized Work performed under unit costs, additional Work performed on.the ,basis of actual costs of labor and materials; and other Work requiring accounting records: § 3.3.12.1 The Construction Manager shall develop and implement procedures for the review and processing of Applications for Payment by Multiple Prime Contractors for progress and final payments. §` 3.3.12.2 Not more frequently'than monthly, the Construction Manager shall review and certify the amounts due the .respective Contractors as follows: .1 Where there is only one Contractor responsible for performing the Work, the Construction Manager shall, within seven days after the Construction Manager receives the Contractor's Application for Payment, review the Application, certify the amount the Construction Manager determines is due the Contractor, and forward the Contractor's Application and Certificate for Payment to the Architect. .2 Where there are Multiple Prime Contractors responsible for performing different portions of the Project, the Construction Manager shall, within seven days after the Construction Manager receives each Contractor's Application for. Payment: (1) review the Applications and certify the amount the Construction' Manager determines is due each Contractor, (2),prepare a Summary of Contractors' Applications for Payment by summarizing information from each Contractor's Application for Payment, (3) prepare a Project Application and Certificate for Payment, (4) certify the total amount the Construction Manager determines is due all Multiple Prime Contractors collectively, and (5) forward the Summary of Contractors' Applications for Payment and Project Application and Certificate for. Payment to the Architect. § 3.3.12.3 The Construction Manager's certification for payment shall constitute a representation to the Owner, based on the Construction Manager's evaluations of the Work and on the data comprising the Contractors' Applications for Payment, ,that, to the best of the Construction Manager's knowledge, information and,belief, the Work has progressed to the point indicated and the quality of the Work is in accordance with the Contract Documents. The foregoing representations are subject to an evaluation of the Work for conformance with the Contract Documents upon Substantial Completion, to results of subsequent tests and inspections, to correction of minor deviations from the Contract Documents prior to completion and to specific qualifications expressed by the Construction Manager. The issuance of a Certificate for Payment shall further constitute a recommendation to the Architect and Owner that the Contractor be paid the amount certified. § 3.3.12.4 The, certification of an Application for Payment or a Project Application for Payment by the Construction Manager shall not be a representation that the Construction Manager has (1) 'made exhaustive or continuous on -site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work; (2) reviewed construction means, methods, techniques, sequences for the Contractor's own Work, or procedures; (3) reviewed copies of requisitions received from Init. AIA Document C132TM -2009 iformerly B801TMCMa- 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, •1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. WARNING: This AlA Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 8 this Ale Document, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under / the law. This document was produced byAIA software at 15:29:09 on 12110/2013 under Order No.61 115554281 which ezplres on 10/29/2014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) Subcontractors and material suppliers and other data requested by the Owner to substantiate the Contractor's right to payment; or (4) ascertained how or for what purpose the Contractor has used money previously paid on account of the Contract Sum. § 3.3.13 The Construction Manager shall review the safety programs developed by each of the Multiple Prime Contractors solely and exclusively for purposes of.coordinating the safety programs with those of the other Contractors and for making recommendations to the Owner for any safety programs not included in the Work of the Multiple Prime Contractors, The Construction Manager's responsibilities for coordination of safety programs shall not extend to direct control over or charge of the acts or omissions of the Contractor, Multiple Prime Contractors, Subcontractors, agents or employees of the Contractors or Multiple Prime Contractors or Subcontractors, or any other persons performing portions of the Work and not directly employed by the Construction Manager. § 3.3.14 The Construction Manager shall determine in general that the Work of each Contractor•is being performed in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents and notify the Owner, Contractor and Architect of defects and deficiencies in the Work. The Construction Manager shall have the authority to reject Work that does not conform to the Contract Documents and shall notify the Architect about the rejection. The failure of the Construction Manager to reject Work shall not constitute the acceptance of the Work. The Construction Manager shall record any rejection of Work in its daily log and include information regarding the rejected Work in its progress reports to the Architect and Owner pursuant to Section 3.3.20.1. Upon written authorization from the Owner, the Construction Manager may require and make arrangements for additional inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not such Work is fabricated, installed or completed, and the Construction Manager shall give timely notice to the Architect of when and where the tests and inspections are to be made so that the Architect may be present for such procedures. § 3.3.15 The Construction Manager shall advise and consult with the Owner and Architect during the performance of its Construction Phase Services. The Construction Manager shall have authority to act on behalf of the Owner only to the extent provided in this Agreement. The Construction Manager shall not have control over, charge of; or responsibility for the construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work of each of the Contractors, since these are solely the Contractor's rights and responsibilities under the Contract Documents. The Construction Manager shall not be responsible for a Contractor's failure to perform the Work in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. The Construction Manager shall be responsible for the Construction Manager's negligent acts or omissions, but shall not have control over or charge of, and shall not be responsible for, acts or omissions of the Contractor or Multiple Prime Contractors, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or any other persons or any other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. § 3.3.16 The Construction Manager shall transmit to the Architect requests for interpretations and requests for information of the meaning and intent of the Drawings and Specifications with its written recommendation, and assist in the resolution of questions that may arise. § 3.3.17 The Construction Manager shall review requests for changes, assist in negotiating Contractors' proposals, submit recommendations to the-Architect and Owner, and, if they are accepted, prepare Change :Orders and Construction Change Directives that incorporate the Architect's modifications to the Contract Documents. § 3.3.18 The Construction Manager shall assist the Initial Decision Maker in the review, evaluation and documentation of Claims, subject to Section 4.3.1.7. § 3.3.19 Utilizing the submittal schedules provided by each Contractor, the Construction Manager shall prepare, and revise as necessary, a Project submittal schedule incorporating information from the Owner, Owner's consultants, . Owner's separate contractors and vendors, governmental agencies, and all other participants in the Project under the management ofthe Construction Manager. The Project submittal schedule and any revisions shall be.submitted to the Architect for approval. The Construction Manager shall promptly review all Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and other submittals from the Multiple Prime Contractors for compliance with the submittal requirements of the Contract, coordinate submittals with information contained in related documents, and transmit to the Architect those that the Construction Manager recommends for approval. The Construction Manager's actions shall be taken in accordance with the Project submittal schedule approved by the Architect, or in the absence of an approved Project AIA Document C132" — 2009 formerly 8801 TMClVla — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Irislltute of Architects. All rights [nit. reserved. WARNING: This AIA � Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 9 . this Ale Document, or any portion of It, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced by AIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2013 under Order N0.6111555428 ,1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for' resale. User Notes: (1769222488) submittal schedule, with such reasonable promptness as to cause no delay in the Work or in the activities of the Contractor, other Multiple Prime Contractors, the Owner, or the Architect. § 3.3.20 The Construction Manager shall keep a daily log containing a record of weather, each Contractor's Work on the. site, number of workers, identification,of equipment, Work accomplished, problems encountered, and other similar relevant data as the Owner may require. § 3.3.20.1 The Construction Manager shall record the progress of the Project. On a monthly psis, or otherwise as agreed to by the Owner, the Construction Manager shall submit written progress reports to the Owner and Architect, showing percentages of completion and other information identified below: .1 Work completed for the period; .2 Project schedule status; .3 Submittal schedule and status report, including a summary of remaining and outstanding submittals; .4 Request for information, Change Order, and Construction Change Directive status reports; .5 Tests and inspection reports; .6 Status report of nonconforming and rejected Work; .7 Daily logs; .8 Summary of all Multiple Pri me Contractors' Applications for Payment; .9 Cumulative total of the Cost of the Work to date including the Construction Manager's compensation and reimbursable expenses at the job site, if any; .10 Cash -flow and- forecast reports; and .11 Any other items the Owner may require: §. 3.120.2 In addition, for Projects constructed on the basis of the Cost of the Work, the Construction Manager shall include the following additional information in its progress reports: .1 Contractor's work force report; .2 Equipment utilization-report; .3 Cost summary, comparing actual costs to updated cost estimates; and .4 Any other items as the Owner may require: § 3.3.21 Utilizing the documents provided by the Contractor, the Construction Manager shall maintain at the site one copy of all Contracts, Drawings, Specifications, addenda, Change Orders and other Modifications, in good order and marked currently to record all changes and selections made during construction, and in addition, approved Shop Drawings, Product Data, Samples and similar required submittals. The Construction Manager shall maintain records, in duplicate, ofprincipal building layout lines, elevations of the bottom of footings, floor levels and key site elevations certified by a qualified surveyor or professional engineer. The Construction Manager shall make all such records available to the Architect and the Contractor, and upon completion of the Project, shall deliver them to the Owner. § 3.3.22 The Construction Manager shall arrange for the delivery, storage, protection and security of . Owner - purchased materials, systems and equipment that are a part of the Project until such items are incorporated into the Work § 3.3.23 With the Architect and the Owner's maintenance personnel, the Construction Manager shall observe the Contractor's or Multiple Prime Contractors' final testing and start-up of utilities, operational systems and equipment and observe any commissioning as the Contract Documents may require. § 3.3.24 When the Construction Manager considers each Contractor's Work or a designated portion thereof is substantially complete, the Construction Manager shall, jointly with the Contractor, prepare for the Architect a list of incomplete or unsatisfactory items and a schedule for their completion. The Construction Manager shall assist the Architect in conducting inspections to determine whether the Work or designated portion thereof is substantially complete. § 3.3.25 When the Work or designated portion thereof is *substantially complete, the Construction Manager shall prepare, and the Construction Manager and Architect shall execute, a Certificate of Substantial Completion. The Construction Manager shall'submit the executed Certificate to the Owner and Contractor. The Construction Manager AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly B801"'CMa- 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA� Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and Intemational Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 10 this Ale Document, or any portion of It, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the laW. This document was produced by AIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/1012013 under Order No.6111655428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) shall coordinate the correction and completion of the Work. Following issuance of a Certificate of Substantial Completion of the Work or a designated portion thereof, the Construction Manager shall. evaluate the completion of the Work of the Contractor or Multiple Prime Contractors and make recommendations to the Architect when Work is ready for final inspection. The Construction Manager shall assist the Architect in conducting final inspections. § 3.3.26 The Construction Manager shall forward to the. Owner, with a copy to the- Architect, the following information received from the Contractor or Multiple Prime Contractors: (1) certificates of insurance received from the Contractor or Multiple Prime Contractors; (2) consent of surety or sureties, if any, to reduction in or partial release of retainage or the making of final payment, (3) affidavits, receipts, releases and waivers of liens or bonds indemnifying the Owner against liens; and (4) any other documentation required of the Contractor-under the Contract Documents, including warranties and similar submittals. § 3.3.27 The Construction Manager shall deliver all keys, manuals, record drawings and maintenance stocks to the Owner. The Construction Manager shall forward to the Architect a final Project Application for Payment and Project Certificate for Payment or final Application for Payment and final Certificate for Payment upon the Contractor's compliance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. § 3.3.28 Duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the Construction Manager as set forth in the Contract Documents shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written consent ofthe Owner, Construction Manager, Architect, Contractor and Multiple Prime Contractors. Consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. § 3.3.29 Upon request of the Owner, and prior to the expiration of one year from the date of Substantial Completion, the Construction Manager shall, without additional compensation, conduct a meeting with the Owner to review the facility operations and performance. ARTICLE 4 ADDITIONAL SERVICES § 4.1 Additional Services listed below are not included in Basic Services but may be required for the Project. The Construction Manager shall provide the listed Additional Services only if specifically designated in the table below as the Construction Manager's responsibility, and the Owner shall compensate the Construction Manager as provided in Section 11.2. (Designate the Additional Services the Construction Manager shall provide in the second column of the table below. In the third column indicate whether the service description is located in Section 4.2 or in an attached exhibit. If in an exhibit, identify the exhibit.) Services Responsibility (Construction Manager, Owner or Not Provided Location of Service Descriptlon (Section 4.2 below or in an exhibit attached to this document and identified below 4.1.1 Measured drawings N/A § 4.1.2 Architectural interior design (B252TM -2007 N/A 4:1.3 Tenant related services N/A 4.1.4 Commissioning 211Tm-20 N/A 4.1.5 LEED certification 214Tm -200 N/A § 4.1.6 Furniture; furnishings, and equipment design (B253TM- 2007) N/A § 4.2 Insert a description of each Additional Service designated in Section 4. 1, if not further described in an exhibit attached to this document. N/A § 4.3 Additional Services may be provided after execution of this Agreement, without invalidating this Agreement. Except for services required due to the fault of the Construction Manager, any Additional Services provided in accordance with this Section 4.3 shall entitle the Construction Manager to compensation pursuant to Section 11.3. AIA Document C132TM — 2008 formerly e801?aCMa- 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009'by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: Thls AIA! Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 11 this AIA® Document, or anyportion of It, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced by AIA software at 15:29:09 on 12110/2013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and is not for resale. User Notes: (1 7 692224 8 8) § 4.3.1 Upon recognizing the need to perform the following Additional Services, the Construction Manager shall notify the Ownerwith reasonable promptness and explain the facts and circumstances giving rise to the need. The Construction Manager shall not proceed_ to provide the following services until the Construction Manager receives the Owner's written authorization: .1 Services necessitated by a change in the Initial Information, previous instructions or approvals given by the Owner, or a material change in the Prcject'including, but not,limited to, size, quality, complexity, the Owners schedule or budget for Cost of the Work, or procurement or delivery method,'or bid packages in addition to those listed in Section 1.1.6; .2 Service's necessitated by the enactment or revision of codes, laws or regulations or official interpretations after the date of this Agreement, .3 Preparation of documentation for alternate bid or proposal requests proposed by the' Owner; .4 Preparation for, an&attendance at a public presentation, meeting pi hearing; .5 Preparation for, and attendance at a dispiite resolution °proceeding or legalproceeding, except where the Construction Manager is party thereto; .6 Providing consultation concerning replacement of Work resulting from fire or other cause during construction . and fumishing services required in connection with the replacement of such Work; .7 Assistance•to the Initial Decision Maker, if other than the Architect; or .8 Service as the:Initial'Decision Maker. § 4.3.2 To avoid delay, in the.Construction Phase, the Construction Manager shall.provide the following Additional Services,' notify the Owner with reasonable promptness, and explain the facts and circumstances giving rise to the need.. If the Owner siNequentlydetermines that all or parts of those services are not required, the Owner shall give prompt written notice to the'Construction Manager; and the Owner shall have no further obligation to compensate the Construction Manager for those services: .1 Services in evaluating an extensive number of Claims submitted by a Contractor or others in connection with the Work when the Architect is serving as the Initial Decision Maker. .2 To the extent the Construction Manager's Basic Services are affected, providing Construction Phase Services 60 days after (1) the date of Substantial Completion of the Work or (2) the anticipated date of Substantial Completion, 'identified in Initial Information, whichever is earlier. .3 Services required in an emergency to coordinate the activities of a Contractor or Multiple Prime Contractors in the event of risk of personal injury or serious property damage, consistent with Section 3.3.13. § 4.3.3 If the services covered by this Agreement have not been completed June 30, 2015, through no fault of the Construction Manager, extension of the Construction Manager's services beyond that time shall be compensated as Additional Services. ARTICLE.5 OWNER'S-RESPONSIBILITIES § 5.1 Unless otherwise_ provided for under this Agreement, the Owner shall provide, information in a timely manner regarding requirements for and limitations on the Project, including the'Owner's program, other objectives, schedule; constraints and criteria, special equipment, systems, and site requirements. Within 15-days after receipt.of a written request from the Construction Manager, the Owner shall furnish the requested information as necessary and relevant for the Construction Manager to evaluate, give notice, of, or enforce any lien rights, if any. § 5:2 Tlie Owner4all'establish and periodically update the Owner's budget'for the Project, including (1) the budget for the Cost of the Work as defined in Section 6.1, (2) the Owner's other costs, and (3) reasonable contingencies related to all of these costs. If the Owner significantly increases or decreases the Owner's budget for"the Cost of the Work, the Owner shall notify the Construction Manager and Architect. The Owner and the Architect, in consultation with the Construction Manager, shall thereafter agree to a corresponding change in the budget for the Cost of the Work or in the Project's scope and quality. § 5.3 The Owner.aclmowledges that accelerated, phased or fast -track scheduling provides a benefit, but also carries with it the risk of additional costs. If the Owner selects accelerated, phased or fast -track scheduling, the Owner agrees to include in the budget for the Project sufficient contingencies to cover such costs. § 5.4 The Owner shall retain an Architect to provide services, duties and responsibilities as described in ALA Document B132, 2009, Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect, Construction Manager as AIA Document C132m — 2009 formerly 8801TMCMa - 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 12 this AIA® Document, or any portion of It, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This documbnt was produced byAIA software at 15:29:09 on 12110/2018 under Order No.61 11 5 5 542 8_1 which expires on 10/19/2014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) r. Adviser Edition. The Owner shall provide the Construction Manager a copy of the executed agreement between the Owner and Architect, and any further modifications to the agreement. § 5.5 The Owner shall identify a representative authorized to act on the Owner's behalf with respect to the Project. The Owner shall render decisions pertaining to documents the Construction Manager submits in a timely manner in order to avoid unreasonable delay in the orderly and sequential progress of the Construction Manager's services. § 5.6 Unless provided by the Construction Manager, the Owner shall furnish surveys to describe physical characteristics, legal limitations and utility locations for the site of the Project, and a written legal description of the site. The surveys and legal information shall include, as applicable, grades and lines of streets, alleys, pavements and adjoining property and structures; designated wetlands; adjacent drainage; rights -of -way, restrictions, easements, encroachments, zoning, deed restrictions, boundaries and contours of the site; locations, dimensions and; necessary data with respect to existing buildings, other improvements and trees; and information concerning available utility services and lines, both public and private, above and below grade, including inverts and depths. All the information on the survey shall be referenced to a Project benchmark. § 5.7 Unless provided by the Construction Manager, the Owner shall furnish services of geotechnical engineers, which may include but are not limited to test borings, test pits, determinations of soil bearing values, percolation tests, evaluations of hazardous materials, seismic evaluation, ground corrosion tests and resistivity tests, including necessary operations for anticipating subsoil conditions, with written reports and appropriate recommendations. § 5.8 The Owner shall coordinate the services of its own consultants with those services provided by the Construction Manager. Upon the Construction Manager's request, the Owner shall furnish copies of the scope of services in the contracts between the Owner and the Owner's consultants. The Owner shall furnish the services of consultants other than those designated in this Agreement, or authorize the Construction Manager to furnish them as an Additional Service, when the Construction Manager requests such services and demonstrates that they are reasonably required by the scope of the Project. The Owner shall require that its consultants maintain professional liability insurance and other liability insurance as appropriate to the services provided. § 5.9 The Owner shall furnish tests, inspections and reports required by law or the Contract Documents, such as structural, mechanical, and chemical tests, tests for air and water pollution, and tests for hazardous materials. § 5.10 The Owner shall furnish all legal, insurance and accounting services, including auditing services, that may be reasonably necessary at any time for the Project to meet the Owner's needs and interests. . § 5.11 The Owner shall provide prompt written notice to the Construction Manager and Architect if the Owner becomes aware of any fault or defect in Project, including errors, omissions or inconsistencies in the Architect's Instruments of Service or any fault or defect in the Construction Manager's. services. § 5.12 The Owner reserves the right to perform construction and operations related to the Project with the Owner's own forces, and to award contracts in connection with the Project which are not part of the Construction Manager's .responsibilities under this Agreement The Construction Manager shall notify the Owner if any such independent action will interfere with the Construction Manager's ability to perform the Construction Manager's responsibilities under this Agreement When performing construction or operations related to the Project, the Owner agrees to be subject to the same obligations and to have the same rights as the Contractors. § 5.13 Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, or when direct communications have been specially authorized, the Owner shall endeavor to communicate with the Contractor and the Construction Manager's consultants through the Construction Manager about matters arising out of or relating to the Contract Documents. The Owner shall promptlynotify the Construction Manager of any direct communications that may affect the Construction Manager's services. § 5.14 Before executing the Contract for Construction, the Owner shall coordinate the Construction Manager's duties and responsibilities set forth in the Contract for Construction with the Construction Manager's services set forth in this Agreement. The Owner shall provide the Construction Manager a copy of the executed agreements between the Owner and Contractors, including the General Conditions of the Contracts for Construction. AIA Documant C132TM — 20119 formerly BB01TMCMa — 1892). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute. of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and lntematlonal Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 13 this Ale Document, or any portion of It, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced byAlA software at 15:29 :09 on 12110/2013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) § 5.15 The Owner shall provide the Construction Manager access to the Project site prior to commencement of the Work and shall obligate the Contractor to provide the Construction Manager access to the Work wherever it is in preparation or progress. ARTICLE 6 COST OF THE WORK § 6.1 For purposes of this Agreement, the Cost ofthe Work shall be the total cost to the Owner-to construct all elements,of the Project designed or specified by the Architect and shall include the contractors' general conditions costs, overheadand profit. The Cost of the Work includes the compensation of the Construction Manager and Constructibn Manager's Consultants during the Construction Phase only, including,eompensation for reimbursable expenses at the job site, if any. The Cost of the Work does not include the compensation of the Architect, the costs of the land, rights -of -way, financing, contingencies for changes in, the Work or other costs'that are the responsibility of the Owner. § , 6.2 The Owner's budget fonthe Cost.of the Work is provided in Initial Information, and may be adjusted throughout the Project as required under Sections 5.2 and 6.4. Evaluations of the Owner's budget, preliminary estimates for the Cost of the Work and detailed estimates of the Cost of the Work prepared by the Construction Manager represent the Construction Manager's judgment as a person or entity familiar with the construction industry It is recognized, however, that neither the Construction Manager nor the Owner has control over the cost of labor, materials or equipment, over Contractors' methods of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding, market or negotiating conditions. Accordingly, the Consttuction'Manager cannot and 'does not warrant or represent that bids or negotiated prices will not vary from the budget proposed, established or approved by the Owner, or from any costestimate or evaluation prepared by the Construction Manager. § 6.3 Ifthe Architect is.providing detailed cost estimating services as an Additional Service, and a discrepancy exists between the Construction Manager's cost estimates and the Architect's cost estimates, the Architect and the Construction Manager'shall work, cooperatively to conform the cost estimates to one another. § 6.4 If, prior to the conclusion of the Design Development Phase, the Construction Manager's estimate ofthe Cost of the Work exceeds the Owner's budget for the Cost of the Work, the Construction Manager, .in consultation with the Architect, shall make appropriate recommendations to the Owner to adjust the Project's size, quality or budget, and the Owner shall cooperate with the Construction Manager and Architect in making such adjustments. ! § � 6.5 If the estimate of the Cost of the Work at the conclusion of the Design Development Phase exceeds the Owner's budget for the Cost of the Work, the Owner shall .1 give written approval of an increase in the budget for the Cost of the Work, .2 in consultation with the Construction Manager and Architect, revise the Project program, scope, or quality as required to reduce the Cost of the Work; or .3 implement any other mutually acceptable alternative, ' ARTICLE 7 COPYRIGHTS AND LICENSES The Construction Manager and the Construction Manager's consultants, if any, shall not own or claim a copyright in the Instruments of Service. The Construction Manager, the Construction Manager's consultants, if any, and the Owner warrant that in transmitting Instruments of Service, or any other information, the transmitting party is the copyright owner of such information or has permission from the copyright owner to transmit such information for its use on the Project. If the Owner and Construction Manager intend to transmit Instruments of Service or any other information or documentation in digital form, they shall endeavor to establish necessary protocols governing such transmissions. ARTICLE 8 CLAIMS AND ' DISPUTES §. 8.1 General § 8.1.1 The Owner and Construction Manager shall commence all claims and causes of action, whether in contract, tort, or otherwise, against the other arising out of or related to this Agreement in accordance with the requirements of the method of binding dispute resolution selected in this Agreement within the period specified by applicable law, but in any case not more than 10 years after the date of Substantial Completion ofthe Work. The Owner and Construction Manager waive all claims and causes of action not commenced in accordance with this Section 8.1.1. . § • 8.1.2 To the extent damages are covered by property insurance, the Owner and Construction Manager waive all rights against each other and against the contractors, consultants, agents and employees of the other for damages, AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly 8801TMCMa- 1992). Copyright ©1973,1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA � Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 14 this Ale Document, or any portion of it, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law: This document was produced by AIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2013 under Order'No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/2912014, and Is not for ' resale. User Notes: (1769222488) except such rights as they may have to the proceeds of such insurance as set forth in AIA Document A232 -2009, General Conditions of the Contract for Construction. The Owner or the Construction Manager, as appropriate, shall require of the contractors, consultants, agents and employees of any of them similar waivers in favor of the other parties enumerated herein. § 8.1.3 The Construction Manager shall indemnify and hold the Owner and the Owner's officers and employees harmless from. and against damages, losses, and judgments arising from claims by third parties, including reasonable attorneys' fees'and expenses recoverable under applicable law, but only to the extent they are caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Construction Manager, its employees and its consultants in the performance of professional services under this Agreement. The Construction Manager's duty to indemnify the Owner under this provision shall be limited to the available proceeds of insurance coverage. § 8.1.4 The Construction Manager and Owner waive`consequential damages for claims, disputes or other matters in question arising out of or relating to this Agreement:. This mutual waiver is applicable, without limitation, to all consequential damages due to either party's termination of this Agreement, except as specifically provided in Section 9.7. § 8.2 Mediation • § 8.2.1 Any claim, dispute'or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be subject to mediation as a condition precedent to binding dispute resolution. If such matter relates to or is the subject of a lien arising out of the Construction Manager's services, the Construction Manager may proceed in accordance with applicable law to comply with the lien notice or filing deadlines prior to resolution of the matter by mediation or by binding dispute resolution. § 8.2.2 The Owner and Construction Manager shall endeavor to resolve claims, disputes and other matters in question between them by mediation which, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, shall be administered by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its Construction Industry Mediation Procedures in effect on the date of the Agreement. A request for mediation shall be made in writing, delivered to the other party to the Agreement, and filed with the person or entity administering' the mediation. The request may be made concurrently with the filing of a complaint or other appropriate demand for binding dispute resolution but, in such event, mediation shall proceed in advance of binding dispute resolution proceedings, which shall be stayed pending mediation for a period of 60 days from the date of filing, unless stayed for, a longer period by agreement of the parties or court order. If an arbitration proceeding is stayed pursuant to this section, the parties may nonetheless,proceed to the selection of the arbitrator(s) and agree upon a schedule for later proceedings. § 8.2.3 The parties shall share the mediator's fee and any filing fees equally. The mediation shall be held in the place where the Project is located, unless another location is mutually agreed upon. Agreements reached in mediation shall be enforceable as settlement agreements in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 8.2.4 If the parties do not resolve a dispute through mediation pursuant to this Section 8.2, the method of binding dispute resolution shall be the following: (Check the, appropriate box. If the Owner and Construction Manager do not select a method of binding dispute resolution below, or do not subsequently agree in writinglo a binding dispute resolution method other than litigation, the dispute will be resolved in a court of competent jurisdiction) [ ] Arbitration pursuant to Section 8.3 of this Agreement [ X ] Litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction [ ] Other: (Specify) § 8.3 Arbitratlon § 8.3.1 If the parties have selected arbitration as the method for binding dispute resolution in this Agreement any N claim, dispute or other matter in question arising out of or related to this Agreement subject to, but not resolved by, mediation shall be subject to arbitration which, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise, shall be administered by the American Arbitration Association in accordance with its Construction Industry Arbitration Rules in effect on the AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly B901 nCMa — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 6y The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA � Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of ,� 5 this Ale Document, or any portion of it, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced byAIA software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2613 under Order No.6111655428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) date of the Agreement. A demand for arbitration shall be made in writing, delivered to the other party to this Agreement, and filed with the person or entity administering the arbitration. § 8.3.1.1 A demand for arbitration shall be made no earlier than concurrently with the filing of a request for mediation, but in no event shall it be made after the date when the institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on the claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by the applicable statute of limitations. For statute of limitations purposes, receipt of a written demand for arbitration by the person or entity administering the arbitration shall constitute the institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on the claim, dispute or other matter in question. §'6.3.2 The foregoing agreement to arbitrate and other agreements to'arbitrate with an additional person or entity duly consented to by parties to this Agreement shall be specifically enforceable in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 8.3.3 The award rendered by the arbitrator(s) shall be final, and judgment maybe entered upon it in accordance with applicable law in any court having jurisdiction thereof. § 8.3.4 Consolidation or Joinder § 8.3.4.1 Either party, at its sole discretion, may consolidate an arbitration conducted under this Agreement with any other arbitration to which it is a party provided that (1) the arbitration agreement governing the other arbitration permits consolidation, (2) the arbitrations to be consolidated substantially involve common questions of law or fact, and (3) the arbitrations employ materially similar procedural rules and methods for selecting arbitrator(s). § 8.3.4.2 Either party, at its sole discretion, may include by joinder persons or entities substantially involved in a common question of law or fact whose presence is required if complete relief is to be accorded in arbitration, provided that the party sought to be joined consents in writing to such joinder. Consent to arbitration involving an additional person or entity shall not constitute consent to arbitration of any claim, dispute or other matter in question not described in the written consent. § 8.3.4.3 The Owner and Construction Manager grant to any person or entity made a party to an arbitration conducted under this Section 8.3, whether by joinder or consolidation, the same rights of joinder and consolidation as the Owner and Construction Manager under this Agreement. ARTICLE 9 TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION § 9.1 If the Owner fails to make payments to the Construction Manager in accordance with this Agreement, such failure shall be considered substantial nonperformance and cause for termination or, at the Construction Manager's option, cause for suspension of performance of services under this Agreement. If the Construction Manager elects to suspend services, the Construction Manager shall give seven days' written notice to the Owner before suspending services. In the event of a suspension of services, the Construction Manager shall have no liability to the Owner for delay or damage caused the Owner because of such suspension of services. Before resuming services, the Construction Manager shall be paid all sums due prior to suspension and any expenses incurred in the interruption and resumption of the Construction Manager's services. The Construction Manager's fees for the remaining services and the time schedules shall be equitably adjusted. § 9.2 If the Owner suspends the Project, the Construction Manager shall be compensated for services performed prior to notice of such suspension. When the Project is resumed, the Construction Manager shall be compensated for expenses incurred in the interruption and resumption of the Construction Manager's services. The Construction Manager's fees for the remaining services and the time schedules shall be equitably adjusted. § 9.3 If the Owner suspends the Project for more than 90 cumulative days for reasons other than the fault of the Construction Manager, the Construction Manager may terminate this Agreement by giving not less than seven days' written notice. § 9.4 Either party may terminate this Agreement upon not less than seven days' written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of the party initiating the termination. AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly B801"'CMa- 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights • Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Lew and International Treaties. Uriauthorlaed reproduction or distribution of 16 this A10 Document, or any portion of It, may result In severe civil and crimin6penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law. This document was produced byAIA'software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2013 under Order No.6111555428 1 which expires on 10/2912014, and is -not for resale. User Notes: (1 78 92224 8 8) § 9.5 The Owner may terminate this Agreement upon not'less than seven days' written notice to the Construction Manager for _the Owner's convenience and without cause. § 9.6 In,the event of termination not the fault of the Construction Manager, the Construction Manager shall be compensated for services performed prior to termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due and all Termination Expenses as defined in Section 9.7. § 9.7 Termination Expenses are in addition to compensation for the Construction Manager's services and include expenses directly attributable to termination for which the Construction Manager is not otherwise compensated, plus an amount for the Construction Manager's anticipated profit on the value of the services not performed by the Construction Manager, as set forth below. § 9.7.1 In the event of termination for the Owner's convenience prior to commencement of construction, the Construction Manager shall be entitled to receive payment for services performed, costs incurred by reason of such termination and reasonable overhead and profit on Preconstruction services not completed during the Preconstruction Phase. § 9.7.2 In the event of termination for:the Owner's convenience after commencement of construction, the Construction Manager shall be entitled to receive payment for services performed and costs incurred by reason of such termination, along with reasonable overhead and profit on services not completed during the Construction Phase. ARTICLE 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS § 10.1 This Agreement shall be governed by the law of the place where the Project is located, except that if the parties have selected arbitration as the method of binding dispute resolution, the Federal Arbitration Act shall govern Section 8.3. § 10.2 Terms in this Agreement shall have the same meaning as those in AIA Document A232 2009, General Go Conditions of the Contract for Construction, except for purposes of this Agreement, the term "Work" shall include the work of all Contractors under the administration of the Construction Manager. § 10,3 The Owner and Construction Manager, respectively, bind themselves, their agents, successors, assigns and legal representatives to this Agreement. Neither the Owner nor the Construction Manager shall assign this Agreement without the written consent of the other, except that.the;Owner may assign this Agreement to a lender providing financing for the Project if the lender agrees to assume the Owner's rights and obligations under this Agreement. § 10.4 If the Owner requests the Construction Manager to execute certificates, the proposed language of such certificates shall be submitted to the Construction Manager for review at least 14 days prior to the requested dates of execution. If the Owner requests the Construction Manager to execute consents reasonably required to facilitate assignment to a lender, the Construction Manager shall execute all such consents that are consistent with this Agreement, provided the proposed consent is submitted to the Construction Manager for review at least 14 days prior to execution. The Construction Manager shall not be required to execute certificates or consents-that would require knowledge, services or responsibilities beyond the scope of this Agreement. § 10.5 Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party against either the Owner or Construction Manager. § 10.6 Unless otherwise required in this Agreement, the Construction Manager shall have no responsibility for the discovery, presence, handling, removal or disposal of, or exposure,of persons to, hazardous materials or toxic substances in any form at the Project site. § 10,7 The Construction Manager shall have the right to include photographic or artistic representations of the design of the Project among the Construction Manager's promotional and professional materials. The Construction Manager shall be given reasonable access to the completed Project to make such representations. However, the Construction Manager's materials shall not include the Owner's confidential or proprietary information ifthe Owner has previously advised the Construction Manager in writing of the specific information considered by the Owner to be confidential or. N proprietary. The Owner shall provide professional credit for the Construction Manager in the Owner's promotional materials for the Project. AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly 8801 TMCMa — 1992). Copyright 01973, 1980, 1892 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights InIt. reserved. WARNING: This AIAL Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Trestles. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 17 this Ale Document, or any portion of It, may,result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law: This document was produced byAlA software at 15:29:09 on 12/10/2013 under Order'No.6111555428_1 which expires on 1012912014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) § 10.8 If the Construction Manager or Owner receives information specifically designated by the other party as "confidential" or °business proprietary," the receiving party shall keep such information strictly confidential and shall not disclose it to any other person except to (1) its employees,•(2) those who need to know the content of such information in order to:perform services or construction solely and exclusively for the Project, or (3) its consultants and contractors whose contracts include similar restrictions on the use of confidential information. ARTICLE 11 COMPENSATION § 11:1: For the Construction Manager's Basic Services described under Article 3, the Owner shall compensate the Construction Manager as follows: § 11.1.1 For Preconstruction Phase Services in Section 3.2: (); sert amount of or b6is for, compensation, including stipulated sums, multiples or percentages.) Preconstruction services will be billed based on actual hours worked at the hourly rates reflected in paragraph 11.5. § 11.1.2 For Construction Phase Services in Section 3.3: (Insert amount of, or basis for, compensation, including stipulated sums, multiples orpercentages.) RJM's fee will be 2.85% of the .total construction costs. Construction phase administration services will be billed in addition to the fee based on actual hours worked at the hourly rates reflected in paragraph 11.5 and as described in attached Exhibit A. § 11.2 For Additional Services designated in Section 4. 1, the Owner shall compensate the Construction Manager as follows: (Insert amount of, or basis for, compensation. If necessary, list specific services to which particular methods of compensation apply) I N/A § 11.3 For Additional Services that may arise during the course of the Project, including those under Section 4.3, the Owner shall compensate the Construction Manager as follows: (Insert amount of, or basis for, compensation) N/A § 11.4 Compensation for Additional Services of the Construction Manager's consultants when not included in Sections 11.2 or 11.3, shall be the amount invoiced to the Construction Managerplus two point eight five percent (2.85 or as otherwise stated below: § 11.5 The hourly billing rates for services of the Construction Manager and the Construction Manager's consultants, if any, are set forth below. The rates shall be adjusted in accordance with the Construction Manager's and Construction Manager's consultants' normal review practices. (If applicabl g attach an exhibit of hourly billing rates or insert them below) Employee or Category Rate ($0.00) Project Executive $110.00/hr Project Manager $95.00/hr Chief Estimator $125.00/hr Administrative Assistant $50.00/hr General•Superintendent $95.00/hr Superintendent $85.00/hr Assistant Superintendent $74.00/hr AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly 8801 TMCMe — 1992). Copyright ©1.973,1980, 1992 and 2009 by.The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA� Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 18 this Ale Document, or any portion of It, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under t the law. This document was produced byAIA software at 15:29:09 on 1211012013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for resale. User Notes: (1769222488) Safety Director $95.00/hr § 11.6 Compensation for Reimbursable Expenses § 11.6.1 Reimbursable Expenses are in addition to compensation for Basic and Additional Services and include expenses incurred by the Construction Manager and the Construction Manager's consultants directly related to the Project, as follows: .1 Transportation and authorized out -of -town travel and subsistence; .2 Long distance services, dedicated data and' communication services, teleconferences, Project Web sites, and extranets; .3 Fees paid for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the Project; .4 Printing, reproductions, plots, standard form documents; .5 Postage, handling and delivery; .6 Expense of overtime work requiring higher than regular rates, if authorized in advance by the Owner; .7 Professional photography, and presentation materials requested bythe Owner; .8 Construction Manager's consultant's.expense of professional liability insurance dedicated exclusively to this Project, or the expense of additional insurance coverage or limits if the Owner requests such insurance in excess of that normally carried by the Construction Manager's consultants; .9 All taxes levied on professional services and on reimbursable expenses; .10 Site office expenses; and .11 Other similar Project - related expenditures. I§ 11.6.2 For Reimbursable Expenses the compensation shall be the expenses incurred by the Construction Manager and the Construction Manager's consultants plus two point eight five percent (2.85%) of the expenses incurred. § 11.7 Payments to the Construction Manager § 11.7.1 An initial payment of zero($0 ) shall be made upon execution of this Agreement and is the minimum payment under this Agreement. It shall be credited to the Owner's account in the final invoice. M§ 11.7.2 Unless otherwise agreed, payments for services shall be made monthly in proportion 'to services performed. Payments are due and payable upon presentation of the Construction Manager's invoice. Amounts unpaid sixty(60) days after the invoice date shall bear interest at the rate entered below, or in the absence thereof at the legal rate prevailing from time to time at the principal place of business of the Construction Manager. (Insert rate of monthly or annual interest agreed upon.) Twelve percent (12 %) § 11.7.3 The Owner shall not withhold amounts from the Construction Manager's compensation to impose a penalty or liquidated damages on the Construction Manager, or to offset sums requested by or paid to Contractors for the cost of changes in the Work unless the Construction Manager agrees or has been found liable for the amounts in a binding dispute resolution proceeding. § 11.7.4 Records of Reimbursable Expenses, expenses pertaining to Additional Services, and services performed on the basis of hourly rates shall be available to the Owner at mutually convenient times. ARTICLE 12 SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Special terms and conditions that modify this Agreement are as follows: ARTICLE 13 SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT § 13.1 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Owner and the Construction Manager and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements; either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both Owner and Construction Manager. § 13.2 This Agreement is comprised of the following documents listed below: 1 AIA Document C132TM -2009, Standard Form Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Adviser AIA Document C132TM —2009 formerly 9601TMCMa- 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. resery ed. WARNING: This AIA Document is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 19 this AIA- Document, orany portion Of-it, may result In severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under / the law. This document was produced by AIA software at 15:29:09 on 12110/2013 under Order No.6111555428_1 which expires on 10/29/2014, and Is not for resale. User_Notes: (1769222488) ARTICLE 13 SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT § 13.1 This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Owner and the Construction Manager and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both Owner and Construction Manager. 13.2 This Agreement is comprised of the following documents listed below: .1 AIA Document C132TK -2009, Standard Form Agreement Between Owner and Construction Manager as Adviser .2 AIA Document E2011M -2007, Digital Data Protocol Exhibit, if completed, or the following: AIA Document E202T'&-2008, Building Information Modeling Protocol Exhibit, if completed, or the following: .4 Other documents: (List other documents, if any, including additional scopes of service forming part of the Agreement.) RJM fee proposal attached as Exhibit "A" Supplement to Standard Form of Agreement AIA C132 -2009 between Owner and Manager attached as Exhibit "B ". /j This Agreement is entered into as of the day and year first written above. OWNER (Signature) (Printed name and title) MANAGER (Signature) Brian Recker, Senior Vice President (Printed name and title) AIA Document C132TM — 2009 formerly 13801 *"CMa — 1992). Copyright ©1973, 1980, 1992 and 2009 by The American Institute of Architects. All rights Init. reserved. WARNING: This AIA Document Is protected by U.S. Copyright Law and International Treaties. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of 20 this AJO Document, or any portion of It, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under i the law. This document was produced byAIA software at 11:21:48 on 1012512013 under Order No.7761.695718_1 which expires on 11/2812013, and is not for resale. User Notes: (2020303691) Exhibit A - Fee Proposal Edina Sports Dome & Outdoor Ice Sheet October 25, 2013 There are many facets to a fee proposal and the selection of the right Construction Manager for your project. We find that although fee varies little from one firm to another, the amount of service, especially during preconstruction, can vary dramatically. Of additional importance is the willingness. of the constructor to operate on a 100% open book basis. This is something RJM Construction believes irrand,practices. Preconstruction Services RJM will provide all preconstruction services for the project as outlined below: • Work with team to assemble a preliminary master project budget. • Work with team to assemble a comprehensive project "schedule which includes pre- construction and construction activities required of the entire project team. • Provide budget estimates at the end of conceptual Design Development and at 90% Construction Drawings, • Provide value, engineering opportunities at each budget phase. • Perform cost benefits and life cycle analysis and provide value engineering opportunities. • Provide a phased design and bidding plan structured to reduce total project sch edule for expedited facility completion. • Develop, bidding strategy that is economically advantageous for the project. • Identify potential bid alternates to be utilized for either project enhancements or to ensure compliance with the project budget. • Review plans and specifications for consistency and constructability. • Coordinate preliminary coordination with utility companies and city municipalities and procure required building permits. • Work with team to prepare all required construction contracts. • Advertise and coordinate receipt of all public bids. Construction Services RJM will provide all construction services for the project as outlined below: a Make recommendations to the City of Edina for award of low bidders. • Prepare and issue contracts for all contractors, • Schedule and conduct weekly meetings to coordinate activities of the contractors. • Provide an on -site superintendent to schedule work and monitor quality of work being performed. • Closely track all project budgets and aggressively scrutinize all cost claims made by contractors. • Provide an overall project schedule and manage contractors as needed to meet required milestone dates. CONSTRUCTION • Administer all submittals and RFI's required for the project. • Conduct a thorough punchlist at substantial completion of construction and efficiently manage the completion of all items. • Coordinate all systems training by the contractors, • Collect and provide close -out documents and submit to the City of Edina. Based upon our years of direct experience, the complexity of the project and the duration of the project, we respectively offer a construction services fee of 2.85% of the total construction cost of the project. Reimbursable General Conditions Once we are able to meet with the team and confirm project scope and anticipated design time an overall project schedule can be established. The following reimbursement costs are shown as a per month basis. These costs represent a not -to- exceed amount per month. Should any savings be realized, they will be returned 100% to the City of Edina. General Superintendent $2,040 Superintendent $13,600 'Project Manager $5,700 Safety Director $1,140 General Clean -up $1,400 Trucking /Mobilization $500 Pickup Fuel & Oil $500 Telephones ' $150 Printing $500 Postage $ 300 Internal Equipment Charges $1,000 Total Monthly General Conditions $26,830 Project Management Personnel RJM proposes the following rates for project management personriel, reimbursed as a cost of the work. Project Executive $110 /hr Project Manager $95/hr Chief Estimator $125 /hr Administrative Assistant $50 /hr General Superintendent $95 /hr Superintendent $85/hr - Assistant Superintendent $74/hr Safety Director $95 /hr �;f`�`" � � Brian Recker Senior Vice President brian .recker @rjmconstruction.com 952 -837 -8636 Brian Recker graduated In 1992 with a Structural Engineering' degree from the University of Minnesota, at which time he entered. the commercial construction Industry. He has had the pleasure of completing projects in a variety of markets such as public, community, religious, education, Industrial, office, aquatic and Ice arena. Brian leads RJM Construction's community market specializing In serving governmental and non -profit agencies throughout Minnesota. Brian will work directly with Paul Kolias to lead the RJM Construction team directly throughout the preconstruction process and alongside Paul during construction. His role will Include assisting with value engineering and constructabillty studies, establishment of the construction budget, establishment of the project schedule, bidding and contract strategy, and the development of team relationships. Experience Client Reference City of Edina Golf Dome Mr. Tim Simon Edina, Minnesota City of Elk River City of Maple Grove Sports Dome 763- 635 -1090 Maple Grove, Minnesota Mr. James Dickinson City of Andover City of Andover YMCA and Community Center 763 - 767 -5110 Andover, Minnesota City of Eden Prairie Mr. Jay Lotthammer Community Center and Ice Arena City of Eden Prairie Eden Prairie, Minnesota 952-949-8440 City of Elk River Architect Reference Community Center and YMCA Mr, Ed Kodet Elk River, Minnesota Kodet Architecture City of Worthington 612- 377 -2737 Community YMCA Worthington, Minnesota Mr. Greg Fenton BWBR Architects Education 651 -290 -1877 Bachelor of Science Degree Civil Engineering -1992 Mr, Mark Wentzell University of Minnesota 292 Deign Group Masters in Business Administration 763- 533 -3813 2004 U of M, Carlson School of Management CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION Paul Kolias Project Executive paul,kolias @rjmconstruction.com 952 - 893 -7593 Paul has been in the.construction industry since 1989 and brings multiple_ years of experience.to,his role as project executive. This depth of Anowled.ge Is invaluable as he offers leadership to clients through project negotiations, design review, site logistics, cost and schedule analysis, contract management and. project administration. " Paul's experience has been gained through his involvement with various project types including publlc,sector, recreational, educational, tenant Improvements, financial, retail, restaurant, mixed use, major renovation, and new construction work. He is skilled in unique and complicated projects where extensive pre - planning is required to create real project value. Through his management style that focuses on team building and project communications, Paul has managed and built lasting relationships, Experience Client Reference City of Edina Golf Dome Ms. Colleen Wlgg Edina, Minnesota YWCA of Minneapglis City of Medina Public Works, 612- 215 -4204 City Hall & Police Station Ms. Ann Kattreh Medina, Minnesota City of Edina City of Edina 952- 826 -0430 Braemar Ice Arena Expansion Mr, Scott Johnson Edina, Minnesota City of Medina Blaisdell YMCA 763- 473 -4643 Minneapolis, Minnesota . Minnehaha Academy Architect Reference South Campus Mr. Mark Wentzell Minneapolis, Minnesota 292 Design Group_ 612- 767 -3773 Hazelden Foundation (Multiple Projects) Mr. Paul Holmes Minneapolis, Minnesota Pope Architects Open Arms of Minnesota 651- 789 -1582 Minneapolis, Minnesota Mr. Nick Sperides Education Sperides Reiners Architects, Inc. Bathelor of Applied Science Degree 952- 996 -9662 Construction Management University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota EXHIBIT B AIA Document C132TM — 2009 SUPPLEMENT TO STANDARD FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND CONSTRUCTIO,'i MANAGER § 9.6 Amend to read as follows: In the event of termination not the fault of the Construction Manager, the Construction Manager _ — shalLbe- compensated- for-se-, wises- peferr- ned- prior- toYterntination together- widrReimbumabr Expenses then due. § 9.7 Delete. § 9.7.1 Amend to read as follows: In the event of termination for the Owner's convenience.prior to commencement of construction, the Construction Manager shall be entitled to receive payment for services performed prior to termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due. § 9.7.2 Amend to read as follows: In the event of termination for the Owner's convenience after commencement of construction, the Construction Manager shall be entitled to receive payment for services performed prior to termination, together with Reimbursable Expenses then due. I . §10.8 - Amend to read as follows: The Construction Manager must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to (1) all data provided by the Owner pursuant to this Agreement, and (2) all data, created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by the Construction Manager pursuant to this Agreement. The Construction Manager is subject to all the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, including but not- limited to the civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.08, as if it were a government entity. In the event the Construction Manager receives a request to release data, the Construction Manager must immediately notify the Owner. The Owner.will give the Construction Manager instructions concerning the release of the data to the requesting party before the data is released. Construction Manager agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the Owner, its officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers harmless from any claims resulting from Construction Manager's officers', agents', owners', partners', employees', 158479v1 RNK:07 /01/11 volunteers', assignees' or subcontractors' unlawful disclosure and/or use of protected data. The terms of this section shall survive the cancellation or.termination of this Agreement. Add: Pursuant to Minnesota Statute_ . §.471.25, Subdivision 4a, the Construction Manager must pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Construction Manager's receipt of payment from the Owner for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Construction Manager must pay interest of one and one- -half percent (1 %; o) per 'month or any part of a month to subcontractor on any undisputed amount not.paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an'unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an uhpaid-balance;7 of less than` $100.00, the Construction Manager shall pay the actual penalty due to the 'subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interestpenalties from the Construction Manager shall be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorney?s fees, incurred in bring the action. 158479v1 2 RNK:07 /01/1 i '`�'� �® CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE 10 /25IDDn3 10 /zs /2o13 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder Is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the pollcy(les) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement: A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsements). PRODUCER 1- 952- 358 -7500 Arthur J. Gallagher Risk Management Services, Inc. CONTACT CT Becky Nadeau PHONE (g52) 358 -75000 Na (952) 358 -7501 3600 American Boulevard West Suite 500 E-M E SS: Beck Nadeau @ajg,com X Bloomington, MN 55431 INSURERS 'AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC 9 INBURERA: valley Forge Insurance Cc 20508 Dave Crowther INSURED INSURERS: Charter Oak Fire Ins Cc 25615 RJM Construction LLC Continental Casualty INSURER C : y Cc 20443 INSURERD: $300,000 S - 701 Washington Ave N, Ste 600 INSURER E: Minneapolis, MN 55401 INSURER F COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: 36566677 REVISION NUMBER- THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. ILT R TYPE OF INSURANCE 9 e POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF MMIDD POLICY EXP MIDO lJMIIS A GENERAL LIABILITY X 5090836494 01 /01 /1 01/01/14 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY A AGE O RENTED REMISES (Ea $300,000 S - CLAIMS -MADE M OCCUR MED EXP one person $5,000 PERSONAL &ADV INJURY $ 11 000, 000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 GEN'LAGGREGATELIMITAPPLIEo-SPER: PRODUCTS - COMPIOPAGG $2,000,000 POLICY M PRO LOC $ B AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY 810 67E5640 (Ea ecdde ING LIMIT - dden t) 1,06o'000 BODILY.INJURY (Per person) $ X ANY AUTO ALL OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS AUTOS BODILY INJURY (Par accIdent) $ PROPERTY DAMAGE $ NON-OWNED HIRED AUTOS AUTOS Per eoddent $ C X UMBRELLA LIAR X OCCUR 5085731862 of /Ol /1 01/01/14 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 10, 000, 000 AGGREGATE $ 10, 000, 000 EXCESS LIAR CLAIMS-MADE DED I X I RETENTION$ 10, 000 $ A WORKERS COMPENSATION 5090836480 01 /01 /1 01/01/14 X STLA lej - OTH- AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ 1,000,000 ANY PROPRIETOWPARTNERIEXECUTIVE [ OFFICERIMEMBER EXCLUDED? NIA E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ 1,000,000 (Mandatory in NH) Dyes, describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POUcYLIMIT $ 1, 000, 000 C Install Float /Bidrs Risk 5090920816 01/0-171-, 01/01/14 Install Float B1drsl2,000,000 Deductible 5,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS /VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, If more space Is required) City of Edina and Cuningham Group Architecture are Additional Insureds on the General Liability policy as per endorsement 0140331C, 10 /10 edition if required by a written contract. Project: Edina Sports Dome; 7501 Ikola Way; Edina, MN 55439 City of Edina IF801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 -1394 ACORD 25 (2010105) becnade —.0—n SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE USA I e'a_ 9^ A- z/1.-It- 1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD S REPORT / R :COMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Mark K. Nolan, AICP, Transportation Planner Date: December 17, 2013 Subject: Traffic Safety Report, November 6, 2013 O Nov cc �y ,Bay Agenda Item #: IV. F. Action Discussion ❑ information ❑ Action Requested: Review and approve the Traffic Safety Committee Report of November 6, 2013. Information / Background: The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the November 6, 2013, Traffic Safety Committee Report at their November 21 meeting and moved to forward the report to the City Council for approval, see attached draft minutes. Attachments: Traffic Safety Committee Report of November 6, 2013 Draft ETC Meeting Minutes of November 21, 2013 G:\ Engineering \infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Safety Committee \City Council Reports\2013 \Item W.F. Traffic Safety Report of November 6, 2013.doot City of Edina < 4801 W. 50th St. a Edina, MN 55424 TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT Wednesday, November 6, 2013 The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on November 6. The Director of Engineering, Public Works Director, Transportation Planner, Police Traffic Supervisor and Sign 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 November 21 Edina Transportation Commission and the December 17 City Council agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which the Committee recommends approval: Al. Request for traffic control or a painted crosswalk at the intersection of Creek Valley Road and Nordic Circle. This request is from a resident who lives at the intersection. The requestor states that there is a high concentration of children during soccer games who are in danger due to the uncontrolled intersection. Requestor stated that vehicles travel through the intersection too fast and there is confusion of right -of -way. A request to look into these issues at this location was made in March of 2012. Since the street was being reconstructed at the time, it was decided to delay action until construction was completed. Map: Creek Valley Road & Nordic Circle There is no relevant history of traffic requests in this area. There are no reported crashes at this intersection. A map and photos are provided below. The criterion for placement of crosswalks and type of control is outlined within the City of Edina Local Traffic Control list. It states: Traffic Safety Committee Report 1 November 6, 2013 Marked Pedestrian Crosswalk • Marked crosswalks are placed at locations that are unusually hazardous or at locations not readily apparent as having pedestrian movement. • 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 Photo: Creek Volley Road and Nordic Circle Looking northeast "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 for markings are: More than five gaps — pavement marking and signage only. Four to five gaps —odd activated pedestal mounted flasher. • Less than three gaps — add activated overhead mounted flasher Counts of pedestrians were taken at the intersection. A maximum total of 34 were recorded walking through the north (Nordic Circle) leg of the intersection within a two -hour period. 33 gaps (a "gap" is defined as time between vehicles that allows a pedestrian to safely cross the street) were counted in the average five - minute period during the peak hour of 4:15- 5:15pm. This is far above the five -gap threshold for activated mounted flashers. Staff recommends approval of a pedestrian crosswalk, pending discussion with homeowner about a concrete safe haven being located on the NE corner of the intersection. A2. Request to move Bike Route sign at Valley View Road and Wooddale Avenue in order to clear sightlines to monument sign. This request comes from an employee of a business located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Valley Vicw Road and Wooddale Avenue. Requestor states that the small Bike Route sign impedes sightlines to the business' monument signage. Traffic Safety Committee Report November 6, 2013 Map: Valley View Road and Wooddale Avenue 2 Req uestor would like the sign moved "a few feet" north to clear views to the sign from both the west and north. Staff recommends approval to move bike route sign northeast, pending the location of utilities. Photo: Southeast corner of Valley View Road and Wooddale Avenue looking southeast SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial: B1. Request to remove parking restrictions on the east side of Antrim Road, south of W 69th Street. This request comes from a resident who lives on the 6900 block of Antrim Road. Requestor states that it is inconvenient — and a safety issue — that no parking is allowed on his (east) side of the street. No parking was installed when the bike lanes were striped in 2012. Parking is allowed on the west side of Antrim Rd. Requestor also believes that heavy "18- wheeler" trucks are using Antrim and that this should be prohibited. A map and picture are provided above and below. In 2012 council directed staff to install Mop: 6900 block of Antrim Road more bike lanes according to the comprehensive plan. The existing road width cannot accommodate two lanes of traffic, two bike lanes, and parking on both sides of the street. After discussion, staff recommends denying the request for removal of parking restrictions. Traffic Safety Committee Report 3 November 6, 2013 CFr'TlrlAl ('• Requests that are deferred to a later date: C1. Request for a crosswalk and "pork chop" island at Wilson Road and Eden Avenue. The request originated with a motorist who stated that the double yellow lane markings on the south leg of the intersection "go too far." Staff discussed this and recommended that, due to the pedestrian crossing distance and large radius at this location, a crosswalk be striped on the south leg of the intersection, along with a "pork chop" island to delineate right- turning motions. See map at right. Staff recommends postponing until spring 2014 to allow for further review and analysis. SECTION D: Other traffic safety - related issues handled. +i�c Q ij p 0 Ni Ak -J& 6 Mop: Wilson Lane and Eden Avenue — proposed crosswalk D1. Call from a resident stating that vehicles are parking on the "stub street" of Creek Valley Rd east of Nordic Dr. Caller said there is no parking on that street and vehicles should not be there. Call was returned, and the requestor was told that parking is allowed except for in front of No Parking signs at end of street, near trail to park. D2. Requestor states that vehicles are speeding on Trillium Lane near Lantana Ln. EPD was notified and will take speed counts on Trillium Lane. D3. Call from a resident on Heather Lane, stating that the intersection of Heather and Vernon Ave is dark and unsafe for pedestrians as vehicles turn off of Vernon. Voicemail was left informing of the petition process, and an email was sent with the link to the petition web page. D4. Call from a resident near the intersection of Malibu Dr and Park Terrace, stating that guests are receiving parking tickets for parking too close to stop signs (3 -way stop). Requestor would like "no parking within 30 feet of stop sign) signs posted. Call was returned, telling resident that this is not standard City practice as this is a state law. Traffic Safety Committee Report 4 November 6, 2013 D5. Motorist states that there is a wide white painted strip located in the right -hand, southbound lane on France Avenue in the north leg of its intersection with 66th Street. France Ave is a County road, thus Hennepin County was contacted and stated that they will notify their maintenance department to remove the stripe. D6. Phone call from a resident stating that traffic from eastbound Highway 62 is exiting the highway at Gleason and heading straight back onto the onramp to eastbound Highway 62. Resident stated that the resulting high level of congestion makes it unsafe for pedestrians and would like the Edina Police Department to issue citations. Call was returned to the resident stating that this action is not illegal. Traffic Safety Committee Report 5 November 6, 2013 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM NOVEMBER 21, 2013 6:00 P.M. • On Oct. 24, he asked why staff decided,to move forward with the sidewalk and not streetlights even though most were not in favor of sidewalk and Director'Houle said he would check with staff and he is still waiting for a response. • ETC was misinformed that there was overwhelming support for the sidewalk; he attended the neighborhood sidewalk meeting and residents were not asked their preferencce�for sidewalk;. much of the discussion centered on traffic, parking and some talk about the sidewal ' • Petition walked around and it was 2/3 against and 1 /3'fo t e si bwalk. • Odd that it was passed forward with an open issue�on fhe table ak- ffl,he would like to know why. Art Thelemann, 5132 Valley View Rd, said the followin o Ask to have the minutes corrected to show correct sp sidewalk; • He's read everything that he could find, including Coy Policy and he is curious how they moving forward developed. • He cross- referenced the survey results wi h h is wh families said no to the sidewalk; this is no suppor o • Difficult to access info's" rnafiio_'h on the web S, still,a streets. • Biased against the r�riij&nts. Member Janovy motioned to a seconded by nri mb' bdr Iver. All i mi ling of his last ection that talkei hen the impleme that he opposed the t the Living Street i plan is not yet sidewalk meeting and 10 of the 17 rence between local and collector as requested by Mr. Thelemann and the motion was Section C: mem er Janovy said aspart of theG�dview CAT, economic development manager Neuendorf has engaged Kimley orn to do a traffic.stl and she�recommended that planner Nolan connect with him. Section D -2: After discussion, it was a ded that this would be removed for clarification of the location. Motion was made by member anovy and seconded by member lyer to forward the November 6 Traffic Safety Report to City Council without Section D -2. All voted aye. Motion carried. Updates Student Members - None Bike Edina Task Force Member Janovy reported that Quality Bicycle Products had a mini -bike summit with the cities of Edina, Bloomington and Richfield and another one is planned for January. The consultant that is developing Hennepin County's bike plan was in attendance and they are seeking input via an online survey. Planner Nolan said he is on the policy advisory committee. O 1888 To: Mayor and City Council Agenda Item 4- IV. G. From: Laura Adler, Water Resources Coordinator Action Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Application for Reauthorization Action Requested: Approve the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Application for Reauthorization and proposed SWPPP activities. Information / Background: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency revised the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) general permit, effective August I, 2013. Due to this revision, the city must update its Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to meet the new requirements. On August 20, 2013, the City Council authorized a contract with WSB & Associates to revise the city's SWPPP. Current Process: The SWPPP addresses six Minimum Control Measures (MCMs): Public Education and Outreach, Public Participation and Involvement, Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination, Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control, Post - Construction Stormwater Management, and Pollution Prevention /Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations. Because the MCMs are so wide - ranging, many different departments have and will be implementing the activities. In order to determine how the city has been doing on its current SWPPP, Engineering and WSB staff conducted a "mock audit" with these departments. The results from the mock audit identified areas where the current program is lacking and where there are gaps between the existing SWPPP and the new requirements. WSB staff modeled the mock audit on audits the MPCA has been performing on municipalities over the last few years. It is very likely that Edina will undergo an audit with the MPCA within this five -year permit term. The mock audit is an effective way to see how the city would perform on a formal audit. Staff used documents employed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to thoroughly analyze what the city is doing to fulfill its SWPPP requirements. There are areas where the city's SWPPP program needed improvement as well as areas where it surpasses the current minimum requirements. One incomplete area for nearly all MCMs was record keeping. The MPCA requires a significant amount of record keeping with this permit from the number of brochures City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th St. - Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 distributed to the public to maintenance records for the storm sewer system. The expansion and use of the City Works asset management software will correct much of this deficiency. Some areas that the city surpasses the. minimum requirements are in frequency of street sweeping, and updating and maintaining. the GIS map of the city's storm sewer system. City streets are swept a minimum of two times per year; areas with heavy leaf cover are swept more frequently, preventing,a significant amount of sediment and pollutants from entering the storm sewer system. The GIS map of the storm sewer system is continuously updated and maintained. Engineering has implemented an inspection program to inspect all manholes, outlets, and ponds within a five -year period. :This inspection information helps prioritize maintenance activities.as well as field - checking the storm sewer system data within the GIS map. Attached is a memo from ,WSB that details all the required SWPPP program. changes. Staff- worked on a strategy for how the city will fulfill all requirements. Many departments will be implementing SWPPP activities concurrent with their core functions.. Each department will nee&to integrate. these tasks within their workload and record keeping. The Engineering Department will coordinate the SWPPP, including meeting quarterly with each department to ensure that we are staying on track with our required activities, as well as record keeping and annual report submittal, to the MPCA. In addition to the city departments, Engineering staff plan to pursue an agreement with Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District to'fulfill some of the SWPPP requirements. The attached example watershed district partnership agreement, provided by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District as a sample of the Memorandums of Understanding they execute with other municipalities, will be the starting point for '.the agreement. Edina currently relies on the watershed districts to implement stormwater rules and provide stormwater education. By creating a formal agreement, the city will be able to coordinate existing activities to meet some of the SWPPP requirements. The first formal step in the SWPPP revision.is to apply to the MPCA for reauthorization of the city's MS4 permit. City staff worked with WSB & Associates to complete the application, which includes the "SWPPP Document," a summary of the city's proposed SWPPP. The application is due on December 30, 2013. Once submitted, the MPCA will review the application and "SWPPP Document" and put them out for a 30 -day public comment period. After the comment period has closed, the MPCA will review any public input and make a decision on the permit. Future Impacts: The update of the SWPPP itself has a variety of impacts to staff workload and the stormwater utility. When city staff begin implementing activities from the SWPPP there will be a number of items coming before the City Council. These may include ordinance changes (see attached ordinances for examples) and projects that address the city- allocated reductions in phosphorous and chloride from Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) reports. The Energy and Environment Commission may be involved in the ordinance and policy changes. Existing and future planned projects may also address these reductions. For example, many of the potential stormwater aspects of the Living Streets initiative provide reductions in phosphorus. Additionally, there may be significant studies and CIP expenditures associated. with the new SWPPP, such as pond assessments and dredging, upgraded equipment for street sweeping and salt application, and additional inspections and maintenance burden. REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 The revised SWPPP will also have impacts on city operations. As mentioned above, multiple departments will be performing the SWPPP implementation activities. New policies and standard procedures need to be developed for a variety of activities. The Public Works Department will be required to increase facility and infrastructure inspections, including new types of stormwater features such as raingardens and underground treatment structures, as well as increasing the frequency of street sweeping. The Communications Department will be producing and distributing more content on stormwater education. The new SWPPP will require a significant number of, erosion control inspections of construction sites, performed by the Building Inspections Department. The Engineering Department will continue to develop and maintain GIS stormwater infrastructure data, incorporate stormwater regulations into city projects, manage specific TMDL projects, coordinate the SWPPP activities between departments, and assemble the required annual reporting. There will also be additional ongoing training and record keeping requirements associated with these activities. The attached memo from WSB summarizes the additional SWPPP tasks. Conclusion: The city is required to submit the SWPPP Application for Reauthorization and SWPPP Document for the MPCA's approval by December 30, 2013. Staff completed these documents in order to fulfill the minimum requirements, allowing flexibility for future policy discussions. By submitting this application, the city is in compliance with the MS4 permit. The MPCA's approval of the permit will kick off a variety of timelines to complete further work.. The attached application may undergo minor changes prior to submittal. Attachments: MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization and SWPPP Document Memo from WSB & Associates Example Watershed District Partnership Agreement Example Ordinances GAPW \INFRAS \UTILITIES DN \STORM SEWER \Plans and Permits \2013 SWPPP \Council 12172013 SWPPP Application for Authorization.docx Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St Paul, MN 55155 -4194 MS4 SWPPP .Application for Reauthorization for the NPDES /SDS General Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit MNR040000 reissued with an effective date of August 1, 2013 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Document Doc Type: Permit Application Instructions: This application is for authorization to discharge stormwater associated with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System /State Disposal System (NPDES /SDS) Permit Program. No fee is required with the submittal of this application. Please refer to "Example" for detailed instructions found on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) MS4 website at http: //www.pca.state.mn.us /ms4. Submittal: This MS4 SWPPPApplication for Reauthorization form must be submitted electronically via e-mail to the MPCA at ms4permitpro oram.pca(o)state.mn.us from the person that is duly authorized to certify this form. All questions with an asterisk ( *) are required fields. All applications will be returned if required fields are not completed. Questions: Contact Claudia Hochstein at 651 - 757 -2881 or claudia .hochstein(a-Dstate.mn.us; Dan Miller at 651- 757 -2246 or daniel.millerAstate.mmus, or call toll -free at 800 - 657 -3864. General Contact Information ( *Required fields) MS4 Owner (with ownership or operational responsibility, or control of the MS4) *MS4 permittee name: City of Edina *County: Hennepin *Mailing address (city, county, municipality, government agency or other entity) 4801 W. 50t' Street *City: City of Edina *State: MN *Zip code: 55424 *Phone (including area code): 952 - 927 -8861 *E -mail: mail@edinamn.gov MS4 General contact (with Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program [SWPPP] implementation responsibility) *Last name: Adler (department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant etc.) *Title: Water Resources Coordinator *Mailing address: 7450 Metro Blvd. *City: City of Edina *State: MN *Phone (including area code): 952 - 826 -0445 *First name: Laura *Zip code: 55439 *E -mail: ladler @edinamn.gov Preparer information (complete if SWPPP application is prepared by a party other than MS4 General contact) Last name: Carlson First name: Jesse (department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant, etc.) Title: Water Resources Project Manager Mailing address: 477 Temperance Street City: St. Paul State: MN Zip code: 55101 Phone (including area code): 651- 286 -8464 E -mail: jcarlson @wsbeng.com Verification 1. 1 seek to continue discharging stormwater associated with a small MS4 after the effective date of this Permit, and shall submit this MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization form, in accordance with the schedule in Appendix A, Table 1, with the SWPPP document completed in accordance with the Permit (Part II.D.). []Yes 2. 1 have read and understand the NPDES /SDS MS4 General Permit and certify that we intend to comply with all requirements of the Permit. ❑ Yes www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats Certification (All fields are required) ❑ Yes -I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. '1 certify that based on my inquiry of the person, or persons, :who manage the system, or those_ persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting: false information, including the possibility of civil and criminal penalties. This certification is. required by. Minn. Stat., §§ 7001.0070. and 7001.0540. The authorized:person.with overall, MS4 legal responsibility must certify the application (principal executive officer or a ranking'elected official): _-By typing my name in the following box, I certify: the above statements to be true and correct, to the best of my knowledge, and that this information can be used for.the purpose of processing my application. Name: (This document has been electronically signed) Title: Mailing address: City: Phone (including area code): Date (mm /dd /yyyy): E -mail: Note: The application will not be processed without certification. Zip code: www:pca. state. mn.us 651- 296 - 6300,' 800- 657 -3864 -TTY -651- 282 -5332 or 800- 657 -3864 • Available in alternative. formats., Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Document I. Partnerships: (Part ILDA ) A. List the regulated small MS4(s) with which you have established a partnership in order to satisfy one or more requirements of this Permit. Indicate which Minimum Control Measure (MCM) requirements or other program components that each partnership helps to accomplish (List all that apply). Check the box below if you currently have no established partnerships with other regulated MS4s. If you have more than five partnerships, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. ® No partnerships with regulated small MS4s Name and description of partnership I MCM /Other B. If you have additional information that you would like to communicate about your partnerships with other regulated small MS4(s), provide it in the space below, or include an attachment to the SWPPP Document, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere Partnerships. The City of Edina currently has no formal partnerships with other MS4s. They do promote educational activities presented by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The watershed districts also have active permitting programs for erosion and sediment control and post - construction stormwater management. The goal will be to develop the following formal partnerships: - Education program implementation - Construction site erosion and sediment control regulation - Post - construction stormwater management regulation - Project funding for TMDL implementation projects II. Description of Regulatory Mechanisms: (Part ILD.2) Illicit discharges A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) that effectively prohibits non - stormwater discharges into your small MS4, except those non - stormwater discharges authorized under the Permit (Part III.D.3.b.)? []Yes ®No 1. If yes: a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): ❑ Ordinance ❑ Contract language ❑ Policy /Standards ❑ Permits ❑ Rules ❑ Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: Direct link: ❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere IDDEreg. 2. If no: www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats .-- #-,—A_A0- - 4/74 117 m...,. 1J , -s-fn Describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: The City Code, Section 1035, General Nuisances has language regarding the pollution or contamination to any well, cistem, stream, lake; canal, or body of water by sewage, creamery, or industrial waste, or other substance; however based upon review.the,City will either create a new ordinance or revise the existing ordinance to address the requirement. of the MPCA MS4 permit. The final ordinance will be adopted within 12 months of the City receiving permit coverage. Construction site stormwater runoff control A. Do,you have a regulatory mechanism(o) that establ'isnes requirements for erosion and sediment controls and waste controls? ® Yes ❑ No If yes: a. Check which.type,of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): ® Ordinance'. ❑ Contract language ❑ Policy /Standards ❑ Permits . ❑ Rules Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: City Code, Section 405 - Landscaping, Screening and Erosion Control City Code, Section 411 - Demolition Permit and Buidling Permits for Single and Two Family Dwelling Units City Code, Section 830 -Tree Removal, Grading, and Excavations Direct link: City Code 405 - http:// edinamn .govledinartileslfilesICity *2OCode /Chapter 4 /Section 20405 % 20Landsca ping•O 20Screeging•* 20& % 20Erosion. pdf City Code 411 - http:// edinamn. govledinarileslfilesICity%2OCode /Chapter 4 /Section %20411 %20Demolition %20Permits %20 And% 20Building% 2OPermits %2OFof lo2OSingle% 2OAnd% 2OTwo- Family02ODwelling %2OUnits.pdf City Code 830 - http :// edinamn .gov /edinariles/rrles/City020Code /Chapter 8 /Section %20830%20 Tree 9lo20Removal, %2OGrading %20 & %2OExcavations. pdf ❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere CSWreg. B. Is your regulatory mechanism at least as stringent as the MPCA general permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction, Activity (as of the effective date of the MS4 Permit)? ❑Yes ® No If you answered yes to the above question, proceed to C. If you answered no to either of the above, permit requirements listed in A. or B., describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is: extended, these permit requirements. are met: We will update our construction site stormwater runoff control regulatory mechanism to be at least as stringent as the MPCA CSW permit. This effort will be completed within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. C. Answer yes or no to indicate whether your regulatory mechanism(s) requires owners and operators of construction activity to develop site plans that incorporate the following erosion and sediment controls and waste controls as described in the Permit (Part III.13.4.a.(1) -(8)), and.as'listed below: 1. Best Management Practices:(BMPs) to minimize erosion. ❑ Yes ® No 2. BMPs to minimize the discharge of sediment and other pollutants. ❑ Yes 0 No 3. BMPs for dewatering activities. _ ❑ Yes ® No 4. Site inspections and records of rainfall events ❑ Yes.. ®: No www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300.. 800- 6573864 TTY 651- 282 -5332 or 800-657-3864 . Available in altematiye formats 5. BMP maintenance ❑ Yes ® No 6. Management of solid and hazardous wastes on each project site. ® Yes ❑ No 7. Final stabilization upon the completion of construction activity, including the use of perennial ❑ Yes ®No vegetative cover on all exposed soils or other equivalent means. 8. Criteria for the use of temporary sediment basins. ❑ Yes ® No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: The City currently has language in City Code, Sections 405, 411 and 830 regarding erosion control, sediment control, and management of solid wastes, but the language is not as stringent as MPCA CSW requirements. The City code may be revised to include language that is at least as stringent as the MPCA CSW permit for items C.1 through C.S, C. 7, and C.8 or the City will seek to establish a partnership with the watersheds. The City will meet with the watersheds within 2 months of receiving permit coverage to determine if establishing a partnership is feasible. If a partnership is feasible and the City wishes to develop a partnership it will be established within 6 months of receiving permit coverage. If a partnership is not established the City will develop a stormwater ordinance that will meet the requirements of the MPCA CSW permits. Post - construction stormwater management A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) to address post- construction stormwater management activities? ® Yes ❑ No 1. If yes: a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): ® Ordinance ❑ Contract language ® Policy /Standards ❑ Permits ❑ Rules ® Other, explain: The City has an approved Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. Section 3.2.2, policies 6 & 7 of the plan adopts the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District's rules by reference b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: City Code, Section 411 - Demolition Permit and Buidling Permits for Single and Two Family Dwelling Units Comperhensive Water Resources Management Plan, Section 3.2.2, Policies 6 & 7 Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Stormwater Rule Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Stormwater Rule Direct link: City Code 411 - http : / /edinamn.govledinafilesffiles /City%2OCode /Chapter 4 /Section %20411 %20Demolition %20Permits %20 And %20Building %2OPermits %2OFor'lo 2OSingle %2OAnd %2OTwo- Family'' 2ODwelling %2OUnits. pdf Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan: http://edinamn.govfindex.php ?section= engineering water resource Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Stormwater Rule: http:// www. ninemil ecreek.orgfRegulatory/Rule04.pdf Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Stormwater Rule: http: /fwww. minnehahacreek. org/sites/minnehahacreek. org1fVes fpdfs/regulatoryfStormwater'lo 20Management %20Ru1e. pdf ❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere PostCSWreg. B. Answer yes or no below to indicate whether you have a regulatory mechanism(s) in place that meets the following requirements as described in the Permit (Part III.D.S.a.): 1. Site plan review: Requirements that owners and /or operators of construction activity submit site plans ® Yes ❑ No, with post - construction stormwater management BMPs to the permittee for review and approval, prior to start of construction activity. 2. Conditions for post construction stormwater management: Requires the use of any combination of BMPs, with highest preference given to Green Infrastructure techniques and practices (e.g., infiltration, evapotranspiration, reuse/harvesting, conservation design, urban forestry, green roofs, etc.), necessary www.pca.sEate.mn.us 6S7 296 6300 800.657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats Wa- strm4 -d9n . V 71117 to meet the following conditions on the site of a construction activity to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP): a. For new development projects — no net increase from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in the Permit (Part III.13.5.a(3)(a)). 2) Stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). 3) Stormwater discharges of Total Phosphorus (TP). b. For redevelopment projects — a net reduction from pre - project conditions (on an annual average basis) of: 1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)). 2) Stormwater discharges of TSS. 3) Stormwater discharges of TP. 3. Stormwater management limitations and exceptions: a. Limitations ® Yes ❑ No ® Yes [--]No 1) Prohibit the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post - construction stormwater ❑ Yes ® No management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) when the infiltration structural stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in areas: a) Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under an NPDES /SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit issued by the MPCA. b) Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur. c) With less than three (3) feet of separation distance from the bottom of the infiltration system to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or the top of bedrock. d) Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by the infiltrating stormwater. 2) Restrict the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post - construction ❑ Yes ® No stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), without higher engineering review, sufficient to provide a functioning treatment system and prevent adverse impacts to groundwater, when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas: a) . With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay) soils. b) Within 1,000 feet up- gradient, or 100 feet down - gradient of active karst features. c) Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) as defined in Minn. R. 4720.5100, subp. 13. d) Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour. 3) For linear projects where the lack of right -of -way precludes the installation of volume control ® Yes ❑ No practices that meet the conditions for post- construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), the permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) may allow exceptions as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(b)). The permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) shall ensure that a reasonable attempt be made to obtain right -of -way during the project planning process. 4. Mitigation provisions: The permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) shall ensure that any stormwater discharges of TSS and /or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction activity are addressed through mitigation and, at a minimum, shall ensure the following requirements are met: a. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference: ® Yes ❑ No 1) Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity. 2) Locations within the same Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR) catchment area as the original construction activity. 3) Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area up- stream 4) Locations anywhere within the permittee's jurisdiction. b. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPs or the ® Yes [--]No retrofit of existing structural stormwater BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional structural stormwater BMP. c. Routine maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs already required by this permit cannot ® Yes ❑ No be used to meet mitigation requirements of this part. d. Mitigation projects shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original ❑ Yes ® No construction activity. e. The permittee shall determine, and document, who will be responsible for long -term ® Yes ❑ No maintenance on all mitigation projects of this part. f. If the permittee receives payment from the owner and /or operator of a construction activity ® Yes ❑ No www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 -657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800.657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or operator of that construction activity meeting the conditions for post - construction stormwater management in Part III.D.5.a(2), the permittee shall apply any such payment received to a public stormwater project, and all projects must be in compliance with Part III.13.5.a(4)(a) -(e). 5. Long -term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs: The permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) shall provide for the establishment of legal mechanisms between the permittee and owners or operators responsible for the long -term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, that have been implemented to meet the conditions for post - construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). This only includes structural stormwater BMPs constructed after the effective date of this permit and that are directly connected to the permittee's MS4, and that are in the permittee's jurisdiction. The legal mechanism shall include provisions that, at a minimum: a. Allow the permittee to conduct inspections of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or ® Yes ❑ No operated by the permittee, perform necessary maintenance, and assess costs for those structural stormwater BMPs when the permittee determines that the owner and /or operator of that structural stormwater BMP has not conducted maintenance. b. Include conditions that are designed to preserve the permittee's right to ensure maintenance ® Yes ❑ No responsibility, for structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, when those responsibilities are legally transferred to another party. c. Include conditions that are designed to protect/preserve structural stormwater BMPs and ❑ Yes ID No site features that are implemented to comply with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). If site configurations or structural stormwater BMPs change, causing decreased structural stormwater BMP effectiveness, new or improved structural stormwater BMPs must be implemented to ensure the conditions for post- construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) continue to be met. If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: B.3.a.1: The watersheds stormwater rules have provisions for prohibiting the use of infiltration techniques, however may not be as specific as the language provided in the MS4 permit. The City will meet with the watersheds to establish an agreement that will include will include a policy that the watersheds evaluate the sites to prohibit discharges as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)( 1)). The City will meet with the watersheds within 2 months of receiving permit coverage to determine if establishing a partnership is feasible. If a partnership is feasible it will be established within 6 months of receiving permit coverage. If a partnership cannot be established the City will develop a regulatory mechanism that will meet the requirement of the MPCA MS4 permit. B.3.a.2: The watershed stormwater rules have provisions for restricting the use of infiltration techniques; however may not be as specific as the language provided in the MS4 permit. The City will meet with the watersheds to establish an agreement that will include a policy that the watersheds evaluate the sites to restrict discharges as described in the Permit (Part II1.D.5.a(3)(a)(2)). The City will meet with the watersheds within 2 months of receiving permit coverage to determine if establishing a partnership is feasible. If a partnership is feasible it will be established within 6 months of receiving permit coverage. If a partnership cannot be established the City will develop a regulatory requirement that will meet the requirement of the MPCA MS4 permit. 8.4. d.: The City will either meet with the watersheds to establish a policy or regulatory mechanism to include the requirement to complete mitigation projects within 24 months after the start of the original construction activity as described in the Permit (Partlll.D.5.a(4)(d)). This will occur on the same schedule as the items above. B.5.c.: The City will either meet with the watersheds to establish a policy or regulatory mechanism to include the requirement to address BMP modifications in the future as described in the Permit (Part111.D.5.a(5)(c)). This will occur on the same schedule as the items above. III. Enforcement Response Procedures (ERPs): (Part II.D.3) A. Do you have existing ERPs that satisfy the requirements of the Permit (Part III.B.)? ❑ Yes ® No 1. If yes, attach them to this form as an electronic document, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere_ERPs. 2. If no, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, with twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: The City will develop draft ERPs within 6 months of receiving permit coverage. The draft ERPs will include requirements for site inspections, criteria for elevating enforcement, and enforcement tools. The will be developed for MCM 3, 4, and 5. Enforcement mechanisms considered may include: - Notice of Violations www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats - Stop Work Orders - Securities in the form of a performance bond,. letter of credit, or cash deposit - Misdemeanor - Partnerships with the watersheds for enforcement of their maintenance agreement for post - construction stormwater BMPs. The draft ERPs will be incorporated in the City Code, policy document, or a formal partnership with the watersheds within 12 months of receiving permit coverage. B. Describe your ERPs: The current ERPs are include in the following.City Codes: Section 100, Penalties for Violation, Section 405; Landscaping Screening, and Erosion ,Control, Section 411; Demolition Permits and Building Permits for Single and Two Family Dwelling Units, and Section 830 ; Tree Removal, Grading, and Excavations. The City ,Code includes the following enforcement mechanisms: - Misdemeanors - Requirement for securities - Stop work orders IV. Storm Sewer System Map and Inventory: (Part II.D.4.) A. Describe how you manage your storm sewer system map and inventory: The City GIS administrator updates and maintains all of the City's GIS information. The storm sewer system is updated annually with mad reconstruction projects as -built information will be collected for new developments/redevelopments. The map is also updated as the City inspects their storm sewer system. B. Answer yes or no-to indicate whether your storm sewer system map addresses the following requirements from the Permit (Part III.C.1.a -d), as listed below: 1. The permittee's entire small MS4 as a goal, but at a minimum, all pipes 12 inches or greater in ® Yes ❑ No diameter, including stormwater flow direction in those pipes. 2. . Outfalls, including a unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee, and an ® Yes ❑ No associated geographic coordinate. 3. Structural stormwater BMPs that are part of the permittee's small MS4. ® Yes ❑ No 4. All receiving waters. ® Yes ❑ No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: C. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the requirements of 2009 Minnesota Session Law, Ch. 172. Sec. 28: with the following inventories, according to the specifications of the Permit (Part III.C.2.a. -b.), including:. 1. All ponds within the permittee's jurisdiction that are constructed and operated for purposes of ® Yes ❑ No water _quality treatment, stormwater detention, and flood control, and that are used for the collection of stormwater via constructed conveyances. 2. All wetlands and lakes, within the permittee's jurisdiction, that collect stormwater via constructed ® Yes. ❑ No conveyances. D. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the following information for each feature inventoried. 1. A unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee. ® Yes ❑ No 2. A geographic coordinate. ® Yes ❑ No 3. Type of feature (e.g., pond, wetland, or lake). This may be determined by using best professional . ® Yes ❑ No judgment. If you have answered yes.to all above requirements, and you have already submitted the Pond Inventory Form to the MPCA, then you do not need to resubmit the inventory form below. If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that', within 12 months of the date permit coverage'is extended, these permit requirements are met: www:pca.state.mncus. 651- 296 - 6300 .. • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY.651 -282 -5332 or 800- 657 -3864 " Available in altemative4ormats .�- ....,_�r�.,e_dOa.....4741Y .Pnao R nf 7n E. Answer yes or no to indicate if you are attaching your pond, wetland and lake inventory to the MPCA ® Yes ❑ No on the form provided on the MPCA website at: http:/A&,ww.i)ca.state.mn.us/ms4, according to the specifications of Permit (Part III.C.2.b.(1) -(3)). Attach with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere inventory. If you answered no, the inventory form must be submitted to the MPCA MS4 Permit Program within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. V. Minimum Control Measures (MCMs) (Part II.D.5) A. MCM1: Public education and outreach 1. The Permit requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise their education and outreach program that focuses on illicit discharge recognition and reporting, as well as other specifically selected stormwater - related issue(s) of high priority to the permittee during this permit term. Describe your current educational program, including any high - priority topics included: The City of Edina is comprised of a large percentage of single family residential. The other land uses include industrial, commercial, multi- family residential, and parks. The priority of the eduction program has been mainly centered on issues associated with single family residential. The City sends educational information using the following: -About Town newsletter - Announcements made in the City Extra email notification system - Annoncements made using social media - Use "Hometown Hereos" to help celebrate people who take pride in the community - Video message either posted on -line or aired on the cable access channel - Website - Newcomer packet - Public Works Pipeline When events are being held in the. City the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District or Nine Mile Creek Watershed District the City either partners or sponsors those events. 2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public education and outreach program, including the distribution of educational materials and a program implementation plan. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and /or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase ll Small MS4s (hftp://www.epa.gov/npdes/i)ubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP Cate Measurable goals and timeframes The City will distribute a minimum of three educational publications via City mailings, workshops, presentations, website postings, or newsletters per calendar year. This BMP will be revised in the new permit term to prioritize Distribute Educational Materials educational activities. The City or its designee will develop and distribute educational material and present an overview of the MS4 program and 6 minimum control measures used within the City's SWPPP at each annual public meeting, via City mailings or newsletters, and on the City's storm water web page. The City will provide stormwater education and outreach programs for residents within the City annually. This BMP will be revised in the new permit term to prioritize Implement an Education Program educational activities. www.pca.state.mn.us 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TfY 651- 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 - Available in altemative formats The City will update its existing storm water webpage with additional water resource related issues. Topics may include, SWPPP information, best management practices, illicit discharge prevention and detection information, information on non -point source pollution, and local contact information for residents to request further information on specific stormwater City Website topics or toreport a stormwater related infraction. The City will develop then distribute water resource related articles in the City newsletter. Article topics may include best management practices, illicit discharge information, and non - point source pollution, etc. Annually the City will distribute a City Newsletter minimum of two stormwater related articles. City staff will coordinate with the NMCWD and MCWD to distribute educational materials and promote outreach programs. Annually the City will promote at least up to two Coordination of Education Program I educational workshop or presentations. BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes During yearly SWPPP review, consider which materials are most effective for our program and audiences, Use this information to determine printing numbers for future education materials. Consider information from citizen feedback related to all aspects Program Evaluation of our SWPPP to determine education needs on a yearly basis. 3. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and /or coordinating this MCM: Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications and Technology Services Director B. MCM2: Public participation and involvement 1. The Permit (Part III.D.2.a.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement a public participation/involvement program to solicit public input on the SWPPP. Describe your current program: The City of Edina is comprised of a large percentage of single family residential. The other land uses include industrial, commercial, multi- family residential, and parks. The priority of the eduction program has been mainly centered on issues associated with single family residential. The City sends educational information using the following: - About Town newsletter - Announcements made in the City Extra email notification system - Annoncements made using social media - Use "Hometown Hereos" to help celebrate people who take pride in the community - Video message either posted on -line or aired on the cable access channel - Website - Newcomer packet - Public WorksPpipeline When events are being held in the City the by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District or Nine Mile Creek Watershed District the City either partners or sponsors those events. 2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public participation/involvement program, including solicitation and documentation of public input on the SWPPP. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase// Small MS4s (hftp:/A&,ww.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/Measurabie-Qoals.Dd you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP Annual Public Measurable goals and timeframes The City will host an annual public meeting and record the number of attendees at the public meeting, all comments received, and responses to each comment in the record of www.pca.state.mn.us 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats decision. The effectiveness of this BMP will be measured by the number of residents who attend the annual public meeting. The City will submit a public meeting notice to the local newspaper. This goal will be met by publishing the public Comply with Public Notice Requirements meeting notice at least 30 days in advance of the meeting date. The City will conduct a public meeting and host a website on the City's Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program. The goal of this BMP will be met by hosting and recording all public comments Solicit Public Input received (if any) at the public meeting. The City will conduct a public meeting and host a website on the City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program. City staff will respond to all public comments and statements received from the public meeting, and document any proposed changes to the SWPPP for final approval by City Engineer (if applicable). The goal of this BMP will be met by documenting all written and oral Consider Public BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes The City will annually hold a coordination meeting involving the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Nile Mile Creek Watershed. If a formal agreement is established with the watersheds the meetingwould include discussing assistance with educational activities, erosion control, post - construction Coordination meeting stormwatermanagement, and TMDL implementation. Make the SWPPP and other important stormwater resources available at an annually held City event. People will be able to provide comments. This may take place of the annual public SWPPP Information Available at Annual Festival meeting. 3. Do you have a process for receiving and documenting citizen input? ❑ Yes ® No If you answered no to the above permit requirement, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: 8.3. The City will develop written procedures for receiving, documenting and storing citizen input as described in the permit (Part /II.C.2.b). Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended 4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and /or coordinating this MCM: Laura Adler, Water Resources Coordinator C. MCM 3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination 1. The Permit (Part III.D.3.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise their current program as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into the small MS4. Describe your current program: The City has a nuisance ordinance that prohibits the pollution of public water. City Staff and public works employees are trained to look for any signs of an illicit discharge while on the job and during their system inspections. The City is also aware of the necessary action in the event of a spill and the need to contact the Minnesota Duty Officer. ERPs will be developed to guide the actions the City will take to respond to an illicit discharge. 2. Does your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program meet the following requirements, as found in the Permit (Part III.D.3.c. -g.)? a. Incorporation of illicit discharge detection into all inspection and maintenance activities conducted ® Yes ❑ No under the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.- f.)Where feasible, illicit discharge inspections shall be conducted during dry- weather conditions (e.g., periods of 72 or more hours of no precipitation). b. Detecting and tracking the source of illicit discharges using visual inspections. The permittee may ® Yes ❑ No also include use of mobile cameras, collecting and analyzing water samples, and /or other detailed procedures that may be effective investigative tools. c. Training of all field staff, in accordance with the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.g.(2)), in ❑ Yes ® No illicit discharge recognition (including conditions which could cause illicit discharges), and reporting illicit discharges for further investigation. d. Identification of priority areas likely to have illicit discharges, including at a minimum, evaluating ❑ Yes ® No land use associated with business/industrial activities, areas where illicit discharges have been identified in the past, and areas with storage of large quantities of significant materials that could www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 800- 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats result in an illicit discharge. e. Procedures for the timely response to known, suspected, and reported illicit discharges. f. Procedures for investigating, locating, and eliminating the source of illicit discharges. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes ®No g. (Procedures for responding to spills, including emergency response procedures to prevent spills from ❑ Yes ® No entering the small MS4. The procedures shall also include the immediate notification of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty Officer, if the source of the illicit discharge is a spill or leak as defined in Minn. Stat. § 115.061. h. When the, source of the illicit discharge is found, the permittee shall use`the ERPs required by the ❑ Yes ® No Permit (Part III.B.) to eliminate the illicit discharge and require any needed corrective action(s). If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and. corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure jhat, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: C. 2.c to C.2.h: 'The City Will formalize the current practices to develop Standard Operating,Procedures (SOPs) for Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination. The City currenttyincorporates illlicit discharge inspections into the .;the evaluation of the City'sstormwaterconveyance system including: - Structural stormwater BMPs - Ponds - Outfalls - Facilty investigations The SOPs will include procedures for identiying priority arcs, tracking illicit discharge, responding in a timely fashion, eliminating illicit discharge if they an: detected, and using City of Edina's ERPs. Training will be provided to all staff that may be responsbile for identifying illicit discharges. The training will be a part of ongoingstormwater training with City,staff. Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. 3. List the categories of BMPs that address your'illicit discharge, detection and elimination program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you. plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes'that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and /or maintain the BMPs." Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http: //www. epa:gov /n pdes /pubs /measu rableaoals. pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate anew row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes The City will review and update storm'sewer map annually. Updates made will be the result of City projects and Storm Sewer System Map develo ment/redevelo ment. ". . The City will review existing ordinances and, if necessary, develop a city'ordinance related to illicit and non- stormwater discharges into the City's storm sewer and surface /ground waters. The goal of this BMP will be met.by reviewing existing city ordinances and implementing a specific ordinance related Regulatory Control Program to illicitrnon- stormwater discha es if necessary). The City will develop and implement a program to detect and reduce non- stormwater discharges, including illegal dumping. Procedures for detection may consist of visual inspections for non- stormwater discharges on City owned land and private property (as requested). Inspection frequency may be conducted concurrent wi& the outfall inspections and be IDDE Plan included as a part of routine activities. The City or designee will `discourage illegal dumping by educating the public (City residents, businesses, and stallo on its potential sources and effects as well as altemative uses:lbr -unwanted materials. This BMP includes providing information on recycling options, services, and programs within the City such as drop -off sites for household hazardous waste. The City wilialso review the current educational activities undertaken by its staff to identify, prevent, and reduce illicit Public and Employee Illicit Discharge Information discharges from daily public works activities and other general Program City o erations.. The City has identified and evaluated the following categories Identification of Non Stormwater Discharges and Flows . of non- stormwater discharges as defined in Part V. G.1e : www.pca.state.mn.us, 651 -296 -6300 :.:;800 -657 -3864 TTY' 651 - 282 -5332 or 800- 657 -3869 Avaitabte"in ittemative formats 4. Do you have procedures for record - keeping within your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) program as specified within the Permit (Part III.D.3.h.)? ❑ Yes ®No If you answered no, indicate how you will develop procedures for record- keeping of your Illicit Discharge, Detection and Elimination Program, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended: C.4., The City will develop written procedures for receiving, documenting and storing citizen input as descriped in the permit (Part M.D.1h). The procedure may include incorporating a link on the website and will include a record of all complaints received and follow -up activity that was performed. Procedueres will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. 5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and /or coordinating this MCM: Laura Adler, Water Resources Coordinator D. MCM 4: Construction site stormwater runoff control 1. The Permit (Part III.D.4) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a construction site stormwater runoff control program. Describe your current program: The City requires review of construction site erosion and sediment control (ESC) plans before projects begin, and works with contractors to ensure appropriate and correct use of erosion and sediment control BMPs is being implemented on site. The building inspection department is primarly responsible for checking compliance with construction site ESC plans. 2. Does your program address the following BMPs for construction stormwater erosion and sediment control as required in Water line flushing, landscape irrigation, diverted stream flows, rising ground waters, uncontaminated groundwater infiltration, ® Yes ❑ No uncontaminated pumped groundwater, discharges from potable water sources, foundation drains, air conditioning ❑ Yes ® No condensation, irrigation water, springs, water from crawl space pumps, footing drains, lawn watering, individual residential car washing, flows from riparian habitats and wetland, de- ❑ Yes ® No chlorinated swimming pool discharges, and street wash water, discharges or flows from fire fighting activities. The City has determined the above referenced sources of non - stormwater discharge to be insignificant pollutant contributors to the MS4 system. BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes ❑ Yes ® No Annually inspect locations identified as high priority outfalls around high -risk establishments (industrial facilities, fast food restaurants, car washes, historical issues, and vehicle repair Inspections sho s If illicit connections are suspected televise sewer system, collect grab samples, or perform other effective testing Illicit Discharge Investigation procedures to find illicit connections in the system. The City will evaluate the need to develop a link on the City Community Reporting Options and Documentation website where all complaints can be logged. Procedures 4. Do you have procedures for record - keeping within your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) program as specified within the Permit (Part III.D.3.h.)? ❑ Yes ®No If you answered no, indicate how you will develop procedures for record- keeping of your Illicit Discharge, Detection and Elimination Program, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended: C.4., The City will develop written procedures for receiving, documenting and storing citizen input as descriped in the permit (Part M.D.1h). The procedure may include incorporating a link on the website and will include a record of all complaints received and follow -up activity that was performed. Procedueres will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. 5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and /or coordinating this MCM: Laura Adler, Water Resources Coordinator D. MCM 4: Construction site stormwater runoff control 1. The Permit (Part III.D.4) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a construction site stormwater runoff control program. Describe your current program: The City requires review of construction site erosion and sediment control (ESC) plans before projects begin, and works with contractors to ensure appropriate and correct use of erosion and sediment control BMPs is being implemented on site. The building inspection department is primarly responsible for checking compliance with construction site ESC plans. 2. Does your program address the following BMPs for construction stormwater erosion and sediment control as required in the Permit (Part III.D.4.b.): a. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you conduct prior to the start of ® Yes ❑ No construction activity? b. Does the site plan review procedure include notification to owners and operators proposing ❑ Yes ® No construction activity that they need to apply for-and obtain coverage under the MPCA's general permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity No. MN R100001? c. Does your program include written procedures for receipt and consideration of reports of ❑ Yes ® No noncompliance or other stormwater related information on cot isiruction aLl.ivity submitted by time public to the permittee? d. Have you included written procedures for the following aspects'of site inspections to determine compliance with your regulatory mechanism(s): 1) Does your program include procedures for identifying priority sites for inspection? ❑ Yes ® No 2) Does your program identify a frequency at which you will conduct construction site ❑ Yes ® No inspections? 3) Does your program identify the names of individual(s) or position titles of those responsible for ❑ Yes ® No www.pca.state.mn.us 651- 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats conducting construction site inspections? 4) Does your program include a checklist or other written means to document construction site inspections when determining compliance? e. Does your program document and retain construction project name, location, total acreage to be disturbed, and owner /operator information? f. Does your program document stormwater - related comments and /or supporting information used to determine project approval or denial? ❑ Yes ® No ® Yes ❑ No ® Yes ❑ No g. Does your program retain construction site inspection checklists or other written materials used to ❑ Yes ® No document site inspections? If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met. D.2.c., The City will develop written procedures for receipt and consideration of reports of noncompliance or other stormwater related information on construction activity submitted by the public as described in the Permit (Part III.D.4.c). Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. D.2.d., City will develop written procedures for conducting site ESC inspections as described in the Permit (Part III.D.4.d).The written procedures will also define the roles that the City and the watersheds will play in ESC site inspections as may be established in the partnerships between the City and the watersheds. Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. D.2.g., City will develop written procedures for retaining documents of site ESC inspections as described in the Permit (Part III.01.4.d). The written procedures will also define the roles that the City and the watersheds will play in documenting construction site inspections as may be established in the partnerships between the City and the watersheds. Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. 3. List the categories of BMPs that address your construction site stormwater runoff control program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and /or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase 11 Small MS4s (http: / /www.epa.gov /npdes /pubs /measurable- oals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes The City will review the current permit stipulations/city codes relating to project specific site erosion and sediment control as part of the conditions of the permit. Staff will review current Ordinance or other Regulatory Mechanism ordinances and City codes and update as necessary, Construction site operators must conform to NPDES Phase ll permit requirements and local city requirements for construction site erosion control on sites 1 acre or larger. As part of the City's permit approval standards, erosion control BMPs must be implemented in accordance with the NPDES permit Construction Site Implementation of Erosion requirements, grading permit stipulations, and applicable city Sediment Control BMPs codes. Construction site operators must confirm to NPDES Phase 11 permit requirements and the City's requirements for proper waste and material disposal, as defined in City codes, section 830. All waste and unused building materials must be property disposed of off -site and prevented from being carried by runoff Waste Controls for Construction Site Operators into a receiving channel or storm sewers stem. Every applicant for a city building permit, subdivision approval, orgrading permit that disturbs one acre ormore is required to submit a project specific stormwater management plan (if applicable) and /or erosion control plan to the City for review and approval. Construction permits are also required to meet MPCA NPDES Phase 11 guidelines for erosion and sediment control Procedures for Site Plan Review and all applicable City ordinances and (;odes. The City will provide a phone line and website links for the public to report potential construction site erosion control and waste Procedures for Receiving Complaints disposal infractions. The City will provide training to its staff on proper erosion control, identification of problem areas, and the expectations of the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for Site Inspection and Enforcement construction site operations. www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651- 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats ... �. �. ..� f)...... 4.4 -4: 711 BMP categories to be Measurable goals and timeframes The City will develop a process to determine the frequency for inspecting high priority inspection sites (e.g., near sensitive Prioritize Inspections raceivina waters, ro ects la er than 5 acres). Develop written procedures to track and archive all plan review and inspection documents within 12 months following the date Documentation Procedures permit coverage is extended. 4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and /or coordinating this MCM: Engineering Department for Review and Support Cindy Larson, Residential Redevelopment Coordinator Steve i(irchman, Chief Building Official E. MCM 5: Post - construction stormwater management 1. The Permit (Part III.D.S.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended; existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a post- construction stormwater management program. Describe your current program: The City reviews sites for post - construction stormwater management primarily to evaluate how private systems are connecting into the public system and ensuring that BMPs designed to manage stormwater are being constructed property. For large sites typically 3 reviews are required by the City. As stated in the City of Edina's approved Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan Section 3.2.2, policies 6 & 7 states "Section 3.2.2, policies 6 & 7 of the plan adopts the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District's rules by reference ". The watersheds have a detailed review process and stormwater rules that require volume control, water quality, and water quantity. 2. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you will conduct prior to the start of ® Yes ❑ No construction activity? 3. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have the following listed procedures for documentation of post - construction stormwater management according to the specifications of Permit (Part III.D.S.c.): a. Any supporting documentation that you use to determine compliance with the Permit (Part ® Yes ❑ No III.D.S.a), including the project name, location, owner and operator of the construction activity, any checklists used for conducting site plan reviews, and any calculations used to determine compliance? b. All supporting documentation associated with mitigation projects that you authorize? ❑ Yes ® No c. Payments received and used in accordance with Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(4)(0)? ❑ Yes ® No d. All legal mechanisms drafted in accordance with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(5)), including date(s) of ❑ Yes ® No the agreement(s) and names of all responsible parties involved? If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the steps that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met. E.3. b -d., The City will develop written procedures for documention of post - construction stormwater management for documentation of mitigation projects, payments, and legal mechanisms as described in the Permit (Part Ill.D.5.c.). Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. 4. List the categories of BMPs that address your post- construction stormwater management program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and /or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase l/ Small MS4s (http://www.eDa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Encourage the use of structural and non - structural Measurable goals and timeframes Structural The City will review and revise (if necessary, during the plan review process) permanent BMP designs and criteria for post- construction stormwater management associated with new development and redevelopment projects of one acre or more. The City will also consider the implementation of low impact development practices if prudent and feasible. The City will annually review and revise (if necessary) the current policies www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats wa- strm4 -49a • 5/31/11 requirements, and Best Management Practices specific to structural BMPs. Non - Structural The, City may also improve the condition of parks, wetlands, and watersheds when the opportunity arises. Wetland restorations; native plantings, bank stabilization, detention ponds, and other best management construction, projects will continue to be will continue to be actively pursued by the City The City will implement the requirements of the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan (CWRMP), along with applicable City ordinances to minimize the negative impacts.stormwater runoff may have on water quality within the city. The. City'will revise this BMP to include establishing a partnership with the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and Minnehaha Creek Watershed. District for reviewing and permitting; of projects 1:acre or greater to require post construction stormwatermanagement. These post - construction stormwater requirements will include the provisions of the MS4 Post - Construction Reaulatory Mechanism permit. Term Operation and Maintenance of BMPs BMP categories to be inspection records for determining the corrective maintenance actions (if necessary) for the long -term operation of all stormwater management facilities owned by the City. Corrective actions and routine maintenance of all stormwater management facilities will be guided by the Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, City of Edina's standard specifications and design requirements, and City staff. This will BMP will be revised for the new permit term to include requirements for the long -term operation and maintenance of structural pollution control devices constructed as a part of Measurable'goals and timeframes Within 12 months of extension of permit coverage, the City will revise the existing site plan review procedures. These procedures may include a site plan review checklist, and form Revise Written Procedures for Site Plan Review letter, etc. Within 12 month of extension of permit coverage the City will update their tracking system to include information to assist with tracking construction site inspections, agreements; Permit Tracking System complaints, and correspondence, for reports of non -com liance. Develop BMP Construction Guidance document for, developers BMP Guidance Document and contractors within 12 months of permit coveraae extension. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and /or coordinating this MCM: Laura Adler, Water Resources Coodinator F. MCM 6: Pollution prevention /good housekeeping for municipal operations 1. The Permit (Part III.D.6.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended,_ existing, permittees,shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement an operations and maintenance program that prevents or reduces the discharge of pollutants from the permittee owned /operated facilities and operations to the small MS4. Describe your current program: The City currently inspects -its structural pollution control devices on an annual basis and inspects all of its outfalls, sediment basins and ponds every 5 years: Inspection`information,,is entered into "City Works" their assett management program.and -is rated 1-4 to assist with prioritizing maintenance. The City inspects stockpiles, storage and material handling areas at the maintenance yard for poteritial,discharges and maintenance of BMPs as a part of their routine activities. The City is evaluating: ways to reduce1he the use of road salt for winter road maintenance activities to reduce ,www.pca.state m ims : • 651- 296 -6300 800- 657.3864 TTY .651- 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 Available in alternative formats chlorides enterin water resources and the City sweeps their streets twice annually (Spring and Fall). 2. Do you have a facilities inventory as outlined in the Permit (Part III.D.6.a.)? ® Yes ❑ No 3. If you answered no to the above permit requirement in question 2, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: 4. List the categories of BMPs that address your pollution prevention /good housekeeping for municipal operations program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and /or maintain the BMPs. For an explanation of measurable goals, refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http: //www.ei)a.gov /npdes /pubs /measurablegoals.i)df). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes The City will implement the Stormwater Management and Maintenance programs identified within the City's Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (CWRMP) and as specified in the City's SWPPP. The City will also provide training materials and workshops to City staff to help reduce stormwater pollution caused from park maintenance, Fleet and building maintenance, new construction Municipal Operations, Maintenance, and Training and land disturbances, outfall inspections, and storm sewer Program s stem maintenance. The City, will brush or vacuum sweep streets a minimum of twice annually in an effort to reduce the amount of sediment, trash and organic material from reaching the storm sewer system and Street Sweeping water resources. The City Public Works Department will inspect all identified structural pollution control devices on City property and prescribe a maintence schedule as necessary. Newly constructed and rebuilt structural pollution control devices will be added to the storm sewer map. This BMP will be revised to identify that inspections need to be Annual Inspection of All Structural Pollution Control completed at least annually unless a different schedule is Devices justified based on maintenance needs. The City will inspect all mapped outfalls, sediment basins and ponds within the City's storm sewer system. The results of these inspections will be compiled in a report which will include sediment levels, watershed information and recommended Inspection of Outfalls and Sediment Basins/Ponds maintenance and maintenance schedules. City staff will annually locate and inspect all exposed stockpiles and storage /material handling areas located on City owned properties. All existing onsite BMPs will be inspected for conformance to NPDES Phase I/ permit requirements. Any identified erosion control issues will be corrected and documented per NPDES Phase 1/ standards. Annual Inspection of All Exposed Stockpile, Storage This BMP will be updated to increase the inspection frequency and Material HanpWrig Areas to at least quarterly, The City will determine whether repair, replacement, or maintenance measures are necessary from evaluating inspection reports and other pertinent information. All corrective maintenance, repair, and/or replacement measures will be System Maintenance documented and recorded by the City's public works staff. www.pca.state.mn.us. • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in altemative formats BMP categories to be implemented Develop Spill Prevention & Control Plans for Municipal Facilities Facility Inventory Pond Assessment Procedures & Schedule Measurable goals and timeframes Develop plans describing spill prevention and control procedures by the end of Year 1. Conduct annual spill prevention and response training sessions to all municipal employees. Distribute education materials, i.e. posters and pamphlets, to each municipal facility by the end of year 2. The City has created a map of all identified facilities and along with BMPs being used to control pollutants. Where BMPs are not in place identify BMPs that could be implemented along with a schedule for implementation. In year 1, develop procedures for determining TSS and TP treatment effectiveness of city owned ponds used for treatment of stonnwater. Implement schedule in year 2 -5. 5. Does discharge from your MS4 affect a Source Water Protection Area (Permit Part III.D.6.c.)? ® Yes ❑ No a. If no, continue to 6. a. If yes, the Minnesota Department of Health (.413H) is is tha process of mapping the following items. Maps are available at hftp: / /www.health. state. mn. us / divs /eh/water /swp /mapsAndex.htm. Is a map including the following items available for your MS4: 1) Wells and source waters for drinking water supply management areas identified as ® Yes ❑ No vulnerable under Minn. R. 4720.5205, 4720.5210, and 4720.5330? 2) Source water protection areas for. surface intakes identified in the source water ❑ Yes ® No assessments conducted by or for the Minnesota Department of Health under the federal www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in altemative formats . . ._ ....... n___ .o _c �n This BMP will be revised to incorporate the City's current system for priotitizing maintenance. The Public Works Director will retain all records of inspection, maintenance, and corrective actions of the City's storm water system. Records will be available, by request, to the public Documentation Procedures upon approval by the Public Works Director. The City will retain records of inspection results and any maintenance performed or recommended. After 2 years of inspections, if patterns of maintenance become apparent, the frequency of inspections may be adjusted at the discretion of the Public Works Director given the following conditions are fulfilled: 1. If maintenance or sediment removal is required as a result of each of the first two annual inspections, the frequency of inspection shall be increased to at least two (2) times annually or more frequently as needed to prevent cant' -over or washout of pollutants from structures and maximize pollutant removal. If maintenance or sediment removal is not required as a result of both of the first two (2) annual inspections, the frequency may Evaluation of Inspection Frequency be reduced to once every two 2 ears. The City will annually review and, if necessary, adjust its current practices in the use of fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide application, mowing and discharge operations, grass clipping Landscaping and Lawn Care Practices Review collection, mulching and composting. The City will review the practices and policies of road salt applications such as alternative products, calibration of Road Salt Application Review equipment, ins ection of vehicles and staff training. The City constructed backwash recycle tanks at water treatment plants #2, #3, and #4. Backwash water recycle tanks will collect the backwash water, which now flows to the storm water system. The backwash water will stay in the tanks until the suspended solids settle out, then will be retreated and put into the potable water supply. The settled solids will be discharged to the sanitary sewer system. Each plant will have an emergency overflow point in the recycling tanks, which will enter the same storm sewer system to which each plant currently discharges. The overflow points will be locked controlled Backwash Recycle Tanks discharges. BMP categories to be implemented Develop Spill Prevention & Control Plans for Municipal Facilities Facility Inventory Pond Assessment Procedures & Schedule Measurable goals and timeframes Develop plans describing spill prevention and control procedures by the end of Year 1. Conduct annual spill prevention and response training sessions to all municipal employees. Distribute education materials, i.e. posters and pamphlets, to each municipal facility by the end of year 2. The City has created a map of all identified facilities and along with BMPs being used to control pollutants. Where BMPs are not in place identify BMPs that could be implemented along with a schedule for implementation. In year 1, develop procedures for determining TSS and TP treatment effectiveness of city owned ponds used for treatment of stonnwater. Implement schedule in year 2 -5. 5. Does discharge from your MS4 affect a Source Water Protection Area (Permit Part III.D.6.c.)? ® Yes ❑ No a. If no, continue to 6. a. If yes, the Minnesota Department of Health (.413H) is is tha process of mapping the following items. Maps are available at hftp: / /www.health. state. mn. us / divs /eh/water /swp /mapsAndex.htm. Is a map including the following items available for your MS4: 1) Wells and source waters for drinking water supply management areas identified as ® Yes ❑ No vulnerable under Minn. R. 4720.5205, 4720.5210, and 4720.5330? 2) Source water protection areas for. surface intakes identified in the source water ❑ Yes ® No assessments conducted by or for the Minnesota Department of Health under the federal www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651 - 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in altemative formats . . ._ ....... n___ .o _c �n Safe Drinking Water Act, U.S.C. §§ 300j —13? C. Have you developed and implemented BMPs to protect any of the above drinking water ® Yes ❑ No sources? 6. Have you developed procedures and a schedule for the purpose of determining the TSS and ❑ Yes ® No TP treatment effectiveness of all permittee owned /operated ponds constructed and used for the collection and treatment of stormwater, according to the Permit (Part III.D.6.d.)? 7. Do you have inspection procedures that meet the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.(1)- ❑ Yes ® No (3)) for structural stormwater BMPs, ponds and outfalls, and stockpile, storage and material handling areas? 8. Have you developed and implemented a stormwater management training program commensurate with each employee's job duties that: a. Addresses the importance of protecting water quality? ❑ Yes ® No b. Covers the requirements of the permit relevant to the duties of the employee? ❑ Yes ® No c. Includes a schedule that establishes initial training for new and /or seasonal employees and ❑ Yes ® No recurring training intervals for existing employees to address changes in procedures, practices, techniques, or requirements? 9. Do you keep documentation of inspections, maintenance, and training as required by the Permit ❑ Yes ® No (Part III.D.6.h.(1) -(5))? If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements listed in Questions 5 — 9, then describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: F.5.b.2): The City of Edina does not have any known surface water intakes. F. 6.: The City completed a non - degradation evaluation during the previous permit in 2007. The City will use this information to develop a procedure for assessing ponds to determine TSS and TP effectiveness as described in the Permit (Part III. D. 6. d). A schedule will be implemented in years 2 thru 5. F. 7.: The City will develop written procedures for inspection of structural stormwater BMPs, ponds and outfalls, and stockpile, storage and material handling areas as described in the Permit (Part III.D.6.f.). Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. F. 8.: The City will develop and implement a stormwater management training program to commensurate with each employees job duties as described in the Permit (Part M. D. 6.g.). Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. F.9: The City will develop written procedures to document inspections, mainenance, and training as described in the Permit (Part M.D.6.h.). Procedures will be in place within 12 months following the date permit coverage is extended. 10. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and /or coordinating this MCM: Brian Olson, Public Works Director VI. Compliance Schedule for an Approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) with an Applicable Waste Load Allocation (WLA) (Part II.D.6.) A. Do you have an approved TMDL with a Waste Load Allocation (WLA) prior to the effective date ® Yes [:]No of the Permit? 1. If no, continue to section VII. 2. If yes, fill out and attach the MS4 Permit TMDL Attachment Spreadsheet with the following naming convention: MS4NameHere TMDL. This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: htto: //www.pca.state.mn.us /ms4. Vll. Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems (Part II.D.7.) A. Do you own and /or operate any Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems which ❑ Yes ® No are regulated by this Permit (Part III.F.)? 1. If no, this section requires no further information. 2. If yes, you own and /or operate an Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment System within your small MS4, then you must submit the Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems Form supplement to this document, with the following naming www.pca.state.mn.us • 651 - 296 -6300 • 800 - 657 -3864 TTY 651- 282 -5332 or 800 - 657 -3864 • Available in alternative formats .#1,4.A0n - 4121112 Dn 10 of 7n convention: MS4NameHere TreatmentSystem. This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: http: / /www.pca.state.mn.us /ms4. VIII. Add any Additional Comments to Describe Your Program www:pca.state.mn : us • 651-296-6300. TTY 651- 282 -5332 or 800 657- 3864 Available in alternative formats wq= strin4 -49a ,• 5131 113 Page 20 of 20 Memorandum To: Laura Adler, City of Edina From: Jesse Carlson Dater 1215113 Re: MS4 General Permit Update WSB Project No. 2092 -650 Overview The City of Edina is classified as a city regulated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agencies (MPCA) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). program. This program began in 2003 and continues on in five year permit cycles. At the end of each permit cycle the MPCA has revised the program to be more restrictive. The current permit term will run from August 1, 2013 to July 31, 2018. The City is required to submit an application for reauthorization by December 30, 2013. The'MS4 program requires municipalities to develop Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are_ designed to reduce pollutants associated with stormwater runoff. The BMPs need to address each of the following major program components, which are known as Minimum Control Measures.(MCMs). • -MCM 1: Public education and outreach • MCM 2: Public participation • MCM 3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination. Illicit discharges are non - stormwater discharges such as illegal dumping of hazardous wastes, dog droppings, or illegal connections into the storm sewer, etc. • MCM 4: Construction -site runoff controls • 'MCM 5: Post - construction runoff controls • MCM 6: Pollution prevention and municipal "good housekeeping" measures (covering salt piles and street - sweeping, etc.) Program Changes The following summarizes each of the major program changes that will need to be met as the City of Edina revises their MS4 program. MCM 1: • Prioritized education activities (areas wit cut stormwater treatment, area discharg i ng to waterbodies that have degraded water quality) • Educating the public on illicit discharge (non - stormwater discharge) recognition and reporting • Documentation of specific information. related to this MCM St. Cloud • Minneapolis • St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com x :e2092-65owdmi.ND«,IswaPFeAS4 aoS— upm s.-y_12"13.a. /�. [- // SB && Assac- engineering- planning- environmental. construction 417 Temperance Street St Paul, MN 55101 Tel: 651 - 2864450 'Fax: 651 - 286 -8488 Memorandum To: Laura Adler, City of Edina From: Jesse Carlson Dater 1215113 Re: MS4 General Permit Update WSB Project No. 2092 -650 Overview The City of Edina is classified as a city regulated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agencies (MPCA) Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4). program. This program began in 2003 and continues on in five year permit cycles. At the end of each permit cycle the MPCA has revised the program to be more restrictive. The current permit term will run from August 1, 2013 to July 31, 2018. The City is required to submit an application for reauthorization by December 30, 2013. The'MS4 program requires municipalities to develop Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are_ designed to reduce pollutants associated with stormwater runoff. The BMPs need to address each of the following major program components, which are known as Minimum Control Measures.(MCMs). • -MCM 1: Public education and outreach • MCM 2: Public participation • MCM 3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination. Illicit discharges are non - stormwater discharges such as illegal dumping of hazardous wastes, dog droppings, or illegal connections into the storm sewer, etc. • MCM 4: Construction -site runoff controls • 'MCM 5: Post - construction runoff controls • MCM 6: Pollution prevention and municipal "good housekeeping" measures (covering salt piles and street - sweeping, etc.) Program Changes The following summarizes each of the major program changes that will need to be met as the City of Edina revises their MS4 program. MCM 1: • Prioritized education activities (areas wit cut stormwater treatment, area discharg i ng to waterbodies that have degraded water quality) • Educating the public on illicit discharge (non - stormwater discharge) recognition and reporting • Documentation of specific information. related to this MCM St. Cloud • Minneapolis • St. Paul Equal Opportunity Employer wsbeng.com x :e2092-65owdmi.ND«,IswaPFeAS4 aoS— upm s.-y_12"13.a. City of Edina December 5, 2013 Page 2 MCM 2 • . One opportunity annually for public input (vs. public meeting as only option) • Documentation of specific information related, to this MCM MCM 3 • Written Enforcement Response. Procedures - • Stormwater Sewer System Map updated to include pipes 12" or greater and map outfalls • Incorporation of illicit discharge inspections into other municipal activities • Training of all field staff in illicit discharge, recognition and reporting • Identification of priority areas for: illicit discharge detection (industrial areas) Procedures for investigating, locating and eliminating illicit discharges. • Spill response procedures • Documentation of specific information related to this MCM MCM 4 • Written Enforcement Response Procedures • Erosion, sediment and waste control program as stringent as State NPDES requirements for sites with' 1 acre or greater in disturbance • Written procedures for site plan reviews (checklists, review timeframes, etc) • Written procedures for receipt of public input • Written procedures for site inspections (inspection checklist) • Documentation of specific information related to this MCM (documenting inspections, etc) MCM 5 • Written Enforcement Response Procedures • Regulatory mechanism for managing runoff volumes, Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and Total Phosphorus (TP) for sites I acre or greater • Local programs must include prohibitions and limitations with regard to infiltrating stormwater • Mitigation requirements when TSS and Phosphorus cannot be managed on -site • Legal mechanisms to ensure long-term maintenance of BMPs • Written procedures for site plan reviews • Documentation of specific information related to this MCM MCM 6 • Inventory of facilities that contribute pollutants to stormwater discharges • Procedures and schedule to determine TSS and TP treatment effectiveness of stormwater ponds (procedures will help prioritize maintenance) • Quarterly inspections of stockpile /storage.and material handling areas • Documentation of specific information related to this MCM Enclosed Document • MS4 Application for Reauthorization — Communicates to MCPA how City will address new permit requirements K:`02092650\AdminlDoalS WPPNMS4 Program Updaw Summwy_120413.dw EXAMPLE MEMORANDUM of UNDERSTANDING Between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City of for Local Water Planning and Regulation This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is made by and between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, a watershed district with purposes and powers as set forth at Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D ( "MCWD "), and the City of , a body corporate and politic and a statutory city in the State of Minnesota ( "City"). Recitals and Statement of Purpose WHEREAS in 2007, the MCWD revised its comprehensive watershed management plan under Minnesota Statutes § 103B.231, which details the existing physical environment, land use and development in the watershed and establishes a plan to regulate water resource use and management to protect water resources, improve water quality, prevent flooding and otherwise achieve the goals of Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D; WHEREAS the MCWD's comprehensive watershed management plan incorporates the Rules adopted by the MCWD to protect water resources, improve water quality, prevent flooding and otherwise achieve the goals of Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D; WHEREAS the City has developed a local water management plan under Minnesota Statutes § 103B.235 that describes the existing and proposed physical environment and land use within the City and sets forth an implementation plan for bringing local water management into conformance with the MCWD's comprehensive watershed management plan; WHEREAS on , the MCWD Board of Managers conditionally approved the City's local water management plan by adoption of Resolution , which resolution is attached and incorporated herein; WHEREAS the City wishes to continue to authorize MCWD permitting authority with respect to all areas regulated by the MCWD including the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act; WHEREAS MCWD approval of a local plan requires a finding that the official controls of the local government are at least as protective of water resources as the MCWD Rules; WHEREAS the finding by the MCWD Board of Managers in this regard rests on the City's authorization of the MCWD's continued exercise of regulatory authority within the City in accordance with Minnesota Statutes §103B.211, subdivision 1(a)(3); WHEREAS the MCWD and City desire to memorialize their respective roles in implementing water resource protection and management within the City; NOW THEREFORE it is mutually agreed by and between the parties that they enter into this MOU in order to document the understanding of the parties as to the roles and. responsibilities of each party. 1.0 Responsibilities of the City 1.1 The City may exercise all present and future authority it otherwise may possess to issue permits for and regulate activities affecting water resources within the City. 1.2 The City will meet at least annually with the MCWD to review the implementation of the City's local water management plan: , 1.3 Annually, by the date specified for the City's submittal of its annual report under its NPDES municipal stormwater permit, the City will submit to the MCWD at concise but specific report describing: a. Progress on the local water management plan implementation program. b. Progress on meeting phosphorus load reduction requirements of the WMP. c. Any adjustments to the implementation and/or capital improvement program in the local water management plan. d. A listing, with further specific information as the MCWD may request, of grading and structural alterations approved or, occurring within city boundaries since the last annual report (both private and public alterations) that could measurably affect hydraulic and hydrologic model outcomes. The City may incorporate its annual report into, its NPDES MS4 annual report, provided it addresses the above items with specificity. 2.0 Responsibilities of the M1V M D 2.1 The MCWD will continue to apply and enforce its Rules, as they may be amended from time to time, within the City. 12 The MCWD will meet with the City at least annually to review the implementation of the City's local water management plan, addressing at,a minimum the following topics: 1. Maintenance of up -to -date water quality measures, such as concentrations of Phosphorus, in the City's local water management plan; 2. The City's progress toward. Implementation Program/CIP items; 3. Utilizing: street sweeping to meet MCWD` Phosphorus Loading Reduction goals, and specifically the progress of the City toward testing phosphorus concentrations in sweepings and utilizing that knowledge for effective sweeping. 2.3 The MCWD retains all authority that it may possess under Minnesota Statutes Chapters 103B and 103D or any other provision of law, except as explicitly reposed in the City under this 2 MOU, including but not limited to authority set forth at Minnesota Statutes § §103B.211, subdivision 1(a); 103D.335 and 103D.341. 3.0 General 3.1 The MOU is effective on the date that it has been executed by both parties, will remain in effect for five years, and will be extended automatically for five -year terms unless terminated by agreement of the parties. Notwithstanding, the City will continue to be subject to applicable statutes and rules requiring that it revise its local water management plan in response to MCWD revisions of the WMP. 3.2 This MOU may be amended only by a writing signed by both parties. 3.3 This MOU does, not affect the rights and duties of the parties under the March 24, 2008 Joint Powers Agreement signed by the MCWD and the City of Shorewood, which remains in force and effect according to its terms. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Memorandum of Understanding. CITY OF By Mayor By City Manager Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION Its Attorney MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT LIZ President, Board of Managers Date: .1192 11A4 .' &12Eel11419&lad1�7 EXECUTION By Its Attorney M EXAMPLE ORDINANCE CITY OF COUNTY OF .. STATE OF MINNESOTA ILLICIT DISCHARGE AND CONNECTION STORMWATER ORDINANCE The City Council ordains as follows: Sec. 35 -1. Purpose/lntent. The purpose-of this ordinance is to provide for the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City of through the regulation of non -storm water discharges to the storm drainage system to the maximum extent practicable as required by federal and state law. This ordinance establishes methods for controlling the introduction of pollutants into the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) in order to comply with requirements of the National. Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process. The objectives of this ordinance are: (a), To regulate the contribution of pollutants to the municipal separate storm sewer. system:(MS4) by stormwater discharges by any user. (b) To prohibit illicit connections and discharges to the municipal separate storm sewer system. (c) To establish legal authority to carry out all inspection, surveillance and monitoring procedures necessary to. ensure compliance with this ordinance. Sec. 35 -2. , -Definitions. For the purposes of this ordinance, the following shall mean: Authorized Enforcement Agency: the City of Best Management:Practices. (BMPs): schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, general good'house keeping practices, pollution prevention and educational practices, maintenance procedures, and`other management practices to prevent or reduce the discharge of pollutants directly or indirectly to stormwater, receiving waters, or stori-r�water conveyance systems. BMPs also include treatment practices, operating procedures, and practices to control site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or water disposal; or drainage from raw materials storage. Clean Water Act: The federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.), and any subsequent amendments thereto. Construction Activity: Activities subject to NPDES Construction Permits. These include construction projects resulting in land disturbance of one acre or more. Such activities include but are not limited to clearing and grubbing, grading, excavating, and demolition. Hazardous Materials: Any material, including any substance, waste, or combination thereof, which because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics may cause, or significantly contribute to, a substantial present or potential hazard to human health, safety, property, or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. Illegal Discharge: Any direct or indirect non -storm water discharge to the storm drain system, except as exempted in this ordinance. Illicit Connections: An illicit connection is defined as any drain or conveyance, whether on the surface or subsurface, which allows an illegal discharge to enter the storm drain system including but not limited to any conveyances which allow any non -storm water discharge including sewage, process wastewater, and wash water to enter the storm drain system and any connections to the storm drain system from indoor drains and sinks, regardless of whether said drain or connection had been previously allowed, permitted, or approved by an authorized enforcement agency or, any drain or conveyance connected from a commercial or industrial land use to the storm drain system which has not been documented in plans, maps, or equivalent records and approved by an authorized enforcement agency. Industrial Activity: Activities subject to NPDES Industrial Permits as defined in 40 CFR, Section 122.26 (b)(14). National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) Storm Water Discharge Permit: means a permit issued by EPA (or by a State under authority delegated pursuant to 33 USC § 1342 (b)) that authorizes the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States, whether the permit is applicable on an individual group, or general area -wide basis. Non -Storm Water Discharge: Any discharge to the storm drain system that is not composed entirely of storm water. Person: means any individual, association, organization, partnership, firm, corporation or other entity recognized by law and action as either the owner or as the owner's agent. Pollutant: Anything which causes or contributes to pollution. Pollutants may include, but are not limited to: paints, varnishes, and solvents; oil and other automotive fluids; non - hazardous liquid and solid wastes and yard wastes; refuse, rubbish, garbage, litter, or other discarded or abandoned objects, pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers; hazardous substances and wastes and residues that result from constructing a building or structure; and noxious or offensive matter of any kind. Premises:. Any building, lot, parcel of land, or portion of land whether improved or unimproved including adjacent sidewalks and. parking strips. Storm Drain System: Publicly -owned facilities by which storm water is collected and/or conveyed, including but not limited to any roads with drainage systems, municipal streets,�gutters, curbs,,Wets,. piped storm drains, pumping facilities, retention and detention basins, 'natural -and human=made or altered drainage channels, reservoirs, and other drainage structures. Storm Water: Any surface flow, runoff, and drainage consisting entirely of water from any form of natural precipitation, and resulting from such precipitation. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan: A document which describes the Best Management Practices and activities to be implemented by a person or business to identify sources of pollution or contamination at. a site and the actions to eliminate or reduce pollutant discharges to stormwater, stormwater conveyance systems, and/or receiving waters to the maximum extent practicable. Wastewater: means any water or other liquid, other than uncontaminated storm water, discharged from a facility. Sec. 35 -3. Applicability. This ordinance shall apply to all water entering the storm drain system generated on any developed or undeveloped lands unless explicitly exempted by an authorized enforcement agency. Sec. 35 -4. Responsibility for Administration. The authorized enforcement agency shall administer, implement, and enforce the provisions of this, ordinance. Any powers granted or duties imposed upon the authorized enforcement agency maybe delegated in writing by the Director of the authorized enforcement. agency to persons or entities acting in the beneficial interest of or in the employ of the agency. Sec. 35 -5. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. If any provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph cf this Ordinance or. the application thereof to any person, establishment, or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions or application of this Ordinance. Sec. 35 -6. Ultimate Responsibility. The standards set forth herein and promulgated pursuant to this ordinance and minimum standards; therefore this ordinance does not intend or imply that compliance by any person will ensure that there will be no contamination, pollution, nor unauthorized discharge of pollutants. Sec. 35 -7. Discharge Prohibitions. (a) Prohibition of Illegal Discharges. No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged into the municipal storm drain system or watercourses any materials, including but not limited to pollutants or waters containing any pollutants that cause or contribute to a violation of applicable water quality standards, other than storm water. The commencement, conduct or continuance of any illegal discharge to the storm drain system is prohibited except as described as follows: (1) The following discharges are exempt from discharge prohibitions established by this ordinance: water line flushing or other potable water sources, landscape irrigation or lawn watering, diverted stream flows, rising ground water, ground water infiltration to storm drains, uncontaminated pumped ground water, foundation or footing drains (not including active groundwater dewatering systems), crawl space pumps, air conditioning condensation, springs, noncommercial washing of vehicles, natural riparian habitat or wet -land flows, swimming pools (if dechlorinated — typically less than one PPM chlorine), fire fighting activities, and any other water source not containing pollutants. (2) Discharges specified in writing by the authorized enforcement agency as being necessary to protect public health and safety. (3) Dye testing is an allowable discharge, but requires a verbal notification to the authorized enforcement agency prior to the time of the test. (4) The prohibition shall not apply to any non -storm water discharge permitted under an NPDES permit, waiver, or waste discharge order issued to the discharger and administered under the authority of the Federal Environmental Protection Agency, provided that the discharger is in full compliance with all requirements of the permit, waiver, or order and other applicable laws and regulations, and provided that written approval has been granted for any discharge to the storm drain system. (b) Prohibition of Illicit Connections (1) The construction, use, maintenance or continued existence of illicit connections to the storm drain system is prohibited. (2) This prohibition expressly includes, without limitation, illicit connections made in the past, regardless' of whether the connection was permissible under law or practices applicable or prevailing at the time of the connection. (3) A.person is considered.to be in violation of this ordinance if the person, connects acline conveying sewage to the MS4, or allows such a connection to continue. Sec. 35 -8. Suspension of MS4 Access. (a) Suspension due to illicit discharges in emergency situations. The City Council -may, without prior notice, suspend MS4 discharge access to a.person when'such-suspension is necessary to stop an actual or threatened discharge which presents or, may present - imminent and substantial danger to the environment; or to the health or welfare of persons, or to the MS4 or Waters of the-United States. If the violator fails to comply with a suspension order issued in an emergency, the authorized enforcement agency may take such steps as deemed necessary to prevent or minimize damage to the MS4 or Waters of the United States, or to minimize danger to persons. (b) Suspension due to the detection of illicit discharge. Any person discharging to the MS4 in violation of this ordinance may have their MS4 access terminated if such termination would abate or reduce an illicit discharge. The.authorized enforcement agency will notify a violator of the proposed termination of its MS4 access. The violator may petition the authorized' enforcement agency for reconsideration and a hearing. A person commits an offense if the person reinstates MS4 access to premises terminated pursuant -to this Section, without the prior approval of the authorized: enforcement agency. Sec. 35 -9. Industrial or Construction Activity Discharges. Any person subject to an industrial;or construction activity NPDES storm water discharge permit shall comply with all provisions of such permit. Proof of compliance with said permit may be required in a form acceptable to the City Council prior to the allowing of dischargesao the MS4. Sec. 35 -10. Monitoring of Discharges. (a) Applicability. This section applies to all facilities that have storm water discharges associated with industrial activity, including construction activity. (b) Access to Facilities. (1) The authorized enforcement agency shall be permitted to enter and inspect facilities subject to regulation under this ordinance as often as may be necessary to determine compliance with this ordinance. If a discharger has security measures in force which require proper identification and clearance before entry into its premises, the discharger shall make the necessary arrangements to allow access to representatives of the authorized enforcement agency. (2) Facility operators shall allow the authorized enforcement agency ready access to all parts of the premises for the purposes of inspection, sampling, examination and copying of records that must be kept under the conditions of an NPDES permit to discharge storm water, and the performance of any additional duties as defined by state and federal law. (3) The authorized enforcement agency shall have the right to set up on any permitted facility such devises as are necessary in the opinion of the authorized enforcement agency to conduct monitoring and/or sampling of the facility's storm water discharge. (4) The authorized enforcement agency has the right to require the discharger to install monitoring equipment as necessary. The facility's sampling and monitoring equipment shall be maintained at all times in a safe and proper operating condition by the discharger at its own expense. All devises used to measure stormwater flow and quality shall be calibrated to ensure their accuracy. (5) Any temporary or permanent obstruction to safe and easy access to the facility to be inspected and/or sampled shall be promptly removed by the operator at the written or oral request of the authorized enforcement agency and shall not be replaced. The costs of clearing such access shall be borne by the operator. (6) Unreasonable delays in allowing the authorized enforcement agency access to a permitted facility is a violation of a storm water discharge permit and of this ordinance. A person who is the operator of the facility with a NPDES permit to discharge storm water associated with industrial activity commits an offense if the person denies the authorized enforcement agency reasonable access to the permitted facility for the purpose of conducting any activity authorized or required by this ordinance. (7) If the authorized enforcement agency has been refused access to any part of the premises from which stormwater is discharged, and the City is able to demonstrate probable cause to believe that there may be a violation of this ordinance, or that there is a need to inspect and/or sample as; part of a routine inspection and sampling. program designed to' verify compliance with this ordinance or,any order issued hereunder, or to protect the overall public health, safety and welfare of the community, then the authorized enforcement agency may seek issuance of a search warrant from any court.of competent jurisdiction. Sec. 35 -11. Requirement to prevent, control, and reduce storm water pollutants by the use of best management practices. The City will adopt requirements identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) of any activity, operation, or facility which may cause. or contribute to pollution or contamination of storm water, the storm drain system, or waters of the U.S. The owner or operator of a.coinmercial or industrial establishment shall provide, at their own expense, reasonable protection from accidental discharge of prohibited materials or other wastes into the.municipal storm drain system or watercourses through the use of these structural: and non- structural BMPs. Further, 'any person responsible for a property or premise, which is; or may be, the source of an illicit discharge, way be required to implement, at said person's expense, additional structural and non - structural BMPs to prevent the farther discharge of pollutants to the municipal separate storm sewer system. Compliance with all terms and conditions of a valid NPDES permit authorizing the discharge of storm water associated with industrial activity, to the extent practicable, shall be deemed compliant with the provisions of this section. These BMPs shall be part of a storm water pollution prevention plan (S)APP) as necessary for compliance with requirements of the NPDES permit. Sec. 35 -12. Watercourse Protection. Every person owning property through which a watercourse passes; or such person's lessee; shall keep and maintain that. part of the Watercourse within.the property free of trash, debris, excessive vegetation, and other obstacles that would pollute, contaminate, or significantly retard the flow of water through the watercourse. In addition, the owner or lessee shall maintain existing privately owned structures Within or adjacent to a watercourse, so that such structures will not become a hazard. to the use, function, or physical integrity'of the watercourse. Sec. 35 -13. Notification of Spills. Notwithstanding other requirements of law, as soon as any. person responsible for a facility or operation, or responsible for emergency response for a facility or operation has information of any known or suspected release of materials which are resulting or may result in illegal discharges or pollutants discharging into storm water, the storm drain system, or water of the U.S. said person shall take all necessary steps to ensure the discovery, containment, and cleanup of such release. In the event of such a release of hazardous materials said person shall immediately notify emergency response agencies of the occurrence via emergency dispatch services. In the event of a release of non - hazardous materials, said person shall notify the authorized enforcement agency in person or by phone or facsimile no later than the next business day. Notifications in person or by phone shall be confirmed by written notice addressed and mailed to the City within three business days of the phone notice. If the discharge of prohibited materials emanates from a commercial or industrial establishment, the owner or operator of such establishment shall also retain an on -site written record of the discharge and the actions taken to prevent its recurrence. Such records shall be retained for at least three years. Sec. 35-14. Enforcement. (a) Notice of Violation Whenever the City finds that a person has violated a prohibition or failed to meet a requirement of this Ordinance, the authorized enforcement agency may order compliance by written notice of violation to the responsible person. Such notice may require without limitation: (1) The performance of monitoring, analysis, and reporting; (2) The elimination of illicit connections or discharges; (3) That violating discharges, practices, or operations shall cease and desist; (4) The abatement or remediation of storm water pollution or contamination hazards and the restoration of any affected property; (5) Payment of a fine to cover administrative and remediation costs; (6) The implementation of source control or treatment BMPs. If abatement of a violation and/or restoration of affected property is required, the notice shall set forth a deadline within which such remediation or restoration must be completed. Said notice shall further advise that, should the violator fail to remediate or restore within the established deadline, the work will be done by a designated governmental agency or a contractor and the expense thereof shall be charged to the violator. Sec. 35 -15. Enforcement Measures after Appeal. If the violation had not been corrected pursuant to the requirements set forth in the Notice of Violation, or, in the event of an appeal, within 15 days of the decision of the municipal authority upholding the decision of the authorized enforcement agency, then representatives of the authorized enforcement agency shall enter upon the subject private property and-are authorized to take any and all measures necessary to abate the violation and/or restore the property. It shall be unlawful for any,person, owner, agent or person in possession of any premises to refuse to allow 1. the government agency or designated contractor to enter upon the premises for the purposes set forth above. Sec. 35 -16. Cost of Abatement of the Violation. Within 30' days after. abatement of the violation, the owner of the property will be , notified of the cost of abatement, including administrative costs. The property owner may file a written protest objecting to the amount of the assessment within 15 days. If the amount due is not paid within a timelymanner as determined by the decision of the municipal authority, the charges shall become a special assessment against the property and shall constitute a lien on the property for the amount of the assessment. Any person violating any of the provisions of this article shall become liable to the City by reason of such violation. Sec. 35 -17. Injunctive Relief. It shall be unlawful for any person to violate any provision or fail to comply with any of the requirements of this ordinance. If a person has violated and continues to violate the provisions of this ordinance, the authorized enforcement agency may petition for a preliminary or permanent injunction restraining the person from activities which would create further violations or compelling the person to perform abatement or remediation of the violation. Sec. 35 -18. Compensatory Action. In lieu of enforcement proceedings, penalties, and remedies authorized by this. Ordinance, the authorized enforcement agency may impose upon aL violator alternative compensatory actions, such as storm drain stenciling, attendance at compliance workshops, creek cleanup, etc. Sec. 35 -19. Violations deemed a Public Nuisance. In addition to the enforcement processes and penalties provided, any condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is a threat to public health, safety, and welfare, and is declared and deemed a nuisance, and may be summarily abated or restored at the violator's expense, and/or a civil action to abate, enjoin, or otherwise compel the cessation of such nuisance may be taken. Sec. 35 -20. Criminal Prosecution. Any person that has violated or continues to violate this ordinance 'shall be liable to criminal prosecution to the fullest extent of the law, and shall be subject to a criminal penalty of $1,000.00 dollars per violation per day.'and/or imprisonment for a period of time not to.exceed 90 days. The authorized enforcement agency may recover all attorney's fees, court costs, and other expenses associated with enforcement of this ordinance, including sampling and monitoring expenses. This ordinance shall become effective following its passage and publication as requited by law. Additions: Add Deletions Delete Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk First Reading: Second Reading: Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement EXAMPLE ORDINANCE Section 828.33, Stormwater Management Subd. 1. Purpose Land development projects, and associated increases in impervious cover, alter the hydrologic response of local watersheds. Increases in stormwater runoff rates and volumes, flooding, erosion, sediment transport and deposition, and water -borne pollutants can be controlled and minimized through the regulation of stormwater runoff. The purpose of this ordinance is to protect and safeguard the health, safety, and welfare of the public by regulating stormwater runoff in order to protect local water resources from degradation. This ordinance seeks to meet this purpose through the following objectives: (a) minimize increases in stormwater runoff rates from any development in order to reduce flooding, siltation and erosion and in order to maintain the integrity of stream channels, (b) minimize increases in nonpoint source pollution caused by stormwater runoff from development which would otherwise degrade local water quality, (c) minimize the total annual volume of surface water runoff that flows from any specific site during and following development so as not to exceed the predevelopment hydrologic regime to the maximum extent practicable, (d) ensure that these management controls are properly maintained and pose no threat to public safety, and (e) implement stormwater management controls to help meet current and future total maximum daily load (TMDL) goals, to address the need to improve water quality, and to meet objectives in the Local Surface Water Management Plan. Subd. 2. Incorporation by Reference The Medina Stormwater Design Manual, dated November 15, 2011, as it may be amended from time to time, is hereby incorporated into this ordinance as if fully set forth herein. The Manual shall serve as the official guide for stormwater principles, methods, and practices for proposed development activities. Subd. 3. Definitions For the purpose of this ordinance, the following definitions describe the meaning of the terms used in this ordinance: (a) "Applicant" means a property owner or agent of a property owner who has filed an application for a stormwater management approval. (b) "Channel" means a natural or artificial watercourse with a definite bed and banks that conducts continuously or periodically flowing water. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement :ity Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement (c) "Impervious Area" means those surfaces that cannot effectively infiltrate rainfall (e.g., building rooftops, pavement, sidewalks, gravel, driveways, swimming pools, etc.). (d) "Land Disturbance Activity" means any activity that changes the volume or peak discharge rate of stormwater runoff from the land surface. This may include the grading, digging, cutting, scraping, or excavating of soil, placement of fill materials, paving, construction, substantial removal of vegetation, or any activity that bares soil or rock or involves the diversion or piping of any natural or fabricated watercourse. (e) "Maintenance Agreement" means document recorded against the property which provides for long -term maintenance of stormwater treatment practices. (f) "Major Expansion Project" means any construction, alteration, or improvement which disturbs one acre or more in area or which increases the Impervious Area by one -half acre or more and where the existing land use is commercial, industrial, institutional, or multi - family residential. For the purposes of this section, the area of disturbance when repaving or reclaiming an existing paved surface shall only include those areas where soil beneath the existing gravel base is disturbed. (g) "Major Single - family Residential Project" means: (i) Any subdivision, as defined by law, which result in one or two additional single - family detached lots; or (ii) Any construction, alteration, or improvement which: 1) disturbs one acre or more in area and increases Impervious Area by more than 1,000 square feet; or 2) increases Impervious Area by more than 5,000 square feet. (h) "Minor Expansion Project" means any construction, alteration, or improvement which increases the Impervious Area by more than 5,000 square feet and less than one -half acre where the existing land use is commercial, industrial, institutional, or multi - family residential. (i) "New Development" means: (i) Any subdivision, as defined by law. For the purposes of this section, a subdivision creating less than three new single - family detached lots shall not be considered New Development, but should instead be considered a Major Single - family Residential Project. (ii) Construction of a principal structure on an existing vacant lot. For the purposes of this section, construction of a detached single - family home shall not be considered New Development. (iii) Redevelopment of a property which results in the removal of more than 50 percent of the market value of the principal structure and such removal is followed by reconstruction. For the purposes of this section, redevelopment of a single - family detached home shall not be considered New Development. (j) "Nonpoint Source Pollution" means pollution from any source other than from any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyances, and shall include, but not be limited to, pollutants from agricultural, silvicultura:, mining, construction, subsurface disposal and urban runoff sources. (k) "Off -Site Facility" means a stormwater management measure located outside the subject property boundary described in the permit application for land development activity. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement 'ity Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement (1) "Responsible Party" means the entity which will be responsible for ownership and maintenance of Stormwater Treatment Practices. (m) "Site" means: (i) For New Development any tract, lot or parcel of land or combination of tracts, lots, or parcels of land, which are in one ownership, or are contiguous and in diverse ownership, where development is to be performed as part of a unit, subdivision, or project. (ii) For a Major Expansion Project, Minor Expansion Project or Major Single - family Residential Project the area of new construction, as shown on an approved site plan, or the original parcel. Final determination of the applicable area for stormwater management shall be made by the City. (n) "Stop Work Order" means an order which requires that all construction activity on a Site be stopped. (o) "Stormwater Management" means the use of structural or non - structural practices that are designed to reduce stormwater runoff pollutant loads, discharge volumes, and/or peak discharge rates. (p) " Stormwater Management Plan" means a set of drawings or other documents submitted by a person as a prerequisite to obtaining a stormwater management approval, which contains all of the required information and specifications pertaining to Stormwater Management. (q) " Stormwater Runoff' means flow on the surface of the ground, resulting from precipitation. (r) " Stormwater Treatment Practices (STPs)" means measures, either structural or nonstructural, that are determined to be the most effective and practical means of preventing or reducing point source or nonpoint - source pollution inputs to stormwater runoff and waterbodies. (s) "Water Quality Volume (WQ,)" means the runoff storage volume needed to treat the specified phosphorus loading as determined in the Medina Stormwater Design Manual. (t) "Watercourse" means a permanent or intermittent stream or other body of water, either natural or fabricated, which gathers or carries surface water. (u) "Watershed" means the total drainage area contributing runoff to a single point. Subd. 4. Applicability (a) This ordinance shall apply to the following circumstances: (i) New Development, as defined herein; (ii) Major Expansion Projects, as defined herein; (iii) Minor Expansion Projects, as defined herein; and (iv) Major Single - family Residential Projects, as defined herein. (b) The following activities shall be exempt from the stormwater performance criteria of this ordinance: (i) Agricultural activity. (ii) Repairs to any Stormwater Treatment Practice deemed necessary by the City. (iii) Emergency actions as declared by the City. (iv) Land Disturbance Activities which do not meet the thresholds described for New Development, Major or Minor Expansion Projects, or Major Single - family Residential Projects as described herein. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Subd. 5. Performance Criteria for Stormwater Management Unless determined by the City to be exempt or granted a waiver, all site designs shall establish Stormwater Management Practices to control the peak flow rates and pollutants of stormwater discharge associated with specified design storms and runoff volumes, as detailed in the Medina Stormwater Design Manual. (a) 'New Development: Rate Control, Volume Control, and Water Quality standards shall apply to all New Development. The City Council may waive strict adherence with Rate Control, Volume Control, and Water Quality standards for redevelopment and new development which results in less than one acre of Land Disturbance. Best management practices addressing the potential water resource impacts associated with the proposed activity shall be incorporated to limit creation of impervious surface, maintain or enhance on -site infiltration, control peak flow rates, and limit pollutant generation on and discharge from the Site. Best management practices may include site design and structural and non- structural practices. (b) Major Expansion Projects: Rate Control, Volume Control, and Water Quality standards shall apply to all Major Expansion Projects. (c) Minor Expansion Projects: Rate Control, Volume Control and Water Quality standards shall apply to all Minor Expansion Projects. As an alternative to meeting relevant Volume Control and Water Quality standards, an Applicant may install a raingarden or similar stormwater improvement as described in the Medina Stormwater Design Manual. Provisions shall also be required to control the rate of run -off if determined to be necessary by the City Engineer. (d) Major Single - family Residential Projects: Rate Control, Volume Control and Water Quality standards shall apply to all Major Single - family Residential Projects. As an alternative to meeting relevant Volume Control and Water Quality standards, an Applicant may install a raingarden or similar stormwater improvement as described in the Medina Stormwater Design Manual. Provisions shall also be required to control the rate of run -off if determined to be necessary by the City Engineer. Subd. 6. Approval Required Prior to Permit or Subdivision No landowner or land operator shall receive a building permit, grading permit, or subdivision approval for any project involving Land Disturbance Activities subject to this ordinance until first meeting the requirements of this ordinance prior to commencing the proposed activity. Subd. 7. Application Requirements Unless otherwise exempted by this ordinance, an application for stormwater management approval shall include the following as a condition for its consideration: (a) a Stormwater Management Plan; (b) a Maintenance Agreement. The Stormwater Management Plan shall be prepared to meet the requirements of Subd. 5 of this ordinance; the Maintenance Agreement shall be prepared to meet the 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement requirements of Subd. 10 of this ordinance. In lieu of preparation of a Stormwater Management Plan, Major Single - family Residential Projects and Minor Expansion Projects may install a raingarden or similar stormwater improvement as described in the City Stormwater Design Manual. Subd. 8. Application Requirements Applications shall include the following: five copies of the Stormwater Management Plan, three copies of the Maintenance Agreement, and any required review fees. Subd. 9. Waivers for Providing Stormwater Management Every Applicant shall provide for Stormwater Management, unless a waiver is granted. Requests to waive the Stormwater Management requirements shall be submitted to the City for approval. The minimum requirements for Stormwater Management may be waived in whole or in part upon written request of the Applicant, if the City determines that at least one of the following conditions applies: (a) It can be demonstrated that the proposed Land Disturbance Activity will not impair attainment of the objectives of this ordinance. (b) Alternative minimum requirements for on -site management of stormwater discharges have been established in a Stormwater Management Plan that has been approved by the City. (c) Provisions are made to manage stormwater by an Off -Site Facility. The Off -Site Facility is required to be in place, to be designed and adequately sized to provide a level of Stormwater Management that is equal to or greater than that which would be afforded by on -site practices and has a legally obligated entity responsible for long -term operation and maintenance of the stormwater treatment practice. In instances where at least one of the conditions above applies, the City may grant a waiver from strict compliance with Stormwater Management provisions that are not achievable, if acceptable mitigation measures are provided. Subd. 10. Stormwater Treatment Maintenance Plan and Agreement During the application process, the City shall determine who the Responsible Party will be for ownership and maintenance of all Stormwater Treatment Practices. The Responsible Party shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City that documents all responsibilities for operation and maintenance of all Stormwater Treatment Practices. Such responsibility shall be documented in a maintenance plan and executed through a Maintenance Agreement. The Maintenance Agreement shall be executed and recorded against the parcel. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement (a) Maintenance Agreement The stormwater Maintenance Agreement shall be in a form approved by the City, shall describe the inspection and maintenance obligations of this section and shall, at a minimum: (1) Designate the Responsible Party, which shall be permanently responsible for maintenance of the structural or nonstructural measures. (2) Pass responsibility for such maintenance to successors in title. (3) Grant the City and its representatives the right of entry for the purposes of inspecting all Stormwater Treatment Practices as described in Subd. 10(b) below. (4) Allow the City the right to repair and maintain the facility, if necessary maintenance is not performed after proper and reasonable notice to the Responsible Party as described in Subd. 10(d) below. (5) Include a maintenance plan that contains, but is not limited to the following: (i) Identification of all structural Stormwater Treatment Practices. (ii) A schedule for regular inspection, monitoring, and maintenance for�each practice. Monitoring shall verify whether the practice is functioning as designed and may include, but is not limited to quality, temperature, and quantity of runoff. (iii) Identification of the Responsible Party for conducting the inspection, monitoring, and maintenance for each practice. (6) Identify a schedule and format for reporting compliance with the Maintenance Plan to the City. (b) Inspection of Stormwater Facilities Inspection programs shall be established on any reasonable basis, including but not limited to: routine inspections; random inspections; inspections based upon complaints or other notice of possible violations; inspection of drainage basins or areas identified as higher than typical sources of sediment or other contaminants or pollutants; inspections of businesses or industries of a type associated with higher than usual discharges of contaminants or pollutants or with discharges of a type which are more likely than the typical discharge to cause violations of state or federal water or sediment quality standards or the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit; and joint inspections with other agencies inspecting under environmental or safety laws. Inspections may include, but are not limited to, reviewing maintenance and repair records; sampling discharges, surface water, groundwater, and material or water in drainage control facilities; and evaluating the condition of drainage control facilities and other stormwater treatment practices. When any new Stormwater Treatment Practice is installed on private property, or when any new connection is made between private property and a public drainage control system, sanitary sewer, or combined sewer; the property owner shall grant to the City the right to enter the property at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner for the purpose of inspection. This includes the right to enter a property when the City has a reasonable basis to 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement believe that a violation of this ordinance is occurring or has occurred, and to enter when necessary for abatement of a public nuisance or correction of a violation of this ordinance. (c) Records of Installation and Maintenance Activities The Responsible Party shall make records of the installation and of all maintenance and repairs of the stormwater treatment practices, and shall retain the records for at least three (3) years. These records shall be made available to the City during inspection of the Stormwater Treatment Practice and at other reasonable times upon request. (d) Failure to Maintain Practices If a Responsible Party fails or refuses to meet the requirements of the Maintenance Agreement, the City, after reasonable notice, may correct a violation of the design standards or maintenance needs by performing all necessary work to place the Stormwater Treatment Practice in proper working condition. In the event that the Stormwater Treatment Practice becomes a danger to public safety or public health, the City shall notify the Responsible Party in writing. Upon receipt of that notice, the Responsible Party shall have thirty days to perform maintenance and repair of the facility in an approved manner. After proper notice, the City may specially assess the owner(s) of the Stormwater Treatment Practice for the cost of repair work and any penalties; and the cost of the work shall be assessed against the property and collected along with ordinary taxes by the county. Subd. 11. Financial Security (a) The City shall require the submittal of a letter of credit or other financial security in a form acceptable to the City in order to insure that the Stormwater Treatment Practices are installed by the permit holder as required by the approved Stormwater Management Plan. The amount of the security shall be 150% of the total estimated construction cost of the Stormwater Treatment Practices approved, with the exception of Major Single - family Residential Projects, which shall be 50% of the total estimated construction cost. The performance security shall contain forfeiture provisions for failure to complete work specified in the Stormwater Management Plan. (b) The security shall be released in full only upon submission of "as built plans" and written certification by a registered professional engineer that the Stormwater Treatment Practice has been installed in accordance with the approved plan and other applicable provisions of this ordinance. The City will make a final inspection of the Stormwater Treatment Practice to ensure that it complies with the approved plan and the provisions of this ordinance. Provisions for a partial pro -rata release of the security based on the completion of various development stages may be done at the discretion of the City. Subd. 12. Notice of Construction Commencement The Applicant must notify the City in advance before the commencement of construction. Regular inspections of the Stormwater Treatment Practice construction shall be conducted by the staff of the City or certified by a professional engineer or their designee, and the Applicant shall be responsible for the costs of such inspections. All inspections shall be documented and written reports prepared that contain the following information: 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement (a) the date and location of the inspection, (b) whether construction is in compliance with the approved Stormwater Management Plan, (c) variations from the approved construction specifications, (d) any violations that exist. If any violations are found, the Applicant shall be notified in writing of the nature of the violation and the required corrective actions. No added work shall proceed until any violations are corrected and all work previously completed has received approval by the City. Subd.13. As Built Plans All Applicants are, required to submit actual "as built" plans for any Stormwater Treatment Practices located on -site after final construction is completed. As -built plans must show the final design specifications for all Stormwater Treatment Practices, and the plans must be certified by a professional engineer. A final inspection by the City is required before the release of any performance securities can occur. The City may waive certain requirements for the as built plans in the case of a Major Single - Family Residential Project or a Minor Expansion Project, provided the Applicant provides sufficient information to verify that the alternative improvements were installed as designed. Subd. 14 Violations Any person who commences or conducted Land Disturbance Activity contrary to this ordinance is guilty of a misdemeanor and may be prosecuted as such, restrained by injunction or otherwise abated in a manner provided by law. (a) Notice of Violation When the City determines that an activity is not being carried out in accordance with the requirements of this ordinance, it shall issue a written notice of violation to the owner of the property. The notice of violation shall contain: (1) the name and address of the owner or Applicant, (2) the address when available or a description of the land upon which the violation is occurring, (3) a statement specifying the nature of the violation, (4) a description of the remedial measures necessary to bring the development activity into compliance with this ordinance and a time schedule for the completion of such remedial action, (5) a statement of the penalty or penalties that shall or may be assessed against the person to whom the notice of violation is directed, and (6) a statement that the determination of violation may be appealed to the City by filing a written notice of appeal within fifteen (15) days of service of notice of violation. (b) Stop Work Orders Persons receiving a notice of violation will be required to halt all construction activities. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning - Performance Standards and Enforcement This Stop Work Order will be in effect until the City confirms that the Land Disturbance Activity is in compliance and the violation has been satisfactorily addressed. Failure to address a notice of violation, in a timely manner may.result in civil, criminal, or monetary penalties in accordance with the enforcement measures authorized in this ordinance. (c) Civil and Criminal Penalties In addition to or as an alternative to any penalty provided herein or by law, any person who violates the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to prosecution. Such person shall be guilty of a separate offense for each day during which the violation occurs :or continues. (d) Restoration of Lands Any violator may be required, to restore land to its undisturbed condition. In the event that restoration is not undertaken within a reasonable time after notice, the City may take necessary corrective action, the cost of which may, after notice and opportunity for hearing, be specially assessed against the property and collected along with the ordinary taxes by the county. Subd. 15. Holds on Occupancy Permits Occupancy permits will not be granted until all Stormwater Treatment Practices have been installed and accepted by the City, or a financial guarantee in a form acceptable to the City has been submitted to ensure completion. Subd. 16. Duration of Approval; Revocation of Approval (a) Approved plans issued under this section shall be valid from the date of approval through the date the City notifies the owner that all stormwater treatment practices have passed the final inspection required under approved conditions, or the approvatis revoked. (b) Revocation of the stormwater approval may be made by the City if requirements within this ordinance are not fulfilled, or the owner or Applicant is unable to fulfill the ordinance requirements. If an approval is revoked, the Applicant must resubmit a Stormwater Management Plan prior to proceeding with any subsequent Land Disturbance Activity. Subd. 17. Appeals Any person aggrieved by the action of any official charged with the enforcement of this ordinance,. as the result of the disapproval of a properly filed application for approval, issuance of a written notice of violation, or an alleged failure, to properly enforce the ordinance in regard to a specific application, shall have the right to appeal the action to the City. (a) The Applicant shall submit the'appeal in writing and include supporting documentatio.D. (b) City staff shall make a decision on the appeal within 15 business days of receipt of a complete appeal application. (c) The Applicant may appeal the decision of city staff to the city council. This appeal must be filed with the City within 30 days of City staff's decision. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Subd. 18 Compatibility with Other Permit and ordinance Requirements This ordinance is not intended to interfere with, abrogate, or annul any other ordinance, rule or regulation, statute,.or other.provision of law. The requirements of this ordinance should be considered minimum requirements, and where any provision of this ordinance imposes restrictions different from those imposed by any other ordinance, rule or regulation, or other provision of law, whichever provisions are more restrictive or impose higher protective, standards for human health or the environment-shall take precedence. Subdi 19. Severability If the provisions of any article, section, subsection, paragraph, subdivision or clause of this ordinance shall be judged invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such or or judgment shall not affect or invalidate the remainder of any article, section, subsection, .paragraph, subdivision or clause of this ordinance, which shall remain in full force and effect. 828. Zoning'— Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement EXAMPLE ORDINANCE Section 828.29. Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control Ordinance Subd.1. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to promote, preserve and enhance the natural resources within the City of Medina by regulating Land Disturbing or development activities that would have an adverse and potentially irreversible impact on water quality and unique and fragile environmentally sensitive land. This ordinance sets forth the following standards and procedures in order to control land disturbances and/or development activities that may impact water quality and/or impact environmentally sensitive land. Subd. 2. Definitions. The following words and terms, wherever they occur in this ordinance, are defined as follows: a) "Best Management Practices" or `BMPs" means erosion and Sediment Control and water quality management practices that are the most effective and practicable means of controlling, preventing, and minimizing degradation of Surface Water, including, but not limited to, avoidance of impacts, construction - phasing, minimizing the length of time soil areas are exposed, or prohibitions or other management practices published by state or designated area -wide planning agencies. b) "Contractor" means the party who signs the construction contract or development agreement with the city to construct a project. Where the construction project involves more than one contractor, the general contractor shall be the contractor that is responsible pursuant to the obligations set forth in this ordinance. c) "Dewatering" means the removal of water for construction activity such as the removal of temporary sediment basin water or appropriated surface or groundwater to dry and/or solidify a construction site. d) "Erosion" means the wearing away of the ground surface as a result of the movement of wind, water, ice and/or land disturbance activities. e) "Erosion Prevention" means measures employed to prevent Erosion. Examples include, but are not limited to: soil stabilization practices, limited grading, mulch, temporary or Permanent Cover, and construction phasing. f) "Final Stabilization" means: i) All soil disturbing activities at the site have been completed and a uniform (e.g., evenly distributed, without large bare areas) perennial vegetative cover with a density of 70 percent of the native background vegetative cover for the area has been established on all unpaved areas and areas not covered by permanent structures, or equivalent permanent stabilization measures (such as the use of riprap, gabions, or geotextiles) have been employed; ii) For individual lots in residential construction by the Contractor, the Contractor must either: (A) complete Final Stabilization as specified above, or (B) establish temporary stabilization including perimeter 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement controls for an individual lot prior to occupation of the structure. If the contractor chooses (B), it must inform the Owner in writing of the need for, and benefits of, Final Stabilization; iii) For construction projects on land used for agricultural purposes (e.g., pipelines across crop or range land) Final Stabilization may be accomplished by returning the disturbed land to its preconstruction agricultural use. Areas disturbed that were not previously used for agricultural activities, such as buffer strips immediately adjacent to Surface Waters and drainage systems and areas which are not being returned to their preconstruction agricultural use must meet the Final Stabilization criteria in subparts (i) or (ii) above; iv) The Contractor must clean out all Sediment from conveyances and from temporary sedimentation basins that are to be used as permanent water quality management basins. Sediment must be Stabilized to prevent it from washing back into the basin, conveyances or drainage ways discharging off -site or to surface waters. The cleanout of permanent basins must be sufficient to return the basin to design capacity. All drainage ditches constructed to drain water from the site after construction is complete must be Stabilized to preclude Erosion; and v) All temporary synthetic and structural Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control BMPs (such as silt fence) must be removed as part of the Final Stabilization on the site. g) "Impervious Surface" means a constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at an increased rate of flow than existed prior to development. Examples include rooftops, sidewalks, patios, parking lots, storage areas and concrete, asphalt, or gravel driveways or roads. h) "Land Disturbing Activity" means any land change that may result in soil Erosion from water or wind and the movement of Sediments into or upon waters or lands within the city's jurisdiction, including, but not limited to, clearing, grubbing, grading, excavating, transporting and filling. i) "Owner" means the person or entity with a legal or equitable interest in the land on which the construction activities will occur. j) "Permanent Cover" shall mean "Final Stabilization." k) "Sediment' ' means the product of an Erosion. process; solid material both mineral and organic, that is in suspension, is being transported, or has been moved by water, air or ice, and has come to rest on the earth's surface either above or below water level. 1) "Scdimert Centro':" means methods employed to prevent Sediment from leaving the site. Sediment Control practices include silt fences, sediment traps, earth dikes, drainage swales, check dams, subsurface drains, pipe slope drains, storm drain inlet protection and temporary or permanent sedimentation basins. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement m) "Stabilized" means the exposed ground surface after it has been covered by appropriate materials. such as mulch, staked sod, riprap, wood fiber blankets, or other material that prevents Erosion from occurring. Grass seeding is not considered stabilization. n) "Storm Water" shall have the meaning given to it by Minnesota Rule 7077.0105, subpart 41(b). o) "Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan" means a plan for storm water discharge that includes Erosion Prevention. measures.. and Sediment Controls that, when implemented, will minimize soil Erosion on a parcel of:land and minimize off -site nonpoint pollution,to the maximum extent.practicable. p) "Surface Water or Waters means all streams, lakes, ponds, marshes, wetlands, reservoirs;. springs, rivers, drainage systems, waterways; watercourses, wells, reservoirs, aquifers, irrigation systems and all other bodies or accumulations of water, surface or underground, natural or artificial, public or private. q) "Temporary Erosion Protection" means short term methods employed to prevent Erosion. Examples" of these methods include: straw, wood fiber blanket, wood chips and erosion netting. Subd. 3. Applicability. Every individual or entity applying for a permit to allow Land Disturbing Activities of one acre or greater, including activities on land that is part of a common plan for development that collectively will disturb land one acre or greater must submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to the city engineer. No building permit, subdivision approval or development permit to allow Land Disturbing Activities shall be issued by the city until approval of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan or a waiver of the approval requirement has been obtained in strict" conformance with the provisions of this ordinance. Any Land Disturbing Activity that is less than one acre that is issued by the city must adhere to subdivisions 7 and 9 of this ordinance, with the exception of the inspection and record keeping requirements of these subdivisions'. Subd. 4. Exemptions. The following activities are exempt from the Storm" Water Pollution Prevention Plan requirement of this ordinance: a) Any part of property located" in a subdivision if the preliminary plat for the subdivision has been approved by the city council on or before the effective date of this ordinance; b) Property for which a building permit has been approved by the city on or before the effective date of this ordinance; c) Installation of fence, sign, telephone, cable television, electric and other kinds of posts or poles, or utility lines or service connections to these utilities which result in creating under one acre of exposed soil; 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement d) Emergencies posing an immediate danger to life or property, or substantial flood or fire hazards; e) Routine agricultural crop management practices; f) Digging and filling of graves at a cemetery; or g) Refuse disposal sites controlled by other governmental regulations. Subd. 5. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Submittal Procedures. a) Submittal. Every individual or entity that has applied for a permit pursuant to this ordinance shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan to the city's zoning administrator in accordance with the requirements and approval standards set forth in subdivisions 6 and 7 of this ordinance. No building permit, subdivision approval or permit to allow Land Disturbing Activities shall be issued until the city engineer approves this Plan. If it chooses, the applicant may have the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan reviewed by the appropriate departments of the city prior to submitting the Plan. b) Financial Security and Fees. All Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan submittals shall be accompanied by a letter of credit, -or cash equal to the required escrow amount and a separate check for deposit for administrative fees. All escrow and administrative fee deposit amounts shall be determined annually by the city council through a resolution that adopts the city's fee schedule. Subd. 6. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements. At a minimum, the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan shall contain the following information: a) The name and address of the applicant, a legal description of the site, north point, date and scale of drawing and number of sheets; b) An existing site map: a map of existing site conditions showing the site and immediately adjacent areas, which shall include the following information; i) Location of the tract by an insert map at a scale sufficient to clearly identify the location of the property and giving such information as the names and numbers of adjoining roads, railroads, utilities, subdivisions and districts or other landmarks; ii) Existing topography with a contour interval appropriate to the topography of the land but in no case having a contour interval greater than two feet; iii) A delineation of all Surface Waters located on and immediately adjacent to the site, including depth of water, a description of all vegetation which may be found in the water, a statement of general water quality and any classification given to the water body or wetland by the Minnesota 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Department of Natural Resources, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and/or the United States Army Corps of Engineers; iv) The location and dimensions of existing Storm Water drainage systems and natural drainage patterns on and immediately adjacent to the site delineating the direction and the rate the Storm Water is conveyed from the site, identifying the receiving stream, river, public water, or wetland and setting forth those areas of the unaltered site where Storm Water collects; v) A description of the soils of the site, including a map indicating soil types of areas to be disturbed as well as a soil report containing information on the suitability of the soils for the type of development proposed and for the type of sewage disposal proposed which describes any remedial steps to be taken by the applicant to render the soils suitable; vi) The location and type of vegetative cover on the site and clearly delineating . any vegetation proposed for removal; and vii) 100 year floodplain, flood fringes and floodways boundaries. c) A site construction plan which shall include the following information: i) Locations and dimensions of all proposed Land Disturbing Activities and any phasing of those activities; ii) Locations and dimensions of all temporary soil or dirt stockpiles; iii) Locations and dimensions of all Erosion Prevention measures and Best Management Practices necessary to meet the requirements of this ordinance; iv) Schedule of anticipated start and completion dates of each Land Disturbing Activity including the dates of installation of Erosion Prevention measures for each phase needed to meet the requirements of this ordinance; and v) Provisions for maintenance of the Erosion Prevention measures prior to Final Stabilization. d) A plan of fmal site conditions, which shall include the following information: i) Finished grading shown at contours at the same interval as provided on the existing site map to clearly indicate the relationship of proposed changes to the site's existing topography and remaining features; ii) A landscape plan, drawn to an appropriate scale, including dimensions and distances and the location, type, size and description of all proposed landscape materials that will be added to the site; iii) A drainage plan of the developed site delineating in which direction and the rate Storm Water will be conveyed from the site and setting forth the areas of the site where Storm Water will be allowed to collect; iv) The proposed size, alignments and intended use of any structures to be erected on the site; v) A clear delineation and tabulation of all Impervious Surfaces to be installed on the site, including a description of the surfacing material to be used; vi) Any other information pertinent to the particular project which in the opinion of the applicant is necessary for the review of the project; and 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement vii) A copy of the applicant's Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's Permit for discharging Storm Water from construction activity (MN R100001). Subd. 7. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Approval and Performance Standards. No Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan that fails to meet the standards set forth in this ordinance shall be approved by the city. All of the following requirements shall be adhered to during the construction on the site. a) Site Dewatering and Basin Draining: Water pumped from the site shall be treated by temporary sedimentation basins, grit chambers, sand filters, upflow chambers, hydrocyclones, swirl concentrators or other appropriate controls as appropriate. Water shall not be discharged in a manner that causes Erosion, scour, sedimentation or flooding of the site, receiving channels or wetlands. b) Construction Site Waste: i) Solid waste: All waste and unused building materials (including, but not limited to, collected Sediment, asphalt and concrete millings, floating debris, paper, plastic, fabric, demolition debris) must be disposed of properly and shall comply with disposal requirements as set forth by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. ii) Hazardous /toxic materials: Oil, gasoline, paint and any hazardous substances must be properly stored, including secondary containment, to prevent spills, leaks or other discharges. Access to storage areas for these materials must be restricted in order to prevent vandalism. All storage and disposal of hazardous or toxic materials must be in compliance with requirements set forth by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. iii) Liquid waste: All other non Storm Water discharges (including, but not limited to, concrete truck washout, vehicle washing or maintenance spills) conducted during the construction activity shall not be discharged to any Surface Waters. iv) External washing of any equipment shall be limited to a defined area of the site. All runoff must be contained. Waste must be disposed of properly. No engine degreasing shall be allowed on the site. v) All liquid and solid waste generated by any concrete washout operations on the site must be contained in a leak proof facility or impermeable liner. Concrete waste must not come into contact with the ground. No runoff from concrete washout operations or areas is permitted. Concrete waste must be disposed of properly and in compliance with applicable Minnesota Pollution Control regulations. c) Tracking: All roads, access drives and parking areas must utilize a temporary tracking pad and must be of sufficient width and length to prevent Sediment from 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement being tracked onto public or private roadways and/or the Storm Water conveyance system. Temporary tracking pads must be installed and maintained in all locations on the site where vehicles enter and exit. d) Storm Drain Inlet Protection: All storm drain inlets must be protected by appropriate Best Management Practices during construction until all sources with potential for discharging to the inlet have been Stabilized. e) Site Erosion Control: The following criteria shall apply only to construction activities that result in runoff leaving the site: i) Channelized runoff from adjacent areas passing through the site shall be diverted around disturbed areas, if practical. Otherwise, the channel shall be protected as follows: sheet flow runoff from adjacent areas greater than 10,000 square feet in area shall also be diverted around disturbed areas, unless shown to have resulted runoff rates of less than 0.5 feet per second across the disturbed area for a one hundred year storm event. Diverted runoff shall be conveyed in a manner that will not cause Erosion, scour, Sedimentation or flooding of the conveyance and receiving waters; ii) All activities on the site shall be conducted in a logical sequence to minimize the area of bare soil exposed at any one time; iii) Runoff from the entire disturbed area on the site shall be controlled by meeting subsections A through E of this subpart: All exposed soil areas must have Temporary Erosion Protection or Permanent Cover for the exposed soil areas for the entire year as soon as possible, but in no case any later than 14, days after construction activity on that portion of the site has temporarily or permanently ceased; B) The normal wetted perimeter of a temporary or permanent drainage ditch that drains water for the project site or diverts water around the project must be Stabilized. Stabilization must occur within 24 hours of connecting to a surface water; C) Pipe outlets must have temporary or permanent energy dissipation within 24 hours of connection to a surface water; D) When possible, all slopes must be graded in such a fashion that any tracking marks made from heavy equipment are perpendicular to the slope in accordance with the city's engineering standards, detail ERO -22; and E) Land Disturbance Activities that are one acre or greater that drain to a discharge point within the distance of a Special or Impaired 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Water as specified in the current version of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Construction Site General Permit must be Stabilized as soon as possible, but in no case later than seven days after construction activity in that portion of the site has temporarily or permanently ceased. F) Land Disturbance Activities that are less than one acre that drain to a discharge point within 1000 feet of a Special or Impaired Water must be Stabilized as soon as possible, but in no case later than seven days after construction activity in that portion of the site has temporarily or permanently ceased. f) Site Sediment Control: The following criteria shall apply only to construction activities that result in runoff leaving the site: i) Silt fences or equivalent control measures shall be placed on the downslope sides of the site and installed along the contour. If a channel or area of concentrated runoff passes through the site, silt fences shall be placed along the channel edges to reduce the amount of Sediment reaching the channel. The use of silt fences or equivalent control measures must be properly maintained during construction activities. ii) For sites that have more than 10 acres disturbed at one time, or if a channel originates in the disturbed area, one or more temporary or permanent sedimentation basins shall be constructed. Each sedimentation basin shall have a surface area of at least one percent of the area draining to the basin, be at least three feet deep and be constructed in accordance with accepted design specifications. Sediment shall be removed on a regular basis in order to maintain a minimum depth of three feet. The basin discharge rate shall also be sufficiently low as to not cause Erosion, scour, sedimentation or flooding of the discharge channel or receiving water. iii) Any soil or dirt storage piles containing more than 10 cubic yards of material should not be located with a downslope drainage length of less than 25 feet from the toe of the storage pile to a roadway or drainage channel. If remaining for more than 14 days, it shall be Stabilized. Erosion from piles which will be in existence for less than 14 days shall be controlled by placing straw bales or silt fence barriers around the pile. In- street utility repair or construction soil or dirt storage piles located closer than 25 feet of a roadway or drainage channel must be covered with tarps or suitable alternative controls. All downstream storm drain inlets must be protected with an appropriate inlet protection device. g) Site Restoration: All areas on the site that are disturbed during construction must be restored. The types of permanent restoration being used on the site shall be 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement clearly shown on the plans including, but not limited to, sod, seed, impervious cover and structures. In areas where vegetation is to be established, at least six inches of topsoil must be used. In areas where vegetation will be maintained, the city encourages the use of a combination of topsoil and compost equivalent to six inches of topsoil. Areas in which the topsoil or topsoil/compost mixture has been placed and finish- graded or areas that have been disturbed and other grading or site building construction operations are not actively underway must be temporarily or permanently restored as set forth in the following requirements: i) Areas that have a slope of less than 3:1 must be seeded and mulched within 14 days of the area not being actively worked. ii) Areas that have a slope greater or equal to 3:1 must be seeded and Erosion control blankets must be placed in accordance with city engineering standard detail ERO -21 within 14 days of the area not being actively worked. iii) All seeded areas must either be mulched and disc anchored, hydromulched, or covered by Erosion control blankets to reduce Erosion and protect the seed. Temporary or permanent mulch must be disc anchored and applied at a uniform rate of two tons per acre with at least 90 percent coverage. h) Special and Impaired Waters: i) Additional BMPs together with enhanced runoff controls are required for discharge from a site to Special and Impaired Water as defined by Appendix A of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity, parts A, B and section 1 of part C. ii) For areas of the site that drain to a discharge point that is within the distance as specified in the current version of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity and drains to a Special or Impaired Water and the Land Disturbance Activity is one acre or greater in size, the BMPs identified in Appendix A, part C of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity are required. Land Disturbance Activities that are less than one acre in size must comply with this requirement only if they are draining to a Special or Impaired Water and are within 1000 feet of that body of water. Subd. 8. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Review Procedures. a) Process: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans meeting the requirements of this ordinance must be approved by the city engineer or his or her designated representative in accordance with the standards of this ordinance. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement b) Duration: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan approval shall expire one year from the date of the city engineer's approval of the Plan unless construction has commenced. However, if prior to the date of expiration of the approval, the applicant makes a written request to the city engineer for an extension of time to commence construction setting forth the reasons for the requested extension, the city engineer may grant one extension that shall not exceed one year. Receipt of any applicant's request for an extension shall be acknowledged in writing by the city engineer within 15 days of receipt. The city engineer shall make a decision on the extension request within 45 days of receipt. c) Condition: A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan may be approved subject to compliance with conditions imposed by the city that are reasonable and necessary to ensure that the requirements of this ordinance are met. Conditions that may be imposed include, but are not limited to: limiting the size, kind or character of the proposed improvements; requiring the construction of structures, drainage facilities, storage basins and other facilities; requiring replacement of vegetation; establishment of monitoring procedures; staging the work over a period of extended time; requiring alteration of the site's design to insure buffering; or requiring conveyance of necessary lands or easements to the city or other public entity. Subd. 9. Inspection and Maintenance Requirements. a) The applicant shall be responsible at all times for the maintenance and proper operation of all Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control measures. The applicant shall also inspect, maintain and repair all disturbed surfaces, Erosion Prevention measures, Sediment Control measures and soil stabilization measures on the site at least once each day that any work is performed on the site. If no work is performed on the site on a daily basis, the inspection, maintenance and _ repair by the applicant shall continue at least once every seven days, until the Land Disturbing Activity has ceased. Thereafter, the applicant shall continue perform these responsibilities at least once every seven days until Stabilization. The applicant shall maintain a record of all of its activities required by this subpart for inspection by the city upon request. b) The applicant must inspect the construction project within 24 hours of a rainfall event of one -half inch or greater in a 24 hour period. c) All inspections and maintenance activities conducted on the site during construction must be recorded in writing and must be retained with the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. Records of each inspection and maintenance activity shall include the following information: i) Date and time of inspection; ii) Name(s) of persons conducting the inspection; iii) Findings of inspections, including recommendations for corrective actions; 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning - Performance Standards and Enforcement iv) Corrective actions taken, including the dates, times and the name of the party completing the corrective action; v) Date and the amount of rainfall events that are greater than one -half inch in a 24 hour period; and vi) Documentation of any changes made to the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. d) If upon inspection of the site, the city finds that any private storm water management facilities or Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control measures require: maintenance, repair, or replacement, but such deficiencies do not create a critical or imminent threat to adjacent properties, the environment, or other storm water facilities; the applicant shall be sent a written notice that includes the city's findings, what°actions are required to correct' the situation, and `a date or dates by which such actions must be completed.. The applicant shall. have a' maximum of seven days from: the date of the notice to reply to the city in writing indicating his or. her response to the notice. If the applicant does not. complete the necessary activities stipulated by the city in the notice by the date(s) set forth in the notice, the city council after notice and public hearing may order that such activities be completed by the city or its designated contractor andthat all costs associated with such activities be charged to the applicant. and may be drawn from the escrow amount. If the escrow amount is insufficient, the amount incurred by the city that is outstanding may be,assessed by the city council by levying the amount upon the properties benefiting from and utilizing the storm water facilities that were maintained, repaired or replaced by the city. This amount may be certified by the city to the County -Auditor of Hennepin County,. Minnesota and shall be collected in the same. manner as the collection of real estate taxes. e) All Erosion and Sediment BMPs must be inspected to ensure integrity and effectiveness. All nonfunctional BMPs must be repaired, replaced or supplemented with a functional BMP. The applicant shall investigate and comply with the following BMP inspection and maintenance requirements: i) All silt fences,. must be repaired, replaced or supplemented when they become nonfunctional or the Sediment reaches one third of the height of the fence. Repairs shall be made within 24 hours of discovery. or as soon as field conditions allow access. ii) Temporary and permanent sedimentation basins must be drained and the Sediment must be removed, when the depth of the. Sediment collected in the basin reaches one =half the storage volume. Drainage: and removal must be completed within 72 hours of discovery or as soon as field conditions allow access. iii) Surface water, including drainage ditches and conveyance systems, must be inspected for evidence of Sediment being deposited by Erosion. The applicant shall remove all deltas and Sediment deposited in surface 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement waters, including drainage ways, catch basins, and other drainage systems and must restabilize the areas where Sediment removal results in exposed soil. The removal and stabilization must take place within seven days of discovery unless precluded by legal, regulatory or physical access constraints. In the event of an access constraint, the applicant shall use all reasonable efforts to obtain access. If access is precluded, removal and stabilization must take place within seven calendar days of obtaining access. The applicant is responsible for contacting all local, regional, state and federal authorities and obtaining any required permits prior to conducting any work. iv) Construction site vehicle exit locations must be inspected for evidence of off -site Sediment tracking onto paved surfaces. Tracked Sediment must be removed from all off -site paved surfaces within 24 hours of discovery, or if possible, a shorter amount of time. v) The applicant is responsible for the operation and maintenance of temporary and permanent water quality management BMPs, as well as Erosion Prevention and Sediment Control BMPs for the duration of the construction work on the site. The applicant remains responsible until another party has assumed control over all areas of the site that have not been finally Stabilized or the site has undergone Final Stabilization and a NOT has been submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. vi) If Sediment escapes the construction site, off -site accumulations of Sediment must be removed in a manner and at a frequency sufficient to minimize off -site impacts. fl All infiltration areas must be inspected to ensure that no Sediment from ongoing construction activities is reaching the infiltration area and these areas are protected from compaction caused by construction equipment driving across the infiltration area. g) The applicant must ensure Final Stabilization of the project. The applicant must submit a NOT within 30 days of Final Stabilization being achieved, or another party assuming control on all areas of the project that have not achieved Final Stabilization. Subd. 10. Notification. a) The applicant shall notify the City at the following points during construction: i) Upon completion of the installation of perimeter Erosion and sedimentation controls; ii) Upon completion of Land Disturbing Activities but before putting into place measures for final soil stabilization and Permanent Cover; iii) When the site has been permanently Stabilized and Permanent Cover has been established; and 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement iv) When all Temporary Erosion Protection and Sediment Controls have been removed from the site. Subd.11. Noncompliance and Enforcement Procedures. a) Notice of Noncompliance. In the event that any work on the site does not conform to the approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan or any of the requirements listed in the provisions of this ordinance, the city engineer or his or her designee shall issue a written notice of noncompliance to the applicant detailing the, corrective actions necessary. for compliance'. The•applicant shall conduct the corrective actions within. the tirne period determined by the city`and- stated in the notice. If an imminent hazard exists, the city may require that the corrective work begin immediately. b) Stop Work Order. If corrective actions identified in the notice of noncompliance are not completed.by the, time period set forth by the city in the notice, the city engineer or his or her designee may issue an order for the city to stop all inspections.required for land use or building permit approvals until all corrective actions identified in the notice of noncompliance are completed. The applicant shall notify the city engineer or his or her designee upon completion of the corrective action. Once the city engineer has verified that corrective action has been taken, he or she shall inform the city, and the city, shall resume inspections on, the sit&no later than the following business day. c) Action Against the Financial Securities. If the corrective action identified in the. notice of noncompliance are not completed within the time specified in the notice, the city may act against the financial security if any of the. conditions listed below exist. The.city shall use funds from this security to finance any corrective or remedial work undertaken by the city or a contractor under contract to the city in order to reimburse the city for its costs incurred in the process of corrective work including, but not limited to, staff time and attorneys' fees. i) The applicant ceases Land Disturbing Activities and/or filling and abandons the site prior to completion'of the city- approved grading plan; ii) The applicant fails to conform to the city - approved grading plan and /or the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, or related supplementary instructions issued by the city; iii) The techniques utilized under the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan fail within one year of installation; or iv) Emergency action is required pursuant to subpart (d) listed below. d) Emergency Action. If circumstances exist such that noncompliance with this ordinance poses an immediate danger to the public health, safety or, welfare, as determined- by the city, the city may take emergency preventative action. Prior to taking emergency preventative action, the city shall attempt every reasonable. measure possible to contact and direct the applicant to take the necessary action. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement. Sample City Code 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement e) Misdemeanor. Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to a maximum fine or maximum period of imprisonment, or both, as specified by Minnesota Statutes Section 609.03. Each additional day that the property remains in violation of this section shall constitute a separate violation of this section and may be prosecuted accordingly. f) Nothing contained herein shall prevent the city from taking such other lawful action as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation of this section, including, but not limited to, seeking a civil injunction or a restraining order. Subd.12. Right of Entry. a) Right of Entry and Inspection: The applicant shall allow the city and its authorized representatives, upon presentation of credentials to: i) Enter upon the site for the purpose of obtaining information, examination of records, conducting surveys or investigations; ii) Bring such equipment upon the site as is necessary to obtain information, conduct surveys or investigations; iii) Examine and copy any books, papers, records, or memoranda pertaining to activities or records required to be kept pursuant to this ordinance; iv) Inspect the Erosion control and Sediment Control measures required by the City or the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan; and v) Sample and monitor any items or activities pertaining to any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this ordinance imposes greater restrictions, the provisions of this ordinance shall prevail. All other ordinances inconsistent with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of the inconsistency only. 828. Zoning — Performance Standards and Enforcement To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator Date: December 17th, 2013 � Agenda Item #o IV.H. Action ❑Q Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Renew Community Health Services Agreement with Bloomington Public Health Division Action Requested: Renew Community Health Services Agreement with Bloomington Public Health Division for $198,678.00 for calendar year 2014. Information / Background: The 2014 Agreement cost is $198,678.00 which allows for a five percent adjustment from the 2013 cost. The costs for these services are offset by the 2014 Community Health Services Grant funding of approximately $1 19,000 and the local general fund match required by the Local Public Health Act Community Health Services are delivered to Edina residents of all ages through senior health promotions, vulnerable adult assessments, public health nurse clinics, high risk home assessments, and community health educational opportunities. In addition, Bloomington Public Health works closely with Edina schools and daycares to increase youth assets and help prevent high risk behaviors, they provide outreach to new parents with high risk children, and administer the WIC Program, a food and nutrition program for pregnant women, infants and children in need. Services such as health screenings, health promotions and immunizations for elderly are coordinated with the Edina Senior Center and senior living complexes. The public health nurses also coordinate with Edina Police, Fire and Health Departments regarding vulnerable adult assessments, partner with the Edina Resource Center to connect residents with resources and services, and counsel with parish nurses and faith communities. The Community Health Commission met with Bloomington Public Health on November 4th to.review and evaluate the contracted community health services and programs. Bloomington Public Health gave a thorough presentation of the services and programs provided and had staff on hand to answer questions. The Commission determined that Bloomington Public Health provides a variety of valuable programs and excellent service to the residents of Edina and agreed unanimously to support continuing the contract services. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50h St • Edina, MN 55424 n Item Renew Community Health Services Agreement With Bloomington Page 2. of 2 The City Attorney has'reviewed and approved the agreement. ATTACHMENTS (pdf): Community Health Services Agreement - Community Health Committee Draft Minutes November 4th, 2013 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF BLOOMINGTON AND EDINA TO PROVIDE LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , by and between the City of Bloomington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota ('Bloomington "), and the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota ( "Edina "). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Bloomington warrants and represents that its Division of Public Health is a public health agency operating in accordance with all applicable federal and state requirements; and WHEREAS, Bloomington provides local public health services, including, but not limited to public health nursing services (including home visits), public health clinics, health education, health promotion services, disease prevention and control, health planning, and program administration; and WHEREAS, Edina wishes to promote, support, and maintain the health of its residents by providing local public health services such as health education, communicable disease programs, public health nursing services, health assessment, counseling, teaching, and evaluation in the community, home and clinic setting at a nominal fee to those making use of such services, and to contract with Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, to provide such services to residents of Edina; and WHEREAS, the governing bodies of Bloomington and Edina are authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 145A.04, Subdivision 5, and by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, Subdivision 10, to provide local public health services and to enter into agreements with each other for the provision of local public health services by Bloomington to residents of Edina; and r WHEREAS, through this contractual arrangement the provision of local public health services will enable Edina to document progress toward the achievement of statewide outcomes, as stated in Minnesota Statutes, Section 145A.10, Subdivision 5. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, and for consideration of the covenan ts hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: 1. This Agreement shall be for a period from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2014. 2. Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, agrees to provide residents of Edina with local public health services (hereinafter called 'Public Health Services "), which ., includes activities designed °to protect and promote the health of the general population within a community health service area by emphasizing the prevention of disease, injury, disability, and; preventable death through the promotion of effective coordination and use of community resources, and by extending Public Health Services into the community. 3. Bloomington agrees to provide Public Health Services to the residents of Edina utilizing the same quality and kind of personnel, equipment and facilities as Public Health Services are provided and rendered to residents of Bloomington. 4. Bloomington shall provide the Public Health Services pursuant hereto on a confidential basis, using capable, trained professionals. 5. All Public Health Services to be rendered hereunder by Bloomington shall be rendered pursuant to and subject to public health policies, rules, and procedures now or hereafter, from time to time, adopted by the Bloomington City Council, and in full compliance with all applicable state and federal laws, provided, however, that (i) no policy, rule, or procedure hereafter adopted by the Bloomington City Council shall in any way affect, modify, or change the obligations, duties, liabilities, or rights of the parties hereto as set out in this Agreement, or reduce or detract from the kind, quality, and quantity of Public Health Services to be provided hereunder by Bloomington to residents of Edina, and (ii) all such policies, rules and procedures shall be uniformly applied to all persons receiving Public Health Services. 6. Edina agrees to pay Bloomington, for Public Health Services provided pursuant to this Agreement according to the following terms: a. The annual sum of ONE HUNDRED NINETY EIGHT THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED SEVENTY EIGHT DOLLARS AND NO /100 ($198,678) shall be paid in quarterly payments of FORTY NINE THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED AND SIXTY NINE DOLLARS AND 50 /100 ($49,669.50) to Bloomington within fifteen (15) days of the receipt by Edina of each of the statements to be given pursuant to Paragraph 6.B hereof, subject, however, to the provisions of Paragraph 6.0 hereof. b. On April 15, July 15, and October 15, 2014 and on January 15, 2015, Bloomington shall send Edina a statement, covering the period of three (3) calendar months preceding the month in which the statement is given. c. Should any dispute arise over this Agreement, Edina shall pay for any undisputed charges for the previous three (3) month period when due. Disputed amounts will be addressed by both parties. If no agreeable solution is reached, the dispute will be handled pursuant to Paragraph 22. 7. In the event Edina desires` to inspect the financial books and records of Bloomington related to the provision of Public Health Services hereunder, Bloomington shall make its financial books and records available at the Bloomington City Hall for inspection and copying by Edina, or any agent, employee, or representative of Edina, during business hours. 8. It shall be the sole responsibility of Bloomington to determine the qualifications, functions, training, and performance standards for all personnel rendering Public Health Services under this Agreement. 9. Bloomington will communicate with Edina relative to Public Health Services to be performed hereunder, in the form of reports, conferences, or consultations, as Edina shall request. All reports relating to the provision of Public Health Services that are given by Bloomington to the Bloomington City Council or to the City Manager during the term of this Agreement shall also be given to Edina. 7 10. Bloomington also agrees to send to Edina quarterly and annual reports describing the Public Health Services performed pursuant to this Agreement. Such reports shall be in such detail and form as Edina may reasonably.requesi. Also, at.Edina's request, made not more than two (2) times during the term of this Agreement, responsible administrative officers of Bloomington's Division of Public Health shall attend meetings of the Edina City Council, or appropriate board or commission, to answer questions and give further information relative to the activities performed and.Public Health Services rendered under this Agreement. 11. Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, will also provide services to Edina for Title-V Maternal Child Health (MCH) and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) to qualifying women,; infants and children and adolescents. Edina agrees to assign its rights to Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) funding provided for the MCH and TANF programs for,fiscal year 2014. Bloomington will complete all required services, reports and . documentation for these programs and will directly invoice MDH for the MCH and TANF services for up to $69,557 that Bloomington provides to Edina residents. 12. Bloomington hereby agrees to maintain in force its present policy of commercial general liability insurance in compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 466, and professional liability coverage in the amount of at least.$ 1,000,000 per occurrence for the term of this Agreement. Said policy shall be with an insurance company authorized to do. business in Minnesota. If requested,. Bloomington will provide a certificate of insurance evidencing such coverage. Upon request, Edina may be named as an additional insured on Bloomington's commercial general liability insurance only. 13. Bloomington shall further require medical malpractice insurance coverage by4ts physicians and other licensed professionals with whom Bloomington has a contract for professional services. 14. Either party may terminate the Agreement by providing the other party one hundred twenty (120) days written notice to the other. Upon such termination, all obligations and liabilities of the parties hereunder shall cease and terminate, except the provisions of Paragraph 12 and 13 hereof shall continue and survive such termination. Also, in the event of termination pursuant hereto, the quarterly payment next due shall be prorated and paid for only the period ended on the date -of termination, and Bloomington shall send to Edina, within thirty (30) days after such termination, a report in the. form of, and in lieu of, the annual report required by Paragraph 10 hereto, and Edina shall pay such reduced quarterly payment for the period ended on the date of termination, within fifteen (15) days after receipt of report. 15. Bloomington and Edina understand and agree that each shall apply and qualify, independently and separately; for any and all grants, matching funds, and/or payments' of all kind from state, federal, and other governmental bodies relating to, or for the provision of, any or all of the Public Health Services, and any-and all such grants, matching funds, and payments shall belong to the recipient and be used and applied as the recipient thereof shall determine, without regard to this Agreement. 16. All notices, reports, or demands required or permitted.to be given under this . Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be given when delivered personally to an officer of the party to which notice is being given, or when deposited in the United States mail in a sealed envelope, with registered or certified mail, postage prepaid thereon, addressed to the parties at the following addresses: To Bloomington: 1800 West Old Shakopee Road Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 Attention: City Manager To Edina: 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Attention: City Manager Such addresses may be changed by either party upon notice to the other party given as herein provided. 17. The parties agree to comply with the following laws and regulations: a. Edina agrees to comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act and agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Bloomington from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought by third parties alleging a violation of ADA by Edina. b. Bloomington does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Bloomington has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. For information contact the Human Services Division, City of Bloomington, 1800 Old West Shakopee Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55431; telephone (952) 563 -8700; TTY: (952) 563- 8740. c. Bloomington agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Edina from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought by third parties alleging violation of ADA by Bloomington. d. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 363A. 18.. Non - Assignment. The parties agree that this Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent of both parties. 19. Scope of Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between Edina and Bloomington and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof; and amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. 20. Each party will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes. 21. Liability for Edina and Bloomington shall be governed by the provisions of the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. Nothing in this Section is intended or shall operate as a waiver of any defenses or limitations on liability available under the Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466. The provisions of this Section are not intended for the benefit of any third party. In the event of any claims or actions filed against either.party, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to allow a claimant to obtain separate judgments or separate liability caps from the individual parties. 22. Bloomington and Edina agree to submit all claims, disputes and other matters in question between the parties arising out of or relating to, this Agreement to mediation. The mediation shall be conducted through the Conflict Resolution Center, 2101 Hennepin Avenue, Suite 100, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55405. The parties hereto shall decide whether mediation shall be binding or non - binding. If the parties cannot reach agreement, mediation shall be non- binding. In the event mediation is unsuccessful, either party may exercise its legal or equitable remedies and may commence such action prior to the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. (LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK) IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed and their corporate seal to be affixed hereto the day and year first above written. CITY OF BLOOMINGTON: Dated: By: Its Mayor Dated: By: Its City Manager Reviewed and approved by the City Attorney: City Attorney MINUTES EDINA COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM, EDINA CITY HALL November 4, 2013 6:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Answering roll call members were Kumar Belani, Melinda Bothum - Hurley, Kristen Connor, Tone Deinema, Matt Doscotch, Alison Pence and Staff Liaisons Jeff Brown and Laurene Draper. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Belani approved the motion. The motion was seconded by Member Bothom- Hurley. All voted aye. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Member Belani motioned to approve the September minutes. The motion seconded by Member Bothom - Hurley. All voted aye. V. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Bloomington Public Health (BPH) Presentation /Report Introductions and power point presentation. Overview of duties • Elected officials — MN statute 145A • Local Public Health Act — must report yearly on progress. Requirements: • Establish local public health priorities basedl on an assessment of community health needs and assets. Assessment is done every 5 years. Last assessment was in May, 2013. • Determine the mechanisms by which the community health board will address the local public health priorities and achieve statewide outcomes within the limits of available funding (MN statute 145A.10, Sub 5a) J State dollars must be used to support public health responsibility: ■ Assure an adequate public health infrastructure ■ Prevent the spread of infectious disease ■ Promote healthy communities and healthy behaviors ■ Prepare for and respond to disasters and assist To fulfill state requirements, BPH delivers a wide variety of: ■ Service to individuals ■ Consultation with Edina school nurses, clinics and child care providers on childhood infectious diseases, safety and health resources ■ Work with partners to create policy, system and environmental changes Reporting and Planning ■ Write grants to expand public health services in Edina (includes SHIP funding) ■ Implement community health assessment activities, identify and prioritize local health issues, develop action plans ■ Complete reports to MN Department of Health and other grant reporting as required. It was noted that 5th, 8th and 10th graders are the best age to gather data on youth behaviors. Early next year, data will be analyzed from Bloomington, Richfield, and Edina. 15% of Hennepin County is served by BPH. Eligible for Free /Reduced Lunch K -12 — Edina 6.7% in 2006 to 8.3% for 2013. In 2013, 94.3% of students graduated high school in 4 years. In 2006 it was 90 %. Maps showed that the southwest corner of Edina is at or below 200% of the Poverty Level. Factors that impact health - Did you graduate from high school? How much money do you earn? Where do you live? The more education you have, the more likely you are to have health coverage. There is projected to still be a group of people that will not have health insurance. Hennepin County is opening a southern hub to assist people who need to apply for MNsure. Mothers receiving prenatal care in the first trimester — Objective met. 90.2% in 2011. Healthy People objective is 77.70% Birth resulting in low birth weight — Meeting objective — 8.2 %.Healthy. People objective -7.8% Overweight or obese students — those receiving free /reduced lunch are more likely to be obese. Se_ rvices Provided: ■ High Risk.Home Assessments for Edina. Vulnerable Adults /Seniors —112 visits in 2011. ■ WIC— increase in caseload during the last three months. SNAP benefits have been cut — families received $36 less per month. This may'cause an increase in WIC program usage. There are a larger amount of pregnant women coming in. WIC offers counseling and nutritional information which provides healthier pregnancies. Breast feeding initiation rates are higher than the state rates. ■ Early intervention services for Children 0 -3 —175 visits with 77 children. ■ Health screening — Women 40 +— housed in the Edina Medical building and provides breast and cervical cancer screening. 10 to. 15% of 'clients are from Edina /Richfield. Younger women with symptoms or risk factors can be seen. The screening reveals 12 - 25 cancers per year. Approximately 200 women require follow -up. ■ Flu shots — over 600 given in Edina at school district, city employees and community. Activities for 2013 • Feedback on quarterly and annual reports — asking advisory boards for feedback. • Community Health Improvement Implementation Plan • Develop of action teams • Maternal and Child health • Nutrition, Obesity and Physical Activity • Social & Emotional Well -being BPH Newsletter was distributed. CHIP Event — November 13 — annual celebration 8:30 —11:30 a.m. Heritage Park Senior Center, Minneapolis. Members are invited to attend. Let Jeff know if you would like to attend. Health Promotion: • More food changes in concession stands • Safe route to school partnership • TCP Coaches and athlete training • Statewide Health Improvement Program (SHIP 3) is funded • Community Food Partnership Report • Federal chemical health grant program ends. • Tri -City partners —focus more on SHIP Family health: New funding for intensive home visits. This program is voluntary for new moms dealing with drug usage, physical, mental or emotional abuse. Can be prenatally— weekly visits or more often if needed. Move mothers into safe situations from their high risk situations. Mothers are referred from clinics and schools. Post -partum check can start screening process. This results in a closer working relationship with FVSD hospital. FVSD can refer to this program as a resource when their services end for a patient. Emergency preparedness — ■ Family assistance center exercise (January) ■ Heat response and plan development (where air conditioning is) ■ Started heart safe communities ■ Recruited more community partners to distribute medications ■ Implementation of SHIP3 —just starting ■ Tobacco issues — community transformation grant ■ Continued implement of community health improvement plan ■ 2013 MN student survey results ■ Health Safe community activities ■ Plan development (Sheltering, Reunification) Federal assessment of Cities Readiness Initiative: Planning for the full scale exercise in 2015 (emergency preparedness) planned for in 2014. Will be for entire metro area. "Meet with the Nurse" at Park Lawn in Edina — best way to reach people is to go to - them. Nurse went out to Park Lawn apartments to be present as a resource with an ECFE teacher. Shared by word of mouth. Has not started yet this fall but there is hope to get it ramped up — also add another apartment complex. Change of staff has caused delay. B. Top Ten Focus Area Recommendations Edina's need is outreach and getting the word out about public health. Website will be utilized next year. BPH can help with outreach. How much can BPH take on? The amount needs to be determined. Revenue can increase to provide services. Can there be more collaboration on public health survey? Last one was only the second time it was done. Feedback was sought at that time. Feedback is valued. Member Pence asked if there are issues from MN Student Survey. BPH has not heard anything so far. E- Cigarettes are a,possible issue. They hope to hear something from the FDA. There is not much data out there to tell what the harm may be. Health impact is not known. Member Connor asked if BPH gets involved in the lobbying efforts of legalizing marijuana. Tri -City partners wrote some letters — they cannot lobby. _Their' position is to get it on the city's platform. Chair Doscotch expressed that BPH provides a valuable service to our community. It is meeting the health needs of our community. Does Community health Committee recommend that City Council renew the contract with BPH? Member Pence approved the motion. Member Belani seconded the motion. All voted aye. MN Department of Health — will be making mental health information recommendations. A comprehensive state framework is recommended to improve data collection, promote positive mental health, early identification, and facilitate access to help. SHIP is working with Edina Schools — evaluation pieces — matrix looking at healthy eating and physical activity. They will pick one to look at and see how SHIP can make a difference. Member Connor expressed concern about screen time and physical activity. CHIP is planning on doing a media campaign in the spring. Age 8 to preteen is harder group to control. It translates into -adult behavior. C. Youth, Senior and General health Subgroups Reports Consolidation of the charts is not yet complete. Senior Group — BPH's priorities do not match those of this group. Edina has a disproportionate number of seniors. VI. CORRESPONDENCE Founders' Day— Thursday, December 12, 7 -8 pm at Edina City Hall. Members are encouraged to attend. VII. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Chair Doscotch announced that the City Council has the proposal for mission /vision statement, name change, 3 questions and work plan. It was pulled off the Council agenda. The ordinance change needs to go to the lawyer. The ordinance change needs to be separated from. other changes to make a cleaner A work session is needed. A person from each subgroup could attend. More on this at a future time. Committee work will be part of updates in 2014. The comprehensive report needs to be consolidated and completed. The completed documentation will be passed out to each Committee member for review. Feedback should then be submitted to Chair Doscotch. This group has been directed to have a televised meeting. That would not be conducive for the comprehensive report meeting. Finding a date may prove to be difficult. Laurene will come up with a list of dates and send them out to the group. Member Pence met with Mary Brindle about Vision 2020. Objective 10 is not part of Vision 2020. Vision 10 will be reviewed by this committee and incorporate it into Vision 2020. Member Pence inquired if there was a Living Streets update. Nothing to update at this time. VIII. STAFF COMMENTS City Council approved resolution appointing Jeff Brown as Community Health Coordinator. Laurene and Jeff will attend meetings until Jeff is acclimated. The process to fill Jeffs previous position is beginning. January 2014 — This Committee will be meeting on a monthly basis. The meetings will be on Tuesdays unless Laurene.hears otherwise. IX. Adjournment Member Belani approved the motion to adjourn. Member Pence seconded the motion. All voted aye. The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. k To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator Date: December 17, 2013 Otte • :� vim. Agenda Item M. W.I. Action 0 Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Subject: Renew Public Health Emergency Preparedness Services Agreement with Bloomington Public Health Division Action Requested: Renew Public Health Emergency Preparedness Services Agreement with Bloomington Public Health Division for $35,777. Information / Background: The 2014 Agreement cost is $35,777. The costs for these services are offset by the 2014 emergency preparedness grant funding of $38,277 received from the Minnesota Department of Health as awarded by the Center for Disease Control. Edina will retain portions of the grant money specifically for expenses generated by Edina staff employee training, ongoing emergency planning, public education and administrative duties. This is the twelfth year of the grant and the Agreement with Bloomington. The grant money must be used for public health readiness and emergency preparedness planning and training. Currently the work focus is a metro -wide approach to coordinate planning efforts for business continuity of operations, public health preparedness, at -risk populations, extreme heat scenarios, and mass dispensing. The Community Health Committee met with Bloomington Public Health on November 4th to review and evaluate these community health services and programs. Bloomington gave a thorough presentation of the services and programs they provide and had staff on hand to answer questions. The Committee determined that Bloomington provides a variety of valuable programs and excellent service to the residents of Edina and agreed unanimously to support continuing the contract services. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50' St • Edina, MN 55424 It' 0 A l Item Renew - Public Health Emergency Preparedness Services Agreement With Bloomington Page 2 of 2 The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the agreement. ATTACHMENTS (pdQ: Public Health Emergency Preparedness Agreement Community Health Committee Draft Minutes November 4, 2013 q AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITIES OF BLOOMINGTON AND EDINA FOR PUBLIC HEALTH PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE TO BIOTERRORISM THIS AGREEMENT, is made,and entered into this day of ,.2013, by and between the City of Bloomington, a Minnesota municipal corporation, located at 1800 West Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 (hereinafter referred to as "Bloomington "), and the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, located at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424 (hereinafter referred to as "Edina "). WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Bloomington warrants and represents that its Division of Public Health is a duly certified public health agency operating in accordance with all applicable federal and state requirements; and WHEREAS, Bloomington's Division of Public Health provides Public Health Emergency Preparedness Services to respond to bioterrorism, infectious diseases, and other threats to public health including, but not limited to ,coordination, assessment, planning and exercise, response, surveillance, Health Alert Network (HAN), and training (hereinafter referred to as "PH. Emergency Preparedness Services ".); and provides services and activities to improve the mass dispensing of medicines and medical supplies through the Cities Readiness Initiative (hereinafter referred to,as °CRI Duties "); and WHEREAS, Edina wishes to promote, support, and.maintain the health of its residents by providing public health emergency preparedness, and CRI planning activities, and to contract with Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, to provide such services to residents of Edina; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto, and for consideration of the covenants hereinafter set forth, agree as follows: I. TERKOF AGREEMENT The term of this Agreement shall be from July 1, 2013 through June 30,2014, subject to termination as provided in Subdivision VI. II. DUTIES OF THE PARTIES A.- Bloomington, through its Division of Public Health, 'agrees to provide residents of Edina with the following PH Emergency Preparedness Services: 1. Develop a work plan for incorporating the grant duties listed in this document. Work plan guidance will be presented at the readiness summit in July 2013. Grantees shall work with their regional Public Health Preparedness consultants to gain approval for the work plan. 2. Complete and submit Capability Planning Guide.(CPG). 3. Complete and submit Performance Measure data elements as required by Centers for Disease. Control and Prevention. 4. Present a community presentation designed to increase the recognition of potential public health impacts in various disaster scenarios and highlight public health emergency. preparedness efforts. 5. Plan and coordinate preparedness, response, and recovery efforts at the jurisdictional level with healthcare entities (hospitals, healthcare providers, mental /behavioral health systems), emergency. medical services, emergency management, tribes, and other response partners, as applicable, and to share expertise, coordinate training and exercises, and evaluate response and recovery to incidents. -Assure policies and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 6. Identify community populations with access and functional communication needs; and engage with appropriate partners to develop communication strategies for these populations. Assure policies and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 7. In partnership with other disciplines, - establish a process to regularly update jurisdictional risk assessments that specifically address public health, healthcare, and mental /behavioral health system risks. Assure policies and procedures. :related to these activities are documented in. written plans. 8. Increase or strengthen engagement of a minimum of two (2) new community partners at the local level to address gaps in readiness. Assure policies and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 9. Monitor recovery efforts in collaboration with jurisdictional and regional partners. Assure policies and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 10. Based on the risk assessment completed, or a more recent hazard and vulnerability assessment, define at least five (5) incident objectives for each of the top three (3) threats, that would guide the first operational period of the response . Assure policies and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 11. Reply to all STATE Health Alerts and Health Alert Updates, and transmit the STATE'S Health Alerts and Health Alert Updates to local Health Alert Network recipients as requested by. the STATE within one hour of receipt, if relevant to their jurisdiction. 12. Reply to all STATE Health Advisories and Health Advisory, Updates, and transmit the STATE Health Advisories and Health Advisory Updates within 24 hours of receipt, if relevant to their jurisdiction. 13. Conduct a minimum of two (2) Health Alert Network (HAN) exercises that include but are not limited to hospitals, clinics, nursing homes, emergency managers, and those who according to agency discretion-are apparent r and necessary to ensure an efficient response -to any public health emergency. Monitor the acknowledgement of respons. a times ..for ;each exercise and work towards a itarget, response., rate of 80% oe ,more from each of the partner organizations within two (2) hours. 14. Work with local and regional partners from multiple disciplines to., define local public health's.role in mass care. 15. Maintain Medical Countermeasure Dispensing, Material Management, and Distribution plans and agreements in order to assure countermeasures can be provided to 100% of•their identified population within 48 hours after the federal decision to do so. Assure policies and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 16. Submit Countermeasure Dispensing and Distribution-plan to the Minnesota Department of Health. 17. Based on deficits identified and technical assistance requested, address at least.one (1) dispensing medical countermeasures issue, and at least one (1) issue on managing inventory or,distributing countermeasures. 18. Develop a strategy to formalize membership in the regional Health Coalition, including representation on the Regional Health Coalition Advisory. Committee. Assure policies .and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 19. Maintain a designated MN Responds administrator to manage the Medical Reserve Corps volunteer database; and coordinate with jurisdictional health care agencies and Regional Health Coalition efforts to recruit, train, and deploy volunteers in accordance with state and federal law. Assure policies and procedures related to these activities are documented in written plans. 20. Test, the. MN Responds database volunteer notification, by an exercise or as a part of a response. 21. Develop strategies to identify and address gaps in volunteer management plan to meet current components of the volunteer management capab.ilities listed in".the Centers for, Disease Control and Prevention, Public Hbalth 'Preparedness Capabilities planning guide. 22. Prepare, update, and maintain a Multi-year (5-year) Exercise and Training Plan, in conjunction- with City /County/Tribal Emergency Management, designed to close gaps,or maintain ,requ.ired, preparedness competencies. Provide timely updates of the Exercise and Training Plan. 23. Submit Multi-year Exercise and Traini,ng.Plan. 24. Conduct at least one (1) annual exercise to test preparedness and response capabilities. This annual requirement could include tabletop, functional, or full-scale exercises that test public health preparedness and response capabilities. 25. Submit Exercise and Training" Reports in accordance with STATE guidance. 26. Develop exercises in accordance with Homeland Security Exercise Evaluation Program (HSEEP) standards. a. Ensure community exercises are posted in the National Exercise Scheduler (NEXS). b. Measure and report throughput data according to STATE guidance for any dispensing or vaccinating drills or exercises conducted locally or regionally. c. Submit an After Action Report and Improvement Plan (AAR/IP) for each exercise conducted at any level with federal funds. d. Post select AAR/IPs as identified by the STATE to the Lessons Learned Information System (LLIS). e. Monitor and implement corrective actions. 27. Participate in the planning of one (1) joint full -scale exercise that includes Medical Countermeasure distribution and dispensing elements within the five -year project period. This requirement applies to the health coalition(s) and all public health departments encompassed by the associated CRI metropolitan statistical areas (MSA). 28. Conduct a minimum of three (3) different Division of Strategic National Stockpile (DSNS) drills in accordance with the following: a. Each drill shall be a different type. b. The three drills shall be chosen from the available drills, as indicated on the DSNS extranet website. 29. Submit after action reports /improvement plans and /or other requested documentation through the DSNS web -based data collection system. Submit required documents to OEP as directed. 30. Complete a self- assessment as directed by the STATE covering local technical assistance review (LTAR) elements and related public health capabilities. 31. Participate in an LTAR progress report visit to be conducted by MDH or CDC. Submit Countermeasure Dispensing and Distribution plan and any requested supporting documentation. A. Payment. Edina agrees to pay to Bloomington the not -to- exceed amount of TWENTY SIX THOUSAND NINETY TWO AND NO /100 DOLLARS ($26,092.00) for PH Emergency Preparedness Services and the not -to- exceed amount of NINE THOUSAND SIX r. HUNDRED EIGHTY FIVE AND NO /100 DOLLARS ($9;685.00) for CRI Duties, for a total not -to- exceed amount of THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND, SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY SEVEN AND NO /100 DOLLARS ($35,777.00) during the term of this Agreement, to be paid according to the following terms: 1. Bloomington shall bill Edina for PH Emergency Preparedness Services "and CRI Duties as.follows: Invoice Date Amount Upon Contract Execution $17'889 February 1, 2014 $8,944 j May 1, 2014 J$8,944 Payment shall be made within fifteen (15) days of receipt by Edina of Bloomington's invoice. 2. In the event Edina desires to inspect the financial books and records of Bloomington related to the providing of PH Emergency Preparedness Services and CRI Duties by Bloomington, Bloomington shall make its financial books and records available at the Bloomington City Hall for inspection and copying by Edina, or any agent, employee, or representative of Edina, upon reasonable request during business hours. 3. In the event of termination pursuant hereto, the payment next due shall be prorated and paid for only the period ended on the date of termination, and Edina shall pay such reduced payment for the period ended on the date of termination, within fifteen (15) days after receipt of Bloomington's,invoice. B. It shall be the sole responsibility of Bloomington to determine the qualifications, functions, training, and performance standards for all health service personnel who render PH Emergency Preparedness Services and CRI Duties under this Agreement. C. Bloomington will communicate with Edina relative to PH Emergency Preparedness Services and CRI Duties to be performed hereunder by Bloomington, such communication to be in the form of reports, conferences, or consultations, as they request. D. At Edina's request, and not more than two (2) times during the term of this Agreement, responsible administrative officers from Bloomington shall attend meetings of the Edina City Council or appropriate board or commission to answer questions and give further information relative to the activities performed and PH Emergency Preparedness Services and CRI Duties rendered under this Agreement. E. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting Edina's staff as the agents, representatives or employees of Bloomington for any purpose in any manner whatsoever. Edina and its staff are to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. Edina represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of Edina or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Edina under this Agreement, shall not be considered employees of Bloomington, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers' Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Edina, its officers, agents, contractors or employees shall in no way be the responsibility of Bloomington; and Edina shall defend, indemnify and hold Bloomington, its officers, agents and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights or benefits of any kind whatsoever from Bloomington, including, without limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay and PERA. F. The parties agree to comply with the Minnesota State Human Rights. Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 363. G. Each of the parties shall maintain insurance in the 'amounts shown below during the entire term of this Agreement. Neither party shall not allow any subcontractor to commence work until all insurance has been obtained and copies have been filed and accepted by. the other party. All, respective insurance must be provided at each party's own expense and at no additional cost to the other party. 1. Commercial General Liability - Bodily injury in the amount of at least $500,000 per individual and $1,500,000 per occurrence for injuries or death arising out of each occurrence. In .the alternative, each party may maintain a general aggregate of at least $2,000,000. 2. Property Damaae Liability - Property damage liability in the amount of $1,500,000 for each occurrence. 3. Automotive Liability — Automotive liability in the amount of $500,000 per individual and $1,500,000 per occurrence for any injuries, including death, arising out of each occurrence and property damage coverage of $1,500,000 for each occurrence. 4. Workers Compensation — Each party shall carry Workers Compensation Insurance as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 176.181, subd. 2. 5. Professional Liability — Each party agrees to maintain professional liability insurance in the amount of at least $1,000,000 during the term of this Agreement. 6. Additional Insured — Each party further agrees to name the other party as additional insured on its commercial general liability policy. _ A certificate of insurance shall be provided to the other party before any work on this project may commence. 7. Notification /Cancellation - Each party agrees to notify the other party thirty (30) days prior to cancellation or change in terms of the above insurance coverage. H. Edina agrees that Bloomington will own and have the right to use, reproduce and 0 apply as it desires, any data, reports, analyses and materials which are collected or developed by Edina or anyone acting on behalf of Edina as a result of this Agreement. III. MISCELLANEOUS A. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement. between Edina and Bloomington and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral,: between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof; any amendments, addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. B. Both Parties agree to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) including all applicable provisions of Title II — Public Services and in accordance with 28 C.F.R. Part 35 Subpart B Section 35::130 of the US Department of Justice Regulations, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. Each Party agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the other from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees and staff time, in any action or proceeding; brought alleging,a violation of ADA and /or Section 504 caused by them.. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all services, programs and activities. Each Party agrees to utilizetheir own text telephone or the Minnesota TTY Relay Service in order to comply with accessibility requirements. Bloomington has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as required by 28 C.F.R. Part 35 Subpart B - Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations C. Data Practices. Each party will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes. D. Edina shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Bloomington, its officials, employees, volunteers and agents, from any and all claims, causes.of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the Edina's (including its off icials,.agents, employees or volunteers) performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Edina. E. Bloomington shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Edina, its officials, employees, volunteers and agents, from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from the Bloomington's (including its officials, agents, employees or volunteers) performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, diseases or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting therefrom and is caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Bloomington. F. Edina agrees to comply with all :applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in the performance of the duties of this contract. This Agreement shall be governed, interpreted, constructed and regulated by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Minnesota shall also be the venue for any dispute over this Agreement. G. This Agreement shall not be assignable except at the written consent of Bloomington. H. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures of Edina, relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by Bloomington, and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota. Statutes, Section 16C.05,' Subdivision 5. I. Bloomington and Edina agree to submit all claims,.disputes' and other matters in question between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement to mediation. The mediation shall ,be conducted through the Conflict Resolution Center, 2101 Hennepin Avenue, Suite 100, Minneapolis, MN 55405. The parties hereto shall. decide whether mediation shall be binding or non- binding. If the parties cannot reach agreement, mediation shall be non- binding. In the event mediation is unsuccessful, either party may exercise its legal or equitable remedies and may commence,such action prior to the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Edina agrees that it must, pay -any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the prime contractor's receipt of payment from the, municipality for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. Edina agrees that it must pay interest of 1 -1/2 percent per month or any..part of a month to the subcontractor -on -any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly 16terest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100 nor. more is $10. For an unpaid balance of less than $100, the prime contractor shall pay. the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. A subcontractor who prevails in a civil action to collect interest penalties from a prime contractor must be awarded its costs and disbursements, including attorneys fees, incurred in bringing the action. K. Edina agrees, as a condition of being awarded this Contract, to require each of its agents, officers and employees to abide by the City of. Bloomington's policies prohibiting sexual harassment, firearms -and smoking, as well as all other reasonable work rules, safety rules or policies regulating the conduct of persons on City property at all times while,performing duties pursuant to this Contract. Edina agrees and understands that a violation of any of these policies or rules constitutes a breach of the Contract and sufficient grounds for immediate termination of the Contract by Bloomington. L. Each Party acknowledges that the person signing this Agreement (hereafter "Signatory") is authorized to execute this Agreement on its behalf and agrees to be bound by its terms and conditions, including the agreement of the Parties to indemnify and hold the other party harmless. In the event either Party did not authorize the Signatory to sign on its behalf, the .Signatory agrees to assume responsibility for the duties and liabilities as set forth herein, personally. VI. TERMINATION Either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving thirty (30) days advanced written notice to.the'other party. Bloomington reserves the right to cancel this Agreement at any time in event of default or violation by Edina of any provision of this Agreement. Bloomington may take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear necessary or desirable to collect damages arising from a default or violation or to enforce performance of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written. Dated: Dated: Dated: CITY OF BLOOMINGTON: By: Its, City. Manager Reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. City Attorney CITY OF EDINA: By: Its Mayor By: Its City Manager MINUTES EDINA COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA MAYOR'S CONFERENCE ROOM, EDINA CITY HALL November 4, 2013 6:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. 11. ROLL CALL Answering roll call'.members were Kumar Belani, Melinda Bothum- Hurley, Kristen . Connor, Tone Deinema, Matt Doscotch, Alison Pence and Staff Liaisons Jeff.Brown and !` Laurene Draper. . III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA y ' Member Belani approved the motion. The motion was seconded by Member Bothom- i Hurley. All voted aye. IV. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Member, Belani motioned to approve the September minutes. The motion seconded by Member Bothom - Hurley. All voted aye. V. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Bloomington Public Health (BPH) Presentation /Report Introductions and power point presentation. Overview of duties ■ Elected officials - MN statute 145A ■ -Local Public Health Act- must report yearly on progress. Requirements: ■ Establish local public health priorities based on an assessment of community health needs and assets. Assessment is done every 5 years. Last assessment was in May, 2013. ■ Determine the mechanisms by which the community health board will address the local public health priorities and achieve statewide outcomes within the limits of available funding (MN statute 145A.10, Sub 5a) State dollars must be used to support public health responsibility: • Assure an adequate public health infrastructure. • Prevent the spread of infectious disease • Promote healthy communities and healthy behaviors • Prepare for and respond to disasters and assist To fulfill state requirements, ;BPH delivers a wide variety of: • Service to individuals • Consultation with Edina school nurses, clinics and child care providers on childhood infectious diseases, safety and health resources • Work with partners to create policy, system and environmental changes Reporting and Planning • Write grants to expand public health services in Edina (includes SHIP funding) • Implement community health assessment activities, identify and prioritize local health issues, develop action plans ' • Complete reports to MN Department of Health and other grant reporting as required. It was noted that 5th, 8th and 101h graders are the best age to gather data on youth behaviors. Early next year, data will be analyzed from Bloomington, Richfield, and Edina. 15% of Hennepin County is served by BPH. Eligible for Free /Reduced Lunch K -12 — Edina 6.7% in 2006 to 8.3% for 2013. In 2013, 94.3% of students graduated high school in 4 years. In 2006 it was 90 %. Maps showed that the southwest corner of Edina is at or below 200% of the Poverty Level. Factors that impact health - Did you graduate from high school? How much money do you earn? Where do you live? The more education you have, the more likely you are to have health coverage. There is projected to still be a group of people that will not have health insurance. Hennepin County is opening a southern hub to assist people who need to apply for MNsure. Mothers receiving prenatal care in the first trimester — Objective met. 90.2% in 2011. Healthy People objective is 77.70% Birth resulting in low birth weight — Meeting- objective — 8.2%. Healthy People objective -7.8% Overweight or obese students — those receiving free /reduced lunch are.more likely to be obese. Services Provided: ■ High, Risk Home Assessments for Edina.;Vulnerable Adults /Seniors -112 visits in 2011. WIC = increase in caseload`during the last three months. SNAP benefits have been cut — families.receiVed $36 less per month. This may cause an increase in WIC program usage. There are a larger amount of pregnant women coming in. WIC offers counseling and nutritional information which provides healthier pregnancies. Breast feeding initiation rates are higher than the state rates. 0 Early intervention services for Children 0 -3 -'175 visits with 77 children. ■ Health screening— Women 40 +— .housed in the Edina Medical building and provides breast and cervical cancer screening. 10 to 15% of clients are from Edina /Richfield. Younger women with symptoms or risk factors can be seen. The screening reveals 12 — 25 cancers per year. Approximately 200 women require follow -up. ■ Flu shots — over 600 given in Edina at school district, city employees and community. Activities for 2013 ■ Feedback on quarterly and annual reports — asking advisory boards for feedback. ■ Community Health Improvement Implementation Plan ■ Develop of action teams ■ . Maternal.and Child health ■ Nutrition, Obesity and Physical Activity ■, Social & Emotional Well -being BPH Newsletter was distributed. CHIP Event November 13 — annual celebration 8:30 —11:30 a.m. Heritage Park Senior Center, Minneapolis. Members are invited to attend. Let Jeff know if you would like to attend. Health Promotion: • More food changes.in concession stands ■ Safe route to school partnership • TCP Coaches and athlete training F ■ Statewide Health Improvement Program (SHIP 3) is funded ■ Community,Food Partnership Report ■ Federal chemical health grant program ends. ■ Tri -City partners -focus more on SHIP Family health: New funding for intensive home visits. This program is voluntary for,new moms dealing with drug usage;-physical, mental or emotional abuse. Can be prenatally — weekly visits or more often if, needed. Move mothers into safe situations from their high risk situations. Mothers are referred from clinics and schools. Postpartum check can start screening process. This results in a closer working relationship with FVSD hospital. FVSD can refer to this program as a resource when their services end for a patient. Emergency preparedness = ■ Family assistance center exercise (January) ■ Heat response and plan development (where air conditioning is) ■ Started heart safe communities ■ Recruited more community partners to distribute medications ■ Implementation of SHIP3 —just starting ■ Tobacco issues — community transformation grant ■ Continued implement of community health improvement plan ■ 2013 MN student survey results ■ Health Safe community activities ■ Plan development (Sheltering, Reunification) Federal assessment of Cities Readiness Initiative: Planning for the full scale exercise in 2015 (emergency preparedness) planned for in 2014. Will be for entire metro area. "Meet with the Nurse" at Park Lawn in Edina — best way to reach people is to go to them. Nurse went out to Park Lawn apartments to be present as a resource with an ECFE teacher. Shared by word of mouth. Has not started yet this fall but there is hope to get it ramped up — also add another apartment complex. Change of staff has caused delay. B. Top Ten. Focus Area Recommendations Edina's need is outreach and getting the word out about public health. Website will be utilized next year. BPH can help with outreach. How much can BPH take on? The amount needs to be determined. Revenuelcan increase to provide services. Can there be more collaboration on public health survey? Last one was only the second time it was done. Feedback was sought at that time. Feedback is valued. Member Pence asked if there are issues from MN Student Survey. BPH has not heard anything so far. E- Cigarettes are a possible issue. They hope to hear something from the FDA. There is not much data out there to tell what the harm may be. Health impact is not known. Member Connor asked if BPH gets involved in the lobbying efforts of legalizing marijuana. Tri -City partners wrote some letters — they cannot lobby. Their position is to get it on the city's platform. Chair Doscotch expressed that BPH provides a valuable service to our community. It is meeting the health needs of our community. Does Community health Committee recommend that City Council renew the contract with BPH? Member Pence approved the motion. Member Belani seconded the motion. All voted aye. MN Department of Health — will be making mental health information recommendations. A comprehensive state framework is recommended to improve data collection, promote positive mental health, early identification, and facilitate access to help. SHIP is working with Edina Schools — evaluation pieces — matrix looking at healthy eating and physical activity. They will pick one to look at and see how SHIP can make a difference. Member Connor expressed concern about screen time and physical activity. CHIP is planning on doing a media campaign in the spring. Age 8 to preteen is harder group to control. It translates into adult behavior. C. Youth, Senior and General health Subgroups Reports Consolidation of the charts is not yet complete. Senior Group — BPH's priorities do not match those of this group. Edina has a disproportionate number of seniors. VI. CORRESPONDENCE Founders' Day — Thursday, December 12, 7 -8 pm at Edina City Hall. Members are encouraged to attend. VII. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS Chair Doscotch announced that the City Council has the proposal for mission /vision statement, name change, 3 questions and work plan. It was pulled off the Council agenda. The ordinance change needs to go to the lawyer. The ordinance change needs to be separated from other changes to make a cleaner A work session is needed. A person from each subgroup could attend. More on this at a future time. Committee work will be part of updates in 2014. The comprehensive report needs to be consolidated and completed. The completed documentation will be passed out to each Committee member for review. Feedback should then be submitted to Chair Doscotch. This group has been directed to have a televised meeting. That would not be conducive for the comprehensive report meeting. Finding a date may prove to be difficult. Laurene will come up with a list of dates and send them out to the group. Member Pence met with Mary Brindle about Vision 2020. Objective 10 is not part of Vision 2020. Vision 10 will be reviewed by this committee and incorporate it into Vision 2020. Member Pence inquired if there was a Living Streets update. Nothing to update at this time. VIII. STAFF COMMENTS City Council approved resolution appointing Jeff Brown as Community Health Coordinator. Laurene and Jeff will attend meetings until Jeff is acclimated. The process to fill Jeff's previous position is beginning. January 2014 —This Committee will be meeting on a monthly basis. The meetings will be on Tuesdays unless Laurene hears otherwise. IX. Adjournment Member Belani approved the motion to adjourn. Member Pence seconded the motion. All voted aye. The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. To: MAYOR & COUNCIL Agenda Item M. IV. J. From: Debra Mangen Action City Clerk Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: On -Sale 3.2 Beer and Wine Licenses, Makers Care 1, LLC dba Makers Cafe, 4920 West 77th Street Action Requested: Motion approving New On -Sale Wine and 3.2 Beer Licenses to Makers Care 1, LLC dba Makers Cafe, 4920 West 77th Street for the period beginning December 18, 2013 and ending March 31, 2014. Information / Background: Makers Care 1, LLC dba Makers Cafe, 4920 West 77th Street (Burgundy Place) has applied for new on -sale wine liquor and 3.2 beer licenses. They have filed the necessary paperwork and paid the applicable fees for the license. The Administration Department has reviewed the submittals and finds that they comply with code requirements. The Health Department is satisfied with the applicant's plan for storage and service. The Planning Department has reviewed the application and finds that it complies with code requirements. The Police Department has completed their. investigation. Attached is Sgt. Tim Olson's memo stating the findings of the Police Department's background investigation. The licenses are placed on the agenda for consideration by the Council. City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St Edina, MN 55424 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION SUMMARY ON -SALE WINE AND 3.2 PERCENT MALT LIQUOR LICENSE Establishment: Makers Cafe 1, LLC License: On Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor December 2013, the Edina Police Department completed a background investigation relating to a City.of Edina application for an On -Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license. The application was submitted- -by Makers Cafe l LLC. Maker's Cafe will operate from 4920 West 77`h St, Edina. Makers Cafe 1, LLC is authorized to-do business in Minmesota and is.registered with the State of Minnesota. Makers Cafe I, LLC is currently active and in good standing with the Minnesota Secretary of State. Makers Cafe 1, LLC and it's representatives are aware of the City of Edina's requirement relating to employee alcohol awareness training. Training.dates to meet this requirement ate pending. Owners/ Partners /Members: Makers iCafd 4, LLC: Christopher E. Eilers Minneapolis, MN Marshall T. Fay Plymouth, MN The.owners /partners/members have been investigated and Were found to have no criminal records. Checks were made with the following agencies. NCIC MINCIS Hennepin County Minnesota Secretary of State Minnesota Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division Personal, business and bank references were contacted and responded positively. From the information gathered during the course of the investigation, I found nothing to prevent Makers Cafe 1, LLC from obtaining an On Sale Wine and 3.2 Percent Malt Liquor license. I would support a positive recommendation from the Police Department in regard to the issuance of this license. G- gt. Tim Olson #142 To: City Council From: Steve Grausam, Liquor Operations Director Date: December 17, 2013 Subject: Request for Purchase —Edina Liquor Grandview Store Remodel Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Dec. 11, 2013 Company: Greystone Construction Prime General Contractors Recommended Quote or Bid: Greystone Construction $57,150 Ow, e O • ,1��RPOPA�FO • lose Agenda Item M IV. K. The Recommended Bid is ❑ Within Budget ® NotWithin Budget Bid or Expiration Date: Jan. 31, 2014 Amount of Quote or Bid: $57,150 $96,300 General Information: The 2014 Capital Improvement Plan includes funding for a light remodeling of the Edina Liquor Grandview location. Grandview was last remodeled in 2002. Our business has changed since that time, necessitating changes to better serve our customers. As Edina Liquor continues to face increased competition within our market, it is important to keep our stores fresh and efficient. The proposed remodeling project will include four key areas: • Redesigning the tasting area to allow for better traffic flow down main isle, • Redesigning the break room which will increase our warm beer area to take advantage of increased demand on craft beers, • Redesigning the third register area to allow for better staff use during non - business times, and • Redesign front cash wraps and pint display case to better utilize space and upgrade the look of front checkout area. The store will remain open during the remodeling project, with the majority of the work being completed during the evening or on weekends. Graystone, the proposed contractor, completed the 2012 remodel of the Southdale store. The scope and amount of the contract does exceed the original scope and amount proposed in the CIP of $25,000, but staff believes that this is a critical investment at this time. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 To: MAYOR & COUNCIL Agenda Item #: V. A. & B. From: Debra Mangen Action City Clerk Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information [I Subject: A. Nate Behlen — 2013 Operator of the Year — Sewer & Water Operation Association B. Memorial Blood Centers Award — Edina Police Department Battle Of The Badges Action Requested: None necessary Information / Background: No packet data, presentation will be done on Tuesday. evening. City of Edina 4861 W. 50u St. Edina, MN 55424 A House resolution honoring the city of Edina on the occasion of its 125th anniversary WHEREAS, our state is enhanced by the presence of those communities that have stood the test of time; and reaching 125 years is a significant milestone in the life of a community; and WHEREAS, the city of Edina began.as part of Richfield Township, where Irish, English;.and Scottish farmers_ began settling in the 1850s; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 1888, the residents of the township overwhelmingly voted 54 -2 to establish a new village, separating themselves from Richfield Township, and after a long and spirited debate, the name Edina was chosen by a vote of 47 to 42 to honor the nickname of the Scottish capital of Edinburgh; and WHEREAS, by 2010, the population of Edina was 47,941, and the city is known as a prosperous suburb of Minneapolis; and WHEREAS, this year, a number of signature events were held to celebrate the city's 125th anniversary, including the Edina Historical-Society's exhibit of historic photos, a Joly 4th Parade with organizations celebrating their own history or some event from Edina's past, the EdinaScapes art show, and.a historic home tour; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2013, a Founders' Day celebration will be held beginning at 5 p.m. with an open house at historic Cahill School and Minnehaha Grange Hall, where farmers voted to form the village of Edina, and continuing at 6 p.m. at Edina City Hall, for a social hour and music by the Edina Chorale, and at 7 p.m. with a program that features short readings and songs that celebrate the people who have created their community over the past 125 years; and WHEREAS, the lobby at.the city hall will display a timeline created by the Human Rights and Relations Commission marking Edina's human rights milestones, as well as historic photographs; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Committee on Rules and Legislative Administration of the House of Representatives of the State of Minnesota that it congratulates Edina on its 125th, anniversary and extends best wishes to the citizens of Edina. 22, 2013 Paul Thissen, Speaker MV to H e of Representatives m y, t Ch Rules and Legisla ve dministration (32W 21�� Ron Erhardt State Representative Paul Rosenthal State Representative lira Franzen State Senator AMY KLOBUCHAR MINNESOTA COMMITTEES: AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE JUDICIARY RULES AND ADMINISTRATION The City of Edina 4801 W. 50`x' Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Friends: 'United Mates senate WASHINGTON, DC 20510 December 12, 2013 Thank you for inviting me to join you tonight in celebrating the City of Edina's Quasquicentennial. Though I am unable to join you in person, I would like to take this moment to reflect on and commemorate 125 years of Edina history. Edina of today would be unrecognizable to the Irish and Scottish immigrants who settled here over a hundred years ago, formed their own village, and passionately fought over giving their new home the name Edina. Much has changed. What used to be a mix of farms, hills, and creeks is now a growing city with quiet residential streets, bustling shopping districts, and a thriving cultural scene. What would be recognizable to those early settlers are the people, independent and fair - minded, but ready to lend a helping hand to neighbors in need. I want to congratulate the City of Edina, the Edina Historical Society, and the many staff and volunteers who made this day possible. Edina is a beautiful city, and credit is due to the many people who commit their time and energy to making this community better. I am proud to serve you in the United States Senate and I look forward to working with you in the future. Sincerely, 1 my Klobuchar nited States Senator SENATOR AL FRANKEN December 11, 2013 The Honorable James Hovland Mayor City of Edina 4801 W. 50" St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland, Congratulations to the city of Edina as you celebrate its 125' anniversary. As someone who grew up in the neighboring city of St. Louis Park, I have many fond memories of time spent in Edina. It is home to beautiful parks, landmarks, and architecture, which greatly contribute to the high quality of life enjoyed by its residents. On its 125th birthday, Edina has many great accomplishments to celebrate. Your city has cultivated successful, nationally - ranked schools and a vibrant, diverse business community. It is clear that Edina is a forward thinking city, which you have demonstrated through actions such as becoming a GreenStep City. The city-wide policies and daily actions of residents provide excellent examples of sustainable practices that prioritize the environment. I am proud to represent the city of Edina as a United States Senator and I join you in celebrating this great city in Minnesota. It is cities, like yours, that make our state a wonderful place to live. Again, congratulations on the 125th anniversary! Sincerely, Al Franken United States Senator • Ilgl I tf-,ce of Senator Al l � tin , �• , This certificate is awarded to: Fra,nk�47 THE CITY OF EDINA On December 11, 2013 THIS FLAG WAS FLOWN OVER THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL, IN HONOR OF THE 1 25TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE VOTE TO FORM THE VILLAGE OF EDINA. Senator Al Franken United States Senate To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL C, Ce. V� may° • ��roRP04iP��O • Agenda Item #: VI. A. From: John Wallin, Finance Director Action Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information ❑ Subjects PUBLIC HEARING — 2014 Building Fees, Second Reading Ordinance No. 2013-11 Amending Schedule 185A Setting Fees For 2014 Action Requested: Hold a public hearing on the proposed increase of the Building Inspection fee increases as required by state statute. Discuss the proposed fees and charges to be adopted by Ordinance. Approve Second Reading of Ordinance 2013-11 Amending Code Section 185 Schedule A Increasing Certain Fees for 2014. Information / Background: Attached are schedules for fees and charges to be adopted by ordinance proposed for 2014. The fees that are proposed to change from 2013 to 2014 are in bold. The first reading was approved at the December 3, 2013 Council meeting. A public hearing is required by state statute to increase development related fees which includes the proposed building inspection fees increases. Utility fees are proposed as presented in the Water, Sanitary and Storm Sewer Utility Rate Study prepared by Ehlers & Associates and discussed by the City Council at the October 14 work session. The attached fees ordinance has not changed since first reading. Attachments 1) Ordinance No. 2012 -22 Amending Code. Section 185 Increasing. Certain Fees. 2) Schedule of General Code Provisions and Administration 185.01— Schedule A. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 ORDINANCE NO. 2013-11 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. The following described fees of Schedule A to Code Section 185 are amended to read as follows: IITION I SUBSEC. I FEE/CHARGE I AMOUNT 410 410.02 Subd. 1 Building Permit If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: $1 to $500 $26.00 501 to 2,000 $26.00 *for first $500 plus $3.35 for each additional $100 or fraction thereof to and including $2,000 2,001 to 25,000 $76.20 *for the first $2,000 plus $15.50 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $25,000 25,001 to 50,000 $430.00 *for the first $25,000 plus $11.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $50,000 50,001 to 100,000 $710.00 *for the first $50,000 plus $8.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 100,001 to 500,000 $1,100.00 *for the first $100,000 plus $6.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $500,000 500,001 to 1,000,000 $3,500.00 *for the first $500,000 plus $5.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $1,000,000 1,000,001 and up $6,000.00 *for the first $1,000,000 plus $4.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof 410 410.02 Subd. 2 Other Permit Related Fees $68.00 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever is greatest. (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved 421 421.04 R -O -W Excavation Permit Administrative Fee $85.00 Underground Utility/Telecom Installation - Directional Boring or Tunnelin Plus Minimum Permit Fee) $50.00 Per 100 L.. Ft Underground .Utility/Telecom Installation -Open Trenching(Plus Minimum Permit Fee ) $70.00 Per 100 L. Ft. .421 421.07 Subd. 3 Street Surface Repair $55.00 Per square foot under 10 square feet $45.00 -Per square foot from 10 -25 square feet $40.00 Per square foot_ over 25 square feet $0 to 300 $301 to 700 $701 to 1,000 1,001 to 5,000 5,001 to 10,000 10,001 to 25,000 25,001 to 50,000 50,001 and over N Fee Calculations: $20.00 $20.00 * plus1.75% > $300 $25.00 * plus- 3.10% > $700 $35.00 * plus 2.60% > $1,000 $150.00 *plus 2.15 % > $ 5,000 $265.00 *plus 1.85 %> $10,000 $575.00 * plus 1.65% > $25,000 $1,000.00* plus 1.30% > $50,000 * plus surcharge pursuant_ to M.S. 16B.70 Burner: Stoker; Steam'or' Hot Water Heating; Mechanical Warm Air Heating and Air Conditioning; Refrigeration; and Gas Piping Installers 435 435.0.7 Gas Piping Permit; Oil Burner: Minimum Fee: Stoker; Steam or Hot Water $25.00 Residential - plus surcharge Heating; Mechanical-Warm Air pursuant to M.S. 166.70 Heating and Air Conditioning; $30.00 Commercial - plus surcharge Refrigeration; pursuant to M.S. 16B.70 Fee Calculations: $0 to 1,000 $17.00 * plus 3.10% >$ 500 1,001 to 5,000 $35.00 * plus 2.60 % > $ 1,000 5,001 to 10,000 $150.00 * plus 2.15% > $ 5,000 10,001 to 25,000 $265.00 * plus 1.85% > $10,000 25,001 to 50,000 $575.00 * plus 1.65% > $25,000 50,001 and over $1,000.00* plus 1.30% > $50,000 * plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 16B.70 435 435.07 Subd. 1 Other Permit Related Fees $68.00 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever is greatest. (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved 440 440.04 Plumbing or Water Minimum Fee: Conditioning Permit $30.00 Commercial - plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 16B.70 $0 to 300 $301 to 700 $701 to 1,000 1,001 to 5,000 5,001 to 10,000 10,001 to 25,000 25,001 to 50,000 50,001 and over N Fee Calculations: $20.00 $20.00 * plus1.75% > $300 $25.00 * plus- 3.10% > $700 $35.00 * plus 2.60% > $1,000 $150.00 *plus 2.15 % > $ 5,000 $265.00 *plus 1.85 %> $10,000 $575.00 * plus 1.65% > $25,000 $1,000.00* plus 1.30% > $50,000 * plus surcharge pursuant_ to M.S. 16B.70 440 Installation or Testing of RPZ $35.00 1440.04 Backflow Preventers 440 440.04 Subd. 1 Other Permit Related Fees $68.00 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever is greatest. (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved 445. 445.08 Surcharge for Prohibited $110.00 Per month Connection to Sanitary Sewer 475 475.03 Subd. 1 Parking R mp License $135.00 Per ear 605 605.05 Subs.1 Operational permits required $64.00 Per hour with a minimum 1 hour by MSFC Section 105.6 fee (includes. supervision, code review, inspections overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) Non- business hours $89.00 Per hour with a minimum 1 hour ins ection fee 605 605.05 Subd. 2 Code Compliance Inspection $64.00 Per hour with a minimum 1 hour fee. (includes supervision, code review, inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved 625 625.04 Subd. 2 Other Permit Related Fees $64.00 Per hour with a minimum 1 hour fee. (includes supervision, code review, inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved 830 830.05 Subd. 2 Permit Fee for Tree Removal or Grading If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: $1 to $5,000 $165.00 $5,001 to $100,000 $165.00 for first $5,000 plus $2.25 , for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 $100.001 and up $375.00 for first $100,000 plus $1.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof 830 830.05 Subd. 2 Permit Fee for Open Pit or Excavation If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: $1 to $5,000 $165.00 $5,001 to $100,000 $165.00 for first $5,000 plus $2.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 $100.001 and up $375.00 for first $100,000 plus $1.25 for each additional $1;000 or fraction thereof 830 830.05 Subd. 2 Other Permit Related Fees $68.00 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever is greatest. (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly'wages and fringe benefits of employees involved 1100 1100.03 Sub. 2 Sewer Service: 1. Single Family, Town $52.86 Per quarter to and including 1600 Houses, Two - Family cubic feet Dwellings, Apartment building $3.30 Additional from 1601 cubic feet with four or less dwelling units and over 2. Apartment building with $47.57 Per qtr for each ,unit over four or more than four dwelling units. $3.30 Per 100. c.f. of water used, whichever is greater 3. Commercial and industrial $52.86 Per water meter or approved buildings, including schools sewage metering device on premises, or and churches $3.30 Per 100 c.f of water used'during the quarter, whichever is greater 1100 1100.03 Sub. 2 Water Service: 1. Per 100 cubic feet for $1.38 up to 3500 c.f. areas of City, except in the -$1.83 3600 to 6500 c.f. Morningside area $2.87 over 6500 c.f. $2.45 2. Per 100 cubic feet - Morningside area 2. Domestic accounts used by commercial and industrial $1.38 Up to 3500 cubic feet buildings, including schools $1.83 Over 3500 cubic feet and churches. - 3. Lawn watering accounts used by commercial and $1.83 Up to 3500 cubic feet industrial buildings, including $2.87 Over 3500 cubic feet schools and churches. 4. Meter charge $16.81 /quarter for up to % inch meter $22.91 /quarter for 1 inch meter $26.14 /quarter for 1 % inch meter $29.41 /quarter for 1 Y2 inch meter $47.35 /quarter for 2 inch meter $179.82/quarter for 3 inch meter $228.89 /quarter for 4 inch meter $190.06/quarter for 6 inch meter $368.36/ uarter for 8 inch meter 1105 1105.02 Service Availability Charge $2,485.00Per SAC unit X number of SAC (SAC) units computed pursuant to Subsection 1105.01 subd. 1 of this code 1105 1105.02 Charge for Connection to City $1,000 Water connection charge per Water or Sewer System REC unit X number of SAC units $500.00 Sewer connection charge per REC unit X number of SAC Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be January 1, 2014. First Reading: December 3, 2013 Second Reading: Published: Attest: Debra Mangen -City Clerk 5 James B. Hovland -Mayor units 1110 1110.03 Storm Water Drainage Charge $22.89 Per quarter pursuant to formula in Subsection 1110.03 1205 1205.01 Curb Cut Permit $80.00 Section 2. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be January 1, 2014. First Reading: December 3, 2013 Second Reading: Published: Attest: Debra Mangen -City Clerk 5 James B. Hovland -Mayor City of Edina SECTION SUBSECTION PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE Prop 2013 2014 General Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A AMOUNT C,-. f REV 195 195.03 Registration of Domestic Partners 25.00 25.00 Clerk Certified Copies of Registration 10.00 10.00 Clerk Amendments to Domestic Partners or 10.00 -10.00 Clerk Notice of Termination of Domestic Partners 200 200.04 Public Dance Permit 55.00 55.00 Clerk 4137 215 215.04 Bingo Occasion, Gambling Device, 15.00 15.00 per permit Clerk 4313 Raffle Permit 220 220.04 Machine or Amusement Device License 15.00 15.00 annually per establishment, plus Health 4176 15.00 15.00 per machine Health 4176 225 225.04 Special Events Application Fee 65.00 65.00 Clerk 4125 300 300.02 Subd 2 Redemption of Impounded Animals 35.00 35.00 per day for feeding & care, any veterinarian services and impounding Police 4331 fee of: 40.00 40.00 a) If animal has not been impounded within one year prior to the date Police 4331 of impounding 65.00 65.00 b) If animal has been impounded once within the year prior to the date Police 4331 of impounding 115.00 115.00 c) If animal has been impounded twice or more within one year prior Police 4331 to the date of impounding 300 300.02 Subd 3 Disposal of Animal _. 50.00 50.00 • per animal Police 4331 300 300.03 Subd. 3 Dog License 30.00 30.00 per dog Police 4120 20.00 20.00 per neutered dog Late charge after March 1 10.00 10.00 Police 4120 300 300.03 Subd. 4 Duplicate Dog License Tag '6.00 6.00 per duplicate tag Police 4120 300 300.04 Subd. 2 Commercial Kennel License 55.00 55.00 per year Police 4174 300 300.15 Permit for Extra Dogs or Cats 100.00 100.00 Police 4120 300 300.17 Dangerous Dog 100.00 100.00 Registration fee Police 4120 405 405.01 Landscaping, Screening, 'or Erosion 100.00 100.00 Planning 4361 Control Site Plan Permit 410 410.02 Subd. 1 Building Permit If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: $ 1 to 500 23.50 26.00 * Building 4111 501 to 2,000 23.50 26.00 ` for first $500 plus Building 4111 3.05 3.35 for each additional $100 or fraction thereof to and including $2,000 Building 4111 2,001 to 25,000 69.25 76.20 * for first $2,000 plus Building 4111 14.00 15.50 for each additional $1;000 or fraction thereof to and including $25,000 Building 4111 25,001 to 50,000 391.25 430.00 * for first $25,000 plus Building 4111 10.10 11.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $50,000 Building 4111 50,001 to 100,000 643.75 710.00 * for first $50,000 plus Building 4111 7.00 8.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 Building 4111 100,001 to 500,000 993.75 1,100.00 * for first $100,000 plus Building 4111 5.60 6.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $500,000 Building 4111 500,001 to 1,000,000 3,233.75 3,500.00 * for the first $500,000 plus Building 4111 4.75 5.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including Building 4111 $1,000,000 1,000,001 and up 5,608.75 6,000.00 * for the first $1,000,000 plus Building 4111 3.65 4.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof Building 4111 * plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 1613.70 Building 4380 Plan Review 65% 65% of Permit Fee Building 4111 G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/2013 3:16 PM City of Edina SECTION SUBSECTION PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE Proposed 2013 2014 General Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A AMOUNT DEPT REV 410 410.02 Subd. 2 Other Permit Related Fees 62.00 68.00 per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever Building 4111 is greatest. (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) 410 410.02 Subd. 3 Residential Building Contractor, 5.00 5.00 surcharge pursuant to M.S. 326.86 Building 4380 Remodeler or Specialty Contractor License Verification 411 411.03 Demolition Permit for Single and Two 1,500.00 1,500.00 Family Dwelling Units 415 415.02 Permit for Moving of Building 212.00 212.00 Building 415 415.02 Subd. 3 Indemnity Deposit for Damages 530.00 530.00 unless licensed by Commissioner of Transportation Building 2605 Sustained by Moving of Building 421 421.03 R -O -W Work Annual Registration 200.00 200.00 Engineer 4341 421 421.04 R -O -W Excavation Permit Administrative 75.00 85.00 Engineer 4341 Fee Per Additional Excavation -Paved Area 35.00 35.00 Engineer 4341 Per Additional Excavation - Unpaved Area 20.00 20.00 Engineer 4341 Underground Utility/Telecom Installation 45.00 50.00 per 100 L. Ft. Engineer 4341 - Directional Boring or Tunneling (Plus Minimum Permit Fee) Underground Utility/Telecom Installation 60.00 70.00 per 100 L. Ft. Engineer 4341 - Open Trenching (Plus Minimum Permit Fee) Overhead Utility/Telecom Installation 5.00 5.00 per 100 L. Ft. Engineer 4341 (Plus Minimum Permit Fee) 421 421.07 Subd. 3 Street Surface Repair 50.00 55.00 Per square foot under 10 square feet Engineer 4343 40.00 45.00 Per square foot from 10 -25 square feet Engineer 4343 35.00 40.00 Per square foot over 25 square feet Engineer 4343 430 430.03 Subd. 8 Installers Licenses: Oil Burner; Stoker; 55.00 60.00 Building 4117 Steam or Hot Water Heating, Mechanical Warm Air Heating and Air Conditioning; Refrigeration, and Gas Piping Installers 435 435.07 Gas Piping Permit; Oil Burner, Stoker, Minimum Fee: Steam or Hot Water Heating, Mechanical 22.00 25.00 Residential - plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 166.70 Building 4115 Warm Air Heating and Air Conditioning; 27.00 30.00 Commercial - plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 166.70 Building 4115 or Refrigeration Permit Fee Calculations: $0 to 1,000 16.00 17.00 * plus 3.10 % >$ 500 Building 4115 1,001 to 5,000 31.50 35.00 * plus 2.60 %> $ 1,000 Building 4115 5,001 to 10,000 135.50 150.00 * plus 2.15% > $ 5,000 Building 4115 10,001 to 25,000 243.00 265.00 * plus 1.85% > $10,000 Building 4115 25,001 to 50,000 520.50 575.00 * plus 1.65% > $25,000 Building 4115 50,001 and over 933.00 1,000.00 * plus 1.30% > $50,000 Building 4115 * plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 1613.70 435 435.07 Subd. 1 Other Permit Related Fees 62.00 68.00 per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever is Building 4115 greatest (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved 440 440.04 Plumbing or Water Conditioning Permit Minimum Fee: 15.00 15.00 Residential - plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 1613.70 Building 4112 27.00 30.00 Commercial - plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 166.70 Fee Calculations: G:\Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/204- 16 PM City of Edina c1:rT1nN SUBSECTION PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE Prop, 2013 2014 General Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A AMOUNT L G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/2013 3:16 PM $0 to 300 15.00 20.00 * Building Building 4112 4112 $301 to 700 15.00 20.00 plus 1.75% >$300 $701 to 1,000 22.00 25.00 * plus 3.10% >$700 Building 4112 1,001 to 5,000 31.50 35.00 * plus 2.60 %> $1,000 Building 4112 5,001 to 10,000 135.50 150.00 * plus 2.15% > $5,000 Building 4112 10,001 to 25,000 243.00 265.00 * plus 1.85% > $10,000 Building 4112 4112 25,001 to 50,000 520.50 575.00 * plus 1.65% > $25,000 * Building Building 4112 50,001 and over 933.00 1,000.00 plus 1.30 %> $50,000 * plus surcharge pursuant to M.S. 168.70 440 440.04 Installation or Testing of RPZ Backflow 27:00 35.00 Building 4306 440 440.04 Subd. 1. Preventers Other Permit Related Fees 62.00 68.00 per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever Building 4306 is greatest. (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved.) 445 445.08 Surcharge for Prohibited Connection to 100.00 110.00 per month Building 4391 Sanitary Sewer Same as the fees for a building permit (See 410.02 Subd.1, fees) Building 4111 450 450.05 450.28 Subd. 4 Swimming Pool Construction Public or Semi - Public Swimming Pool 470.00 470.00 per year for each enclosed pool (partial or all of the year) Health 4173 450 License 340.00 340:00 per year for each outdoor pool Health 4173 450 450.28 Subd. 4 Public or Semi - Public Whirlpool Bath or 170.00' 170.00 per year for each bath or pool Health 4173 Therapeutic Swimming Pool License 150.00 150:00 for reface or 50 square feet or less, plus an additional Planning 4185 460 460.06 Subd. 1 Sign Permit 3.00. 3.00 per square foot for signs greater than 50 square feet. 4 - 460.06 Subd. 1 60 Courtesy;_Bench Sign Permit 35.00 35.00. per year Planning Planning 4185 4361 460 460.06 Subd 6 Sign Variance Fee 350.00 350.00 Residential Property Planning 4361 700.00 700.00 Commercial Property 475 475.03 Subd. 1 Parking Ramp License 125.00 62.00 135.00 per year 64.00 Per hour with a minimum 1 hour fee. (Includes supervision, code review, Building Fire 4134 4322 605 605.05 Subd. 1 Operational permits required by MSFC inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees Section 105.6 involved) Non - business hours inspection,. 87.00 89.00 Per hour with a minimum 1 hour fee. Fire 4325 605 605.05 Subd. 1 Construction permits required by MSFC Section 105.7 except for those covered in City Code Section 625 If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: Fire 4324 $1 to 500 60.00 60.00 *minimum fee 501 to 2,000 60.00 60.00. * for first $500 plus Fire 4324 4.00 4.00 for each additional $100 or fraction thereof to and including $2,000 2,001 to 25,000 120.00 120.00 * for first $2,000 plus Fire 4324 16.00 16.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $25,000 25,001 to 50,000 488.00 488.00 * for first $25,000 plus Fire 4324 12.00 12.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $50,000 50,001 to 100,000 788.00 788.00 * for first $50,000 plus Fire 4324 9.00 9.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 100,001 to 500,000 1,238.00 1,238.00 * for first $100,000 plus Fire 4324 7.00 7.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $500,000 500,001 to 1,000,000 4,038.00 4,038.00 * for first $500,000 plus Fire 4324 6.00 6.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $1,000,000 _ 1,000,001 and up 7,038.00 7,038.00 * for first $1,000,000 plus Fire 4324 G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/2013 3:16 PM City of Edina SECTION SUBSECTION PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE Genera .Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A Proposed 2013 2014- AMOUNT DEPT REV G: \Budnet \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees;& Charge&xlsx 12112/20 ?6 PM 5.00 5.00 foreach-additional:$1,000or -fraction thereof Plan check 70% 70% ofpermit fee 605 605.05 Subd. 2 Code Compliance Inspection 62.00 ` 64.00 -Per hour rwith a_ minimumA.hour fee. (Includes supervision, code review, Fire 4326 inspections, overhead, hourly.wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) 605 605.05 Subd. 2 Day Care Fire Inspection 50.00 50.00 Per inspection per MN Statute:245A:151 Fire 4326 615 615.03 License to Service Fire Extinguishers 100.00 100.00 per year per person licensed Fire 4325 6.20 620.04 Permit Fee for Cleaning Commercial 90.00 90.00 Fire 4321 Kitchen Exhaust Hood and Duct Systems 625 625.04 Subd. 1 Sprinkler Permit Fees: Per Number of Heads: 1- 5 60.00 60.00 " (minimum fee) Fire 4161. 6- 12 90.00 90.00 Fire 4161 13- 25 140.00 140.00 Fire 4161 26- 50 260.00 260.00 Fire 4161 51 - 75 340.00 340.00 Fire 4161 76--100 400.00 400.00 Fire 4161 101 -125 440.00 440.00 Fire 4161 126-150 470.00 470.00 Fire 4161 151-175 510.00 510.00 Fire 4161 176-200 540.00 540.00 " Fire 4161 201-plus - 620.00 620.00 ` for first 200.+ $3.00 for each additional head Fire 4161 625 625:04' Subd. 1 Fire Pump Installation and Associated 255.00 255.00 Fire 4161 Hardware ' Dry Valve Assembly 255.00_ 255.00 Fire 4161 Hydrant Flow Test 110.00 110:00 Fire 4161 Standpipe Installation 160.00 160.00 Fire 4161 Each Additional Standpipe 55:00 55.00 Fire -4161 625 625.04 Subd. 1 Fire alarm & alternative fire suppression` permit If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: . $1 to 500 60.00 60.00 `minimum fee Fire 4162 501 to 2,000 60.00 60.00 ' for first $500 plus Fire 4162 4.00 4.00 for each additional $100 or fraction thereof to and including $2,000 2,001 to 25,000 120.00 120.00 ' for first $2,000 plus -Fire 4162 16.00 16.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $25,000 25,001 to 50,000 488:00 488.00 " for first $25,000 plus Fire 4162 12.00 12.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including-$50,000 50,001 to 100,000 788.00 788.00 *for first $50,000. plus Fire 4162 8.00 8.00 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 100,001 to 500,000 1,238.00 1,238.00 ' for first $100,000 plus, Fire 4162 7.00 7.00 for each additional $1,000'or.fraction thereof to and including $500,000 . 500,001 to 1,000,000 4,038.00 4,038.00 ' for first $500,000 plus Fire 4162 6.00 6.00 for each additional'$1, 000 or fraction- thereof to and including $1,000,000 1,000;001 and up 7,038.00 7,038.00 " for first- $1,000,000plus Fire 4162 5.00 6:00. for each-additional $1,000 or fraction thereof Plan check 70% 70% of permit fee 625. 625.04 Subd.72 Other Permit Related Fees 62.00 64.00 Per Kour with a minimuin,1 hour fee. (Includes supervision, code•review, Fire 4325 inspections, overhead, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved) G: \Budnet \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees;& Charge&xlsx 12112/20 ?6 PM City of Edina SFr_TION SUBSECTION PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE Prop 2013 2014 General Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A AMOUNT L. REV 635` 635.02 Fire Alarm 300.00 300.00 Residential Fire Fire 4323 4323 500.00 500.00 Commercial 640 640:02 License allowing sale of Fireworks 100.00 100.00 Per year Fire Recycle 4137 . 4640 716 716.02 Recycling Service: 5.25 5.25 " Per Quarter - Single Family Recycle 4640 5.25 5.25 Per Quarter - Double Bungalow 5.25 5.25 Per Quarter - Apartments /Condos (2 -8 units) Recycle 4640 721 721.03 Subd. 1 Food Establishment 620.00 620.00 High risk food Health Health 4171 4171 380.00 380.00 Medium risk food 110.00 110.00 Low risk food Health 4171 155.00 155.00 Base fee Health 4171 55.00 55.00 Beer or wine table service Health 4171 130.00 130.00 Alcohol bar service Health 4171 138.00 138.00 Food vehicle Health 4171 155.00 155.00 Additional facility Health 4171 200.00 200.00 Pushcart Health 4171 120.00 120.00 Itinerant food Health 4171 15.00 15.00 Food vending machine Health 4172 721 721.03 Subd 1 Restaurant Plan Review Fee 150% of License Fee Health 4353 Restaurant Plan Review Fee for Remodel 100% of License Fee Health 4353 Minimum Restaurant Plan Review Fee 130.00 130.00 Health 4177 735 735.03 Lodging Establishment 9.00 9.00 per room Health 4177 Supervised, Group Home 46.00 46.00 Health 4177 Boarding and Lodging House License 110.00 50.00 110.00 50.00 single, tract of land (may contain more'than one building under Health 4179 740 740.04 Multiple Dwelling Parking Garage per same ownership) 740 740.04 Multiple Dwelling Parking Garage 90.00 90.00 per garage Health 4351 Inspection Fee- 745 745.04 Subd. 2 Body Art Establishment License 300.00 300.00 Health 4137 745.07 Subd. 1 Body Art Establishment Plan Review Fee 300.00 300.00 Planning 4361 810 810.09 Subd. 3C Neighborhood Property Owner List r 1.00 1.00 200.00 per property owner name lot for division of one or more lots where no new buildable Planning 4361 810 810.09 Plat and Subdivision Filing Fee 200.00 per lots are created 700.00 700.00 plus $50 /lot - all -plats and subdivision other than above Planning 4361 810 810.09 Subd: 2 Developer's Agreement Fee for City 6.5% of the total construction cost of such public improvements Planning 4361 Services Rendered in Connection with Required Street, Water and Sewer Improvements Same as for a building permit (See Subsection 410.02 Subd 1 fees) Building 4111 815 815.03 Antennas, Dish Antennas & Tower 820 820.01 Permits Filing of Application for Vacation of 450.00 450.00 Clerk 4391 Street, Alley or Easement. Building 4118 830 830.05 Subd. 2 Permit Fee for Tree Removal or Grading If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: $1 to $5,000 150.00 165.00 $5,001 to $100,000 150.00 165.00 for first $5,000 plus 2.00 2.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 $100,001 and up 340.00 375.00 for first $100,000 plus 1.00 1.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof Building 4118 830 830.05 Subd. 2 Permit Fee for Open Pit or Excavation G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/20133:16 PM City of Edina SECTION SUBSECTION PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE Proposed 2013 2014 General Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A AMOUNT DEPT REV G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/201" ^16 PM If total valuation of work is: Then amount is: $1 to $5,000 150.00 165.00 $5,001 to $100,000 150.00 165.00 for first $5,000 plus 2.00 2.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof to and including $100,000 $100,001 and up 340.00 375.00 for first $100,000 plus 1.00 1.25 for each additional $1,000 or fraction thereof 830 830.05 Subd. 2 Other Permit Related Fees 62.00 68.00 per hour or the total hourly cost to City, whichever Building 4111 is greatest. (includes supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of employees involved.) 845 845.04 Restricted Access Parking Lot License 500.00 500.00 Planning Planning 4137 4137 Renewals: 100.00 100.00 0 - 50 spaces Planning 4137 150.00 150.00 51 - 100 spaces 250.00 250.00 100 - 200 spaces Planning 4137 400.00 400.00 Over 200 spaces Planning 4137 850 850.04 Subd. 2 C Variance Fee 350.00 350.00 Residential Planning Planning 4361 4361 600.00 600.00 Commercial 850 850.04 Subd. 4 A.2 Fee for Transfer of Land to Another 500.00 500.00 (One) R -2 Lot Planning Planning 4361 4361 Zoning District 600.00 600.00 (Two) R -2 Lots Planning 4361 1,100.00 1,100.00 All other Transfers 850 850.04 Subd. 2,3A5 Mailed Notices 1.00 800.00 1.00 800.00 A parcel Fee shall be equal to City staff time expended and City's direct Planning Planning 4361 850 850.04 Subd. 5 A.1 Conditional Use Permit cost incurred in processing applications. 850 850.10 Subd. 1 D Landscaping Inspection 100.00 100.00 Planning Planning 4361 4361 850 850.04 Subd. 3 F Site Plan Review Fee 850.00 850.00 Planning 4361 850 850.17 Subd. 5 C.1.a Temporary Retail Sales in PID Permit 400.00 400.00 First Permit Planning 4361 300.00 300.00 Subsequent Permits 850 850.20 Subd. 10 Certificate of Appropriateness Planning 4361 600.00 600.00 Accessory structure and facade change 1,200.00 1,200.00 New house 900 900.07 Subd. 1 Liquor License Fees (per year) Police 4130 300.00 300.00 Under 200 members 500.00 500.00 201 -500 members 650.00 650.00 501 -1000 members 850.00 850.00 1001 -2000 members 1,000.00 1,000.00 2001 -4000 members 2,000.00 2,000.00 4001 -6000 members 3,000.00 3,000.00 over 6000 members 8,850.00 8,850.00 On -Sale Intoxicating License - Restaurants only Police 4132 670.00 670.00 3.2 Beer License Off or On Sale Police 4130 2,000.00 2,000.00 Wine On -Sale - Restaurants only Police 4131 200.00 20.00 per event - Temporary On -Sale Intoxicating - Max 3 days by MS Police 4130 95.00 95.00 per event - Temporary On -Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor Police 4130 200.00 200.00 Sunday On -Sale License - Restaurants only Police 4130 1020 1020 False Automatic Alarm 25.00 25.00 for the first response per calendar year Police 4332 110.00 110.00 for the 2nd thru 4th response within one calendar year Police 4332 200.00 200.00 for the 5th and subsequent false alarm within one calendar year Police 4332 1040 1040.08 Loudspeaker Permit 25.00 25.00 Clerk Planning 4137 4361 1045 1045.05 Variance Fee RV's, Boats, etc. Storage 50.00 50.00 Based upon water usage during winter quarter. (November 1 to March 1) 1100 1100.03 Subd. 2 Sewer Service Charge: G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/201" ^16 PM City of Edina - SECTION SUBSECTION Prot PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE 2013 201, General Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A AMOUNT REV G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/2013 3:16 PM Single Family Dwellings, Townhouses, Two- Family Dwellings, Apartment Buildings Containing Four or Less 51.20 52.86 Per quarter up to and including 1600 cubic feet Finance ' 464 Dwelling Units: 3.20 3.30 Additional from 1601 cubic feet and over Finance 4641 Apartment Buildings with More Than 46.08 47.57 Per quarter for each unit over four or Finance 4641 Four Dwelling Units: 3.20 3.30 per 100 cubic feet of water used during the quarter, whichever is greater Finance 4641 Commercial and Industrial Buildings, 51.20 52.86 Per water meter or approved sewage metering device on premises, or Finance 4641 Including Schools and Churches: 3.20 3.30 per 100 cubic feet of water used during the quarter, whichever is greater Finance 4641 1100 1100.03 Subd. 3 Industrial User Extra Strength Charges As allocated to City by Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Finance 4641 1100 1100.03 Subd. 4.A Shutting Off or Turning On Curb Water For each turn -on and each shut -off. Finance 4628 Stops at Customer's Request or Due to Non - payment of Bill 35.00 35.00 Finance 4626 1100 1100.04 subd. 1.A Fee for Alternative Water Meter Reading 20.00 20.00 Per quarter Finance 4627 1100 1100.04 Subd. 1.0 Issuance of Water Meter Cost of water meter, plus handling charges 1100 1100.03 Subd. 2 Water Service 1. Per 100 cubic feet for areas of City, except as described in #2 below Finance 4626 1.31 1.38 Up to 3500 cubic feet 1.74 1.83 From 3600 cubic feet to 6500 cubic feet 2.73 2.87 Over 6500 cubic feet 2.44 2.45 2. Per 100 cubic feet - Morningside area Finance 4626 Domestic accounts used by: Commercial and Industrial Buildings, 1.31 1.38 Up to 3500 cubic feet Including Schools and Churches: 1.74 1.83 Over 3500 cubic feet Lawn watering accounts used by: Commercial and Industrial Buildings, 1.74 1.83 Up to 3500 cubic feet Including Schools and Churches: 2.73 2.87 Over 3500 cubic feet Meter Charge: 15.97 16.81 Per quarter for up to 3/4 inch meter Finance 4627 21.77 22.91 Per quarter for 1 inch meter Finance 4627 24.84 26.14 Per quarter for 1 1/4 inch meter Finance 4627 27.94 29.41 Per quarter for 1 1/2 inch meter Finance 4627 44.99 47.35 Per quarter for 2 inch meter Finance 4627 170.85,' 179.82 Per quarter for 3 inch meter Finance 4627 217.47 228.89 Per quarter for 4 inch meter Finance 4627 275.59 290.06 Per quarter for 6 inch meter Finance 4627 349.99 368.36 Per quarter for 8 inch meter Finance 4627 Flat Annual Charges as Follows: - Park Department for water used for sprinkling and skating rinks Finance 4626 - Street Department for water used for flushing street Finance 4626 1105 1105.01 Subd. 1 Service Availability Charge (SAC) 2,435.00 2,485.00 Per SAC unit X number of SAC units computed pursuant to Subsection Building 4307 1105.01, Subd, 1 of this code 1105 1105.02 Charge for Connection to City Water or 860.00 1,000.00 Water. connection charge per REC unit X number of SAC units Engineer 4116 Sewer System 430.00 500.00 Sewer connection charge per REC unit X number of SAC units 1110 1110.03 Storm Water Drainage Charge 21.59 22.89 Per quarter pursuant'to formula in Subsection 1110.03 Finance 4642 Surcharges for violation of_the Irrigation Bans are determined based on the number of water 1115 1115.03 Water Surcharges restriction violations issued to an owner in the previous three years and are as follows: First Offense Written warning Second Offense 50.00 50.00 Third Offense 100.00 100.00 Fourth Offense 200.00 200.00 Each Additional Offense 300.00 300.00 1205 1205.01 Curb Cut Permit 40.00 80.00 Engineer 4344 1230 1230.07 Sidewalk Cafe Permit 650.00 650.00 Clerk 4137 G: \Budget \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014 Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/2013 3:16 PM City of Edina SECTION SUBSECTION PURPOSE OF FEE OR CHARGE General-Code Provisions and Administration 185.01 - Schedule A Proposed 2013 2014' AMOUNT DEPT REV G: \BudnM \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014.Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/20' 16 PM 1230.08 Temporary Liquor License Special Permit; 320:00 320.00 -,Per. Clerk 4137 1230 1230.10 Off -leash Dog Park 25.00. 25.00 - Resident 50.00 50:00 Non- Resident 1235 1235.03 Subd. 2 Parking Permit 5.00 5.00 _per month pro -rated Police 4751 Refund Parking Permit - Sticker Must 5.00 5.00 per month pro -rated Police 4751 Be Returned 1300 1300.02 Subd. 1 Refuse'or Recycling Hauler's License 300.00 300.00 per year for 1st vehicle: Health 4178 95.00 95.00 per year for each additional vehicle, Health 4178 1311 1311.03 Peddler/ Solicitor`Permit . 30.00 30.00 per permit - valid for 14 calendar days Police, 4128 1311.04 Subd.,1 Registration for Peddling /Soliciting 50.00 50.00 per registration- .valid for.90 calendar days Police 4128 1325 1325.03 Tobacco Sale License 370.00 370.00: per.location Health 4170 1341 1341.02 Registration for Massage. Therapists 20.00 20.00 Per therapist for-those businesses exempt from icensure ., Clerk 4137 1341 1341.05 Physical Culture & Health Service or 295.00 295.00 Business License Clerk 4137 Club, Reducing Club or Salon, Sauna Parlor, Massage Parlor or Escort Service License 1341 1341.05 Investigation Fee - Business License 1,500.00 1,500.00 Clerk 4314 1345 1345.05 Subd. 1 Sexually- oriented Business License 5,000.00 5,000:00 per year. Clerk 4137 1345 1345.05 Subd. 2 Business License .1,500:00 1,500.00 At time of original application Clerk 4137 1350 1350:06 Subd. 1 Commercial Photography 35.00 35.00 Manager Permit- 'Still Photography Clerk 4133 130.00 130.00 Manager Permit - Motion Photography Clerk 4133 362.00 362.00 Council Permit Clerk 4133 1400 1400.12 Truck Restrictive Road Permit, 100.00 100.00''. - Engineer 4190 1410 1410.01 Redemption of Impounded Vehicle Fee as posted, in Police�Department ` Police 4334 G: \BudnM \Fees & Charges\2014 Fees & Charges\2014.Proposed Fees & Charges.xlsx 12/12/20' 16 PM To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL e 0 Po V11 • 1888 Agenda.1tem #: VIII. A. From: John Wallin, Finance Director Action Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013' Information ❑ Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -135 Setting 2014 Tax Levy And Adopting 2014 Operating Budget Action Requested: Approve Resolution No. 2013 -135 Setting 2014 Tax Levy And Adopting 2014 Operating Budget Information / Background: The attached resolution approves the budget and the levies for governmental and enterprise budgets. The 20 years of referendum levy were set in 1996 when the GO Park and Recreation Bonds Series 19968 were issued and reset when those bonds were refunded by GO Park and Recreation Bonds Series 2005A. For both issues all levies were set by law at 105% of the corresponding annual debt service payments. The debt service fund is now sufficient to cover any foreseeable tax shortages and I would recommend canceling the portion of the 2014 levy in excess of the annual debt service payment. Future referendum levies remain at the 105% level and would require canceling a portion of the levy on an annual basis depending on the amount needed to maintain a sufficient debt service fund. The attached resolution reflects the budget as presented for the December 3 Truth in Taxation hearing. Attachment: Resolution No. 2013 -135 Setting 2014 Tax Levy And Adopting 2014 Operating Budget City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013 -135 RESOLUTION ADOPTING.THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF EDINA FOR THE YEAR 2014, AND ESTABLISHING TAX LEVY FOR YEAR 2014, PAYABLE IN 2014 THE CITY COUNCIL'OF THE CITY OF EDINA MINNESOTA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The Budgets for all Governmental Funds for the City of Edina for the calendar year 2014 is hereby adopted as after this set forth, and funds are hereby appropriated therefore: 2014 GOVERNMENTAL FUND BUDGETS Braemar Debt General HRA PACS CDBG Police SR Memorial Service Construction Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES Property ax levy $ 22.509,403 $ $ S Reductions (119,000) _ Net ax revenue 22,390,403 Tax increments - 3,900,000 - Franchise fees 770,000 - 1,200,000 Special assessments - - - Ucenses and permits 3,277,865 - - Intergovemmenal 1,093,500 - - Charges for services 4,132,766 - - Fines and forfeitures 950,000 - - Investment income 100,000 118,000 Other revenue 451,100 - - Transfers 765,100 Debt issued - - Other financing sources - - TOTAL REVENUES AND OTHER FINANCING SOURCES $ 33,930,734 $ 4,018,000 $ 1,200,000 $ S $ $ 3,953,397 $ 992,072 $ 27,454,872 (119,000) 39953397 992,072 27,335,872 $ S $ S' 3,900,000 $ 8,116,558 100,000 2,070,000 2,083,699 1,237,872 3.321,571 25,000 3,302,865 105,000 153,689 - - 2,680,000 4,032,189 50,000 4,182,766 150.000 827,487 950,000 900 200 20,000 88,300 327,400 57,821 5,000 513.921 250,000 1,015,100 2,917,200 2,917,200 105,000 $ 212,410 $ 5.200 $ 6,057,096 $ 8.340.444 $ 53,868,884 EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES - BY DEPARTMENT Administration $ 1,680,069 $ 6,371,489 $ $ $ S $ S' 65,000 $ 8,116,558 Communication & tech. 998,357 211.900 1,210,257 Human resources 677,487 150.000 827,487 Finance 884,509 25,000 909,509 Public works 8,266.220 - - - - - - 1,226,395 9,492,615 Engineering 1,607,798 - 1,226,752 - - - - 6,320,000 9,154.550 Police 10,166,166 - - - 59,000 - 1,038,845 11,264,011 Fire 6,697.458 422,000 7.119,458 Parks & recreation 1,357.639 333,000 1,690,639 Community development 1,595,031 105,000 1,700,031 Debt service - - 6,008,988 6,008,988 Transfers _ _ - _ - 620,60D 620,600 TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES $ 33.930,734 $ 6,371,489 $ 1,226,752 $ 105,000 $ 59,000 $ $ 6,008,988 $ 10,412,740 $ 58,114,703 EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES - BY TYPE Personal services $ 24,085,051 $ 115,219 $ $ - $ $ $ $ 102,956 $ 24,303,226 Contractual services 4,404,931 656,070 22,000 105.000 54,000 148,522 5,390,523 Commodities 1,740,792 200 25,000 5,000 73,522 1,844,514 Central services 3.699,960 - 79,752 - 3,779,712 Equipment - - 2,138.14D 2,138,140 Capital outlay 5,600,000' 1,100,000 7,329,000 14,029,000 Debt service 6,008,988 - 6,008,988 Transfers 620.600 620.600 TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER FINANCING USES $ 33,930.734 $ 6,371,489 $ 1,226,752 $ 105,000 $ 59,000 $ $ 6,008,988 $ 10,412,740 $ 58,114,703 CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ $ (2.353,489) $ (26,752) $ - $ 153,410 $ 5,200 $ 48.108 $ (2,072,296) $ (4,245,819) Section 2: The Budgets for all Enterprise Funds for the City of Edina, for the calendar year 2014 is hereby adopted as after this set forth, and funds are hereby appropriated therefore: 2014 ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY DEPARTMENT Aquatic Golf. Arc Administration $ $ 12,263,854 Utilities Liquor Center Course Arena Center Edinborough Centennial Finance 278.110 Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Fund Total REVENUES AND TRANSFERS IW'?- . Operating revenues $ 18.542,999 $., 14,058,841 $ 966.500 $ 3.729,750 $ 1,941,164 $ 439,550 $ 1,311,800 $ 771,000 $ 41,761,604 Intergovernmental 542,000 176,000 Police 429,702 - - - 542,000 Investment income 67,631 429,702 Par1a and recreation 25,000 27,500 120,131 Other revenue 51,356 1.575,683 992.638 10.443,497 Transfers 100,000 3,000 54.356 Transfers 795,000 365.000 200.000 120,600 25,000 1,505,600 TOTAL REVENUES AND TRANSFERS OUT $ 14,059,094. $ 14,063,954 $ TRANSFERS IN $ 19,203,986 $ 14.058,841 $ 966,500 $ 4.524,750 $ 2,306.164 $ 642,556 $ 1,457,400 $ 823,500 $ 43,983,691 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY DEPARTMENT Administration $ $ 12,263,854 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 12,263,854 Finance 278.110 - 278,110 Public worla 13,075,282 13.075,282 Engineering 176,000 176,000 Police 429,702 429,702 Par1a and recreation 891.349 3,935,124 2385,165 663,538 1.575,683 992.638 10.443,497 Transfers 100,000 1,800,100 1.900,100 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT $ 14,059,094. $ 14,063,954 $ 891,349 $ 3,935,124 $ 2,385,165 $ 663,538 $ 1,575,683 $ 992,638 $ 38,566,545 EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT - BY TYPE COGS $ $ 10,013,099 $ 43,500 $ 366,540 $ 80,000 $ 23,000 $ 95,000 $ 14,000 $ 10,635,139 Personal services 1,683.310 1,378.442 362,211 1,828.701 861,659 437,753 725,075 606,641 7,883,792 Contractual services 6.573,063 513.592 159,225 633,455 612,400 95.367 358,000 166.885 9,111,987 Commodities 974,500 61,725 60,850 412,800 95,750 47,050 184,150 117.800 1,954,625 Central services 692:088 220,896 26,340 128.628 57,048 34,368 51.708 49,812 1,260,888 Depreciation 3.305,000 76,100 231.500 565.000 535,000 26,000 161,750 37,500 4,937,850 Interest 731,133 7,723 143,308 - - 882,164 Transfers 100,000 1,800,100 1,900,100 TOTAL EXPENSES AND TRANSFERS OUT $ 14,059,094 $ 14,063,954 $ 891,349 $ 3,935,124 $ 2,385,165 $ 663.538 $ 1,575.683 $ 992,638 $ 38.566,545 CHANGE IN NET POSITION POSITION $ 5.144,892 $ (5,113) $ 75.151 $ 589.626 $ (79,001) $ (20,988) $ (118,283) $ (169,138) $ 5,417,146 Section 3. That there is proposed to be levied upon all taxable real and personal property in the City of Edina a tax, -rate sufficient to produce the amounts hereinafter set forth: GENERAL FUND $ 22,509,403 CONSTRUCTION FUND - EQUIPMENT LEVY $ 992;072 LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF CIP PLAN BONDS - SERIES $ 9471'600 2010A LEVY FOR. PAYMENT OF HRA PUBLIC PROJECT $ 409,244 BONDS -SERIES 2005A LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF CIP PLAN BONDS - SERIES $ 441,944 2007A LEVY FOR PAYMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY $ 1,526,809 DEBT TOTAL LEVY $ 26,827,072 Section 4. That there is proposed to be levied upon all taxable real and personal property in the City of Edina, a tax rate sufficient to produce the amount below for the debt levy of the market . . . is, value based referendum levy and canceling the portion of the levy not required to produce the following amount: GO PARK AND RECREATION BONDS SERIES 19966/2005A $ 627,800 Passed and adopted by the City Council on December 17, 2013. . ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, ,City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) James B. Hovland, Mayor CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 120 City Clerk To: MAYOR & COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: December 17, 2013 Subject: Resolution No. 2013 -136 Accepting Various Donations Action Requested: Adopt Resolution. Information / Background: Agenda Item #- VIII. B. 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 -136 City of Edina - 4801 W. 50th St - Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-136 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,Jhat the Edina City Council accepts with sincere appreciation the following listed donations on behalf of its citizens. Fire Department: Thurl M. Quigley $100.00 Edina Parks & Recreation Department: Edina High School Dug Out Club $11,499.00 Dated December 17, 2013 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK Two Scoreboards — Pamela Park Softball Fields James B- Hovland, Mayor I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of December 17, 2013, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of City Clerk R :PORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR & COUNCIL { Agenda Item #: VIII. C. From: Scott Neal Action City Manager Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information El Subject: Ordinance No. 2013 -13 Temporarily Prohibiting Smoking Lounges And Vapor Lounges Action Requested: Adopt Ordinance No. 2013 -13 including waiver of second reading. Information / Background: . During the November 19 Work Session, City Council Members expressed concerns with the local regulation and regulatory authority over the use, sale and oversight of e- cigarettes. You directed me to confer with the City Attorney regarding the matter. You also asked me to direct the Community Health Committee to study the issue in order to advise the Council on future related policy. I conferred with the City Attorney and shared a draft moratorium ordinance with the City Council at the December 3 Council meeting. The moratorium, if adopted by the City Council, will temporarily prohibit the establishment of "vapor lounges" and other similar facilities that are specifically designed for the sale and use of e- cigarettes and similar products. I have also advised the staff to the Community Health Committee about the matter and added the subject t the committee's 2014 Work Plan. The City Attorney and I will provide further explanation and address questions at the December 17 Council meeting. Attachments: Ordinance No. 2013 -13 City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St Edina, MN 55424 ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -13 CITY OF EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN INTERIM ORDINANCE TEMPORARILY PROHIBITING SMOKING LOUNGES AND VAPOR LOUNGES THE CITY COUNCIL'OF:EDINA.ORDAINS: SECTION L ,DEFINITIONS: The following terms when used in this ordinance shall mean: E- cigarette means an electronic device.that converts nicotine liquid into water vapor. The e- cigarette has three main parts: a battery, atomizer and cartridge. Smoking lounge means a location licensed to sell tobacco products where: (a) Except for a bona fide sale. of a smoking device, providing or otherwise making available for use by a customer, potential customer, or any other person a smoking device for the purpose of smoking any. tobacco product; (b) Providing in exchange for a fee or any other consideration seating within or access to, the indoor area of a tobacco products shop; or (c) , Permitting within the indoor area the sampling of any tobacco product which was not furnished by the tobacco products shop on the date and at the time the sampling occurs. Vapor lounge means a location that sells e- cigarettes where: (a) Except for a bona fide. sale of e- cigarettes, providing or otherwise making available for use by a customer, potential customer, or any other person a device for the purpose of using an e- cigarette product; (b) Providing in exchange fora fee or any other consideration seating within or access to the indoor area of a shop that sells e- cigarettes; or (c) Permitting within the indoor area of a shop that sells e- cigarettes the sampling of any e- cigarette product which was not furnished by the shop on the date and at the time the sampling occurs. Official Controls means ordinances and regulations which control the physical. development of the .City or any part thereof or any detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the comprehensive plan. Official controls include ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and'official maps. SECTION 2. BACKGROUND: The City has not adopted specific Official Controls for Smoking Lounges and Vapor Lounges. There are substantial concerns that the current City zoning ordinance does not adequately address issues relating to such uses such as the appropriate locations and the conditions under which they may be allowed within the City, including compatibility with existing uses. As a result of the important land use and zoning issues cited above, the City will conduct studies for the purpose of consideration of possible amendments to the City's official. controls to address the issues concerning such uses. J Ordinance No. 2013 -13 Page Two SECTION 3. INTENT: It is the intent of this ordinance to allow the City of Edina time to complete an evaluation of Smoking Lounges and Vapor Lounges and to consider changes in the City's official controls necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare and in the interim to preserve the status quo. SECTION 4. TEMPORARY PROHIBITION: Pending the completion of the above referenced study and the adoption of appropriate official controls, Smoking Lounges and Vapor Lounges are prohibited. SECTION S. EXEMPTIONS: The statutory exemption to this ordinance set forth in Minnesota Statutes § 462.355, Subd. 4 is incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its passage and shall remain in effect until the date of the adoption of the official controls contemplated hereunder and the repeal of this ordinance or , 2014, whichever occurs first First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor To: MAYOR & COUNCIL. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: December 17, 2013 Agenda Item #: VIII. D. Subject: Ordinance No. 2013 -14 Enacting New Code For City of Edina Action Discussion ❑ Information ❑ Action Requested: Adopt Ordinance No. 2013 -14 enacting new City Code including waiver of second reading Information I Background: . During 2012, the city entertained proposals from several codifiers of municipal ordinances. We selected Municipal Code Corporation. from Florida as the best fit for Edina. All of our ordinances were sent to Municipal Code for re- codification. Municipal Code conducted a legal review looking for outdated provisions and language and provided us with a draft during the latter part of 2012. The draft reorganized our code into an encyclopedic format, updated statutory citations, but no substantive changes to Edina ordinances were made. Staff reviewed the draft and offered suggestions. In March of 2013, Municipal Code had a staff attorney meet with the City,Clerk and City Attorney to review all the marked questions from the review of the draft. Following the legal conference, Municipal Code produced a proof which again was distributed to staff for review and comment. The. new code has a detailed table of contents preceding each section as well as a comprehensive table of contents. In addition, the code has comprehensive index, state law reference table and a land development regulation index. Finally to help navigate the new code there is a code comparative table. Future updates (supplements) to the code will be available both in paper form (about 2 -3 times a year) and online (almost immediately following the adoption of any amendment). In order to put this new code into use the attached enacting ordinance has been prepared for adoption by the Council. Following its adoption and publication, we will be placing the link to the online version on our website and distributing the paper document to all current subscribers of our paper document. This includes the Edina School Reference Library, Hennepin County Library, the court system, all staff, our attorneys and some other people who had subscribed for the paper version of our code. Staff recommends adoption of the attached ordinance, including waiver of second reading. Attachments: Ordinance No. 2013 -14 City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 J 4 ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -14 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AND ENACTING A NEW CODE FOR THE CITY .OF EDINA, MINNESOTA;.,PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF CERTAIN ORDINANCES NOT INCLUDED THEREIN;: PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION ' THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR THE MANNER OF AMENDING SUCH CODE; AND PROVIDING WHEN SUCH CODE AND THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: Section 1. The Code: entitled-"Edina City Code," published by Municipal Code Corporation, consisting of chapters I through 36, each inclusive, is_ adopted. Section 2. All ordinances of a general and permanent nature enacted on or before October 14, 2013, except Ordinance No. 2013 -09 and, not included in the Code or recognized and continued in force by reference therein, are repealed. Section 3. The repeal provided for in section 2 hereof shall not be construed to revive any ordinance or part thereof that has been repealed by a subsequent ordinance that is repealed by this ordinance. Section 4. Unless another penalty is expressly provided; every person convicted of a violation of any provision of the Code or any ordinance, rule or regulation adopted or issued in pursuance thereof shall, be punished as follows: k• (1) Petty Misdemeanors. Whenever an act or omission is declared in this Code to be a petty misdemeanor, any person violating the provision will, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than $300. The cost of prosecution may be added to the penalty imposed on every person convicted of violating any provision of this Code. ;(2) Misdemeanors. In any case other than those in which a violation is expressly stated to be a petty misdemeanor in this Code,. any person violating any provision of this Code, or any rule or regulation adopted under this Code will, upon conviction, be guilty of a misdemeanor, and be subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for a term not to exceed 90 days or both, plus, in either case, the cost of prosecution. The cost of prosecution may be added to the penalty imposed on every person convict ed of violating any provision'of this Code. (3) Separate Violations. Unless otherwise provided, each act of violation and every day on which a violation occurs or continues, constitutes a separate offense. (4) Other Remedies. In addition to the remedies set out above in this section, the City may exercise, with or separately, from such remedies and at the same or separate times, all and any legal and equitable remedies then available to the City by this Code or State Law to enforce this Code, or to recover any fees, charges or expenses owed to City pursuant to this Code, including, without limitation, injunction and the penalties and remedies in any provision incorporated into this Code by reference as provided in this Code. ;i - 11-k-11. Ordinance No. 2013 -14 Page Two (5) Permits, Licenses and Registrations. In addition to other remedies available to the City, the City may revoke or suspend, pursuant to the provisions of the Code, any permit, license or registration when the holder has violated or failed to comply with any provision of this Code which applies to the permit, license or registration which is the subject of the suspension or revocation. (6) Incorporated Law. Any code, statute, or other provision, incorporated into and made a part of this Code by reference, shall also include and incorporate any penalties and remedies for violations which are a part of such incorporated provision, and the City may enforce such penalties and pursue such remedies in addition to the other penalties and remedies set out or referenced in this Code. The penalty provided by this section, unless another penalty is expressly provided, shall apply to the amendment of any Code section, whether or not such penalty is reenacted in the amendatory ordinance. In addition to the penalty prescribed above, the city may pursue other remedies such as abatement of nuisances, administrative adjudication, injunctive relief and revocation of licenses or permits. Section 5. Additions or amendments to the Code when passed in such form as to indicate the intention of the city to make the same a part of the Code shall be deemed to be incorporated in the Code, so that reference to the Code includes the additions and amendments. Section 6. Ordinances adopted after October 14, 2013 that amend or refer to ordinances that have been codified in the Code shall be construed as if they amend or refer to like provisions of the Code. Section 7. This ordinance shall become effective after its adoption and publication according to law First Reading: December 17, 2013 Second Reading. Waived Published: December 26, 2013 Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor ow 4. To: Mayor and Council Agenda Item #: VIII.E. From: Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator Action 0 Discussion ❑ Date: Dec. 17, 2013 Information. ❑ Subject: Ordinance No. 2013 -15 Amending the Edina City Code Concerning the Community Health Committee Action Requested: Grant first reading and waive second reading, adopting Ordinance No. 2013 -15 amending the Edina City Code concerning the Community Health Committee. Information / Background: As requested by the City Council during previous joint work.sessions, the Community Health Committee (CHC) has reviewed the current City code section regarding the purpose and duties of the CHC and proposes the attached changes to the City Code. The proposed changes will broaden the mission of the CHC to include community -wide health and wellness issues. The changes will also align the Community Health Commission's purpose and duties with the duties required of the Edina Community Health Board, by Minnesota Statutes 145A, and the Local Public Health Act. The City Attorney has reviewed the new ordinance language. The CHC is also forwarding proposed modifications to City's Mission and Vision Statements for consideration during the upcoming revision of the Edina s strategic plan, Vision 20/20. The recommendations support a health in all policies initiative. The proposed modifications also reflect the CHC's belief that the City's statements need to become more aspirational, as they relate to the health of Edina, to drive change in the community. As the Council prepares to update Vision 20/20 in 2014, the CHC requests that the attached proposed language changes be considered and incorporated. Attachments: -Ord. No. 2013 -15 -An Ordinance Amending the Edina City Code Concerning Boards and Commissions - Proposed Mission and Vision Statement Edits. City of Edina 4801 W. 50'' St Edina, MN 55424 Va ORDINANCE NO. 2013 -15 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EDINA CITY CODE CONCERNING THE COMMUNITY HEALTH COMMITTEE THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 2 -162 to 2 -165 of the Edina City Code is amended to read as follows: Division 4. Community Health Gem,,:Ree- Commission Sec. 2 -162. Establishment. The Council, acting as the Community Health Board pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 145A and article II of chapter 20, hereby establishes the Community Health tee: Commission. Sec. 2 -163. Purpose and Duties. eemmunity. In determining the mechanisms to address Edina public health priorities, the Community Health Commission shall study and advise the Community Health Board on: (i) monitoring health status to identify community health problems; (ii) diagnosing and investigating problems and health hazards in the community; (iii) informing, educating, and empowering people about health issues; (iv) mobilizing community partnerships to identify and solve health problems; (v) developing policies and plans that support individual and community health efforts; (vi) enforcing laws and regulations that protect health and ensure safety; (vii) linking people to needed personal health care services; (viii) ensuring a competent public health and personal health care workforce; (ix) evaluating effectiveness, accessibility, and quality of personal and population -based health services; and (x) new insights and innovative solutions to health problems. Sec. 2 -164. Membership. The Community Health wee Commission shall consist of nine regular and two student members. Members shall include, if possible, providers and consumers of health care services. Sec. 2 -165. Subject to General Provisions Governing Boards and Commissions. The membership and operations of the Community Health wee- Commission shall be governed by Section 1500 Section 2- 162 -2 -165 of this Code. SECTION 2. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage and publication. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Edina Community Health Commission December, 2013 Proposed Mission Statement Modifications Proposed New Statement: Our mission is to provide superior effeGtive and valued public services, maintain a sound public infrastructure, offer premier public facilities and guide the development and redevelopment of lands, all in a manner that promotes the physical, mental and social - well- beingi of our residents, ., ^d hu°i^ °cam, fosters the Growth of a healthy, safe, and vibrant Alternative Proposed New Statement: Our mission is to provide superior °ffeGtiy° and valued public services, maintain a sound public infrastructure, offer premier public facilities and guide the development and redevelopment of lands, all in a manner that promotes the physical, mental and social well -being of and sustains and improves the uncommonly high quality of life enjoyed by our residents and businesses. Vision Statement Edina will be the preeminent place for healthy living, learning, raising families and doing business distinguished by: A Livable and Healthy Environment Our residents regard their quality of _life in Edina as very high. Many factors contribute to this opinion, including premier schools, exceptional neighborhoods, and advantageous location in the metropolitan area, excellent public facilities and services, safe streets (a safe environment), a clean and adequate water supply, access to new technology and communications systems, and a strong sense of community identity, an opportunity for social interaction and community building, access to health services and healthy choices, and a vibrant and cooperative community where all that live and work in Edina have the opportunity to thrive and grow. Superior E#eGtive and Valued City Services Our customers (we view our residents and businesses as customers as well as taxpayers) have an extraordinarily high regard for city services. They associate an outstanding value with these services. They also distinguish Edina from other place by the quality of and access to our services. These services change as the needs of our World Health Organization, Constitution: "Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well- being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity." See http: / /www. who. int / governance /eb /who_constitution_en.pdf ; This modification is also consistent with the Strategic Health Issues identified in the 2012 -2015 Hennepin County Community Health Improvement Plan: Maternal and Child Health; Nutrition, Obesity & Physical Activity; Social & Emotional Wellbeing; Health Care Access; and Social Conditions that Impact Health. customers change, but their effectiveness and value will be the benchmarks of our success. A Sound M. blur- Infrastructure Edina streets; utilities, parks and public buildings are the essential components of the foundation of our city. A sound public and private infrastructure encourages healthy living for Edina residents the OeyelepmeRt of a stable Private infrnOW-Wef,,re' leading to An enhancement of the sense of quality that =mR the community has and will enjoy. A Balance of-L'and Uses Edina is, model of urban development: diversity of land uses, housing choices for all stages of. a person's life,. outstanding neighborhoods and an extensive network of parks and open spaces all ahranged in a manner of'development that ,promotes the health:of its residents and is pedestrian and transit- friendly. It also includes the employment and reinvestment and redevelopment strategies to address changing housing and business needs and prudent policies that sustain Edina's enormous investment in it housing stock and neighborhoods. Innovation "Innovation" means matching our technological resources with the needs and desires of our residents. "Innovation" means creating'yalue in what we do to serve our citizens. "Innovation" means operating local government in a business -like manner even though we are not a business. "Innovation" means'forging partnerships with our schools, community organizations and volunteers to serve our customers. "Innovation" can also mean risk- taking. "Innovation" community while improving the quality of life of all that live and work in Edina. Although our residents, are highly satisfied with their community, we always seek innovative ways to improve their lives. REPORT / RECOM ENDATION rel- I To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item #: VIII. F. From: Chad Millner PE, - Interim City Engineer Action Discussion ❑ Date: December 17, 2013 Information ❑ Subject: Accept Report and Authorize Professional Services — Trunk Sanitary Sewer Lining. Action Requested: - - Accept report and authorize City Manager to sign professional services proposal with Bolton and Menk, Inc. for trunk sanitary rehabilitation design and construction services. Information / Background: The City of Edina sanitary sewer system was designed to transmit daily and peak flows without surcharge and with minimal risk of human exposure. The sanitary conveyance system is aging; the majority built between 1950 and 1970, with portions built prior to 1940. Efficiently and effectively maintaining this critical infrastructure system requires study and prioritization. The attached report is the latest effort to understand system function and prioritize interventions to maintain it. This is the first study to investigate the system of "trunk" sanitary sewers, those large and deep lines that constantly carry millions of gallons of wastewater each day. The attached Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report spells out risk factors to clear water infiltration and inflow (1 /1). The report recommends trunk lining and manhole rehabilitation projects that address the oldest and most degraded and leaking pipes in the system, further investigation where risk factors point to high 1/1 potential, and continued periodic review for lines in good condition. The development of this report coincided with, and was informed by, the first televising of these trunk pipes. The televising was made possible by the purchase of a new, larger sewer camera and cable reel purchased as part of CIP item UT- I I - 008 in early 2013 and contracted sewer televising conducted this fall. The first trunk sewer lining project envisioned in CIP item UT -08 -014 was split into two implementation years, 2013 and 2014, totaling $1.14 million over the two years. The attached proposal would develop plans and specifications for two project areas, combined into a single project as described below. Funding planned for 2013 would be extended into 2014, thus modifying the approved CIP. This prospective project is eligible for approximately $195,200 in grant funding secured though the Metropolitan Council and authorized by the City Council on February 19, 2013. The attached proposal would prepare plans and specifications for trunk lining and manhole rehabilitation for project areas I and 2 (Table 2) as described in the report. This area extends from Xerxes Avenue and Minnehaha Creek, upstream, under France Avenue to Woodland Circle and Woodland Lane (Figure 16 and 17). The project challenges would include a temporary bypass, tight access along backyards in the Minnehaha Creek corridor, significant disruption of service to around 16 -20 households with service City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St • Edina, MN 55424 REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 connections directly off the trunk line or near access manholes, and minor disruption of service to a handful of nearby lateral lines and to local traffic. Communication and coordination with affected residents is included in the proposal. The proposed schedule would include design in January and February, bid advertisement and bid opening in March, to return to the City Council for consideration of bid award on April I. If the City Council approves the project on April I, the work would begin in early April and be complete by June 30. Project funding summary: ITEM COST / ESTIMATE CITY COUNCIL DATE /SCHEDULE Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study $47,336 (actual) 6/18/2013 Project area I and 2 Design $52,464 (estimate) 12/17/2013 Project area I and 2 project management $100,000 (estimate) 4/1/2014 Project area I and 2 construction $1,000,000 (estimate) 4/1/2014 TOTAL $1,199,800 (estimate) Funding Sources summary: ITEM AMOUNT CITY COUNCIL DATE CIP UT -08 -014 2013 $540,000 2012 CIP UT -08 -014 2014 $600,000 2012 Met Council 1/1 abatement grant $195,200 2/19/2013 TOTAL $1,335,200 Additional reimbursement through the Met Council 1/1 abatement grant total approximately $362,700. Attachments: Proposal for Engineering Services — Bolton and Menk Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — Bolton and Menk G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \SS485 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Lining \ADMIN \131217 Item VIII.F. Authorize Professional Services -Sanitary 181 Abatement.docx m � or �'gtin R 5i4;a� December 5, 2013 BOI_—i'ON & M F= N K If Consulting Engineers & Surveyors 12224 Nicollet Avenue • Burnsville, MN 55337 Phone (952) 890-0509 • Fax (952) 890 -8065 www.bolton - menk.com Mr. Ross Bintner, P.E., Environmental Engineer City of Edina — Engineering Department 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 RE: SUPPLEMENTAL LETTER AGREEMENT 2014 Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Improvements City of Edina, Minnesota Dear Mr. Bintner, NCe Bolton & Menk, Inc. is pleased to present this proposal to you for professional engineering services in support of its 2014 Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Improvements. As a part of this proposal, we describe our understanding of the project, detail our proposed scope of work, and provide our fees for service. This proposal is being offered as a Supplemental Agreement to our June 18, 2013 Master Agreement for Professional Engineering Services with the City of Edina. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING The City of Edina recently completed an evaluation of its trunk sanitary sewer system in order to identify sewer segments susceptible to infiltration problems and to prioritize trunk sewer lines for future rehabilitation and renewal. The study concluded that the 24" vitrified clay pipe (VCP) along Minnehaha Creek has a high potential for infiltration. This conclusion was confirmed via subsequent televising of the sewer pipe, which revealed active infiltration into the pipe. Earlier this year, the City secured grant monies from the Metropolitan Council in support of rehabilitation projects along its trunk sewers which would reduce infiltration into its sanitary sewer system. At this time, the City is interested in proceeding with a grant - eligible cured in place pipe (CIPP) lining project along the Minnehaha Creek trunk sewer. The segment of trunk sewer encompassed by this project stretches from the intersection of Woodland Lane and Woodland Circle, downstream along Minnehaha Creek to the intersection of Xerxes Avenue and West 50 Street. The length of this sewer is approximately 4700 feet. The City of Edina has requested this proposal from Bolton & Menk to complete final design, bidding, and construction observation and administration services in support of this project. SCOPE OF WORK Bolton & Menk proposes to complete the following services: Final Design and Bidding 1. Project base mapping, utilizing existing City of Edina GIS map layers. 2. Field confirmation of existing ground cover conditions and sewer manhole locations, conditions and accessibility. DESIGNING FOR A BETTER TOMORROW Bolton & Menk is an equal opportunity employer BOLTON & MENK, INC. 3. Meet with selected adjacent property owners to discuss and negotiate temporary access to the trunk sewer system for construction purposes (up to 6 meetings). 4. Prepare technical construction plans and specifications for CIPP lining improvements and manhole improvements along the trunk sewer. 5. Identify temporary sewer bypassing needs and establish parameters for inclusion in bidding documents. 6. Conduct a neighborhood open house to discuss the proposed project and expectations during construction. 7. Complete and submit required construction permit applications (fees to be paid by City). 8. Prepare project cost estimates. 9. Prepare bidding documents. 10. Advertise project according to standard City practices. 11. Address contractor questions during the bidding period and distribute any necessary addenda. 12. Conduct bid opening, evaluate bids, and make recommendation for project award. 13. City progress meetings (up to 2 meetings). Construction Services 1. Facilitate execution of construction contract between City and contractor. 2. Conduct preconstruction meeting. 3. Review construction material submittals and shop drawings. 4. Conduct preconstruction neighborhood open house. 5. Provide construction observation and administration services including, but not limited to, conducting weekly construction meetings, serve as a liaison between the City, its residents and the contractor, review of the work for general conformance with construction documents, review of material test results, maintenance of construction documentation, preparation of pay estimates and any necessary change orders. 6. Completion of record drawings. We understand the City's desire to utilize its own staff to provide construction services to the extent practical during construction. Therefore we are prepared to adjust our levels of construction services in accordance with the City's requests and requirements. PROPOSED FEES Estimated fees for the final design and bidding services as described above are summarized as follows: Base Mapping and Field Verifications $ 6,566 Discuss Site Access with Affected Residents $ 2,232 Technical Construction Plans & Specifications $30,484 Design Phase Open House $ 1,440 Permit Applications $ 1,272 Project Cost Estimates $ 2,948 Bidding Documents $ 2,224 Bidding Assistance $ 3,024 City Progress Meetings 2,274 TOTAL $52,464 The costs for these individual work tasks are estimates. Bolton & Menk proposes to complete the final design and bidding services for a not -to- exceed fixed fee of $52,464. 2014 Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Improvements City of Edina, Minnesota Page 2 BOLTON & MENK, BNC.. .,:. ,. , . Because the consultant does not have direct control over the construction contractor's operations or schedule, our construction observation and administration services are provided on an hourly basis. Personnel rates for anticipated staffing are as follows: Principal Engineer: $160 per hour Project Manager: $119 per hour Construction Observer: $114 per hour Engineering Technician: $94 per hour If you find this proposal satisfactory, your signature of:this proposal will constitute acceptance of the terms outlined and your authority for us to proceed: Please call if you wish to discuss this proposal. We look forward to providing these professional engineering services to you on this project and.appreciate your consideration of Bolton & Menk, Inc. Sincerely, . BOLTON & MENKONC. *w U44_1 C 44_1 4 Marcus A. A. Thomas, P.E. Principal Engineer Signed Printed Name 2014 Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation'lmprovements City of Edina, Minnesota Date Page 3 .. '. A _ 1� �.4I ,t-11 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report City of Edina, Minnesota December 2013 Project No. T16.106814 BOLTON a MENK, ING Consulting Engineers & Surveyors F =° City of Edina Edina, Minnesota 716.106814 f 4 it. —t, I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the — r State of Minnesota. Marcus A. Thomas r` License No. 26499 c. Date: 12/5/2013 Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Certification Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina TABLE OF CONTENTS I. STUDY BACKGROUND ................................................................. ..............................1 II. STUDY PURPOSE ......................................................................... ............................... 2 III. AVAILABLE STUDY BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND DATA .......... ............................... 2 IV. ANALYSIS OF AVAILABLE DATA .................................................. ............................... 4 V. PIPE REHABILITATION METHODS ............................................... ............................... 7 VI. RECOMMENDED PROJECT LIMITS .............................................. ............................... 9 APPENDIX FIGURE 1 ..................................... ............................... SANITARY SERVICE AREA SUMMARY FIGURE 2 .............. ............................... ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES & IMPAIRED WATERS FIGURE 3 ............ ............................... DEVELOPMENT & SEWER CONSTRUCTION HISTORY FIGURE 4 ..... ..........................YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FIGURE 5 ....... ............................... ..........................TRUNK SEWER PIPE DEVEOPMENT AGE FIGURE 6 ....................................... ............................... OVERALL INFILTRATION SUMMARY FIGURE 7 ......................... ........................OVERALL INFILTRATION PER ACRE SERVICE AREA FIGURE 8 ............. ............................... ....................GROUNDWATER DEPTH ABOVE INVERT FIGURE 9 ................... ............................... ............................DRY WEATHER PIPE CAPACITY FIGURE 10 ..................................................................... ............................... PIPE MATERIAL FIGURE 11 .................... ............................... SERVICE CONNECTIONS ALONG TRUNK LINES FIGURE12 .................................................... ............................... ...........................PIPE SIZE FIGURE 13 ............... ..........................TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT PRIORITY FIGURE 14 .................................... ............................... 5 -YEAR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN FIGURE 15 ................ ............................... ........................EXAMPLE OF PROJECT SYNERGIES FIGURES 16 TO 32 ..................................................... ............................... REHAB PROJECTS Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Table of Contents Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina I. STUDY BACKGROUND This trunk sanitary sewer infiltration study report was ordered in support of the City of Edina's overarching goals of reducing infiltration and inflow into its sanitary sewer system, and renewal of its aging sanitary conveyance system. The City's Wastewater and Comprehensive Sewer Plan defines the "service" the City provides as "effective and efficient removal of sanitary sewage for all areas of the City of Edina, while also'eliminating inflow and infiltration, protecting the health, safety and welfare of our citizens, and supporting the needs of a dynamic and sustainable community." Identification and reduction of infiltration and inflow (1/1) has been a regional priority of Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). Infiltration, which typically contributes a continuous flow of "clean water" into the system through cracked pipes and manholes, increases the City's flows into MCES facilities and directly increases costs -to the City for the ongoing treatment of these excess flows. Inflow typically comes through illicit storm water connections into the sanitary sewer system (e.g., roof drains, sump pump drains, etc.) or surface openings such as openings in manhole lids, and deteriorating rings and castings. These flows are less continuous but typically cause greater flow "spikes" during storm events and 'can exceed pipe capacity and cause system backups and consequential. damages. A current response by MCES is to assess a surcharge to those municipalities exhibiting these types of spikes in their systems. Recent Evaluations and Mitigation Efforts The City of Edina recognizes both the regional and local implications of iR and continues to take action toward eliminating these problems within the City. Past steps taken by the City include various studies and field evaluations. Large area I/I studies were completed in 1983 (Donohue) and 1997 (TKDA) which quantified volumes of I/I entering the City's sanitary sewer system, provided estimated costs for system rehabilitation, and identified neighborhoods with sump pump connections to the sanitary sewer. Pipe televising and field inspections of sewer manholes have been completed in advance of neighborhood reconstruction projects to identify necessary sewer infrastructure improvements; the result being replacement and rehabilitation projects implemented throughout the City's system. Local sewer system analyses have been completed in conjunction with redevelopment projects to determine capacity needs. In 2005/2006, Barr Engineering collected sewer flow meter readings and completed system wide modeling to estimate general volumes of infiltration being carried by the trunk sewer system. Most recently, the City has been televising the trunk sewer system, much of which has never been visually inspected to this degree in the past. Special Trunk Sewer Considerations Sanitary trunk sewers, which are the focus of this study report, are the primary pipes within the City of Edina's sanitary sewer system. In addition to their larger diameter, these trunk lines can generally be identified by their deeper depths and by their alignments along creeks and other low terrain. The trunk lines are a critical component of the City's sanitary sewer system, as they ultimately collect and rout all sewer flows out of the City and into MCES facilities.. It is imperative that the trunk sewers are maintained in a structurally sound condition and are free of excessive "clear water" flows via groundwater infiltration. Therefore, the rehabilitation priority recommendations given in this report are in support of both necessary system renewal and infiltration reduction. The trunk sewer system that is the subject of this study is illustrated in Figure 1. Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 1 The City of Edina's trunk lines are relatively aged, and based on previous assessments as described above, groundwater and storm water infiltration flows into the trunk lines are evident. Specific attributes of the trunk sewer system that raise concerns of UI problems include pipe alignments along creek beds, high groundwater, and flood -prone zones; exposure of deteriorating manholes; antiquated manhole covers (including those with vent hole openings); and overall age, material type and diameter of the trunk sewer pipes. These attributes, which are given further consideration in this report, can be correlated to various levels of potential infiltration within the trunk sewer system. Finally, it should be noted that while a focus on the City's trunk sewer system is certainly warranted, it is also important to recognize the I/I potential of the broader lateral (or neighborhood) sanitary sewers throughout the City, and that the City of Edina should continue its proactive practice of lateral system evaluation and maintenance: 11. STUDY�PURPOSE This trunk sewer infiltration study supports the City of Edina's objectives of reducing infiltration into its sanitary sewer system, initiating an overall trunk sewer system renewal process and the establishment of a service- reliable, next - generation trunk sewer system. This report includes recommendations for prioritizing trunk sewer system segments for rehabilitation, along with a preliminary identification of individual project areas. A discussion of various rehabilitation methods is included, with a focus on cured in place pipe (CIPP) lining as a viable trenchless alternative for many of the trunk sewer segments. Estimated, project costs are also provided for capital improvement planning. 111. AVAILABLE STUDY BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND DATA Several sources of information were assembled for this study to define the sanitary system and its proximity to other physical system components. Important relationships between quantitative and qualitative information were also developed as a method to measure specific system characteristics and their effect on potential infiltration. GIS Information The City of Edina has a comprehensive inventory of its existing sanitary system maintained in a geographical information management system (GIS). This includes geometric information for manholes, gravity pipe, force mains, lift stations, service connections, valves, and fittings. Other GIS data provided by the City includes groundwater depth information and development age. The available data is further summarized below. Sanitary system wide data: The attributed data contained in the City's sanitary system GIS is extensive. Manhole information includes elevation data when available; information on the physical condition and the date of inspection; structure type and material; and a unique identity number. Pipe information, including gravity and pressure main, includes diameter, material, length, slope (where available), and additional inspection records. Other system information incorporated in the GIS includes services, lift stations, supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) sensors, pipe fittings, valves, pipe casings, and clean out structures. • Ground water elevation model: A Metropolitan Area Groundwater Flow Model was developed by Met Council and Barr Engineering, et al, for the Twin Cities area called Metro Model 2, which further enhanced a model developed by the MPCA in 2000. One product of Metro Model 2 is the approximate water elevation of the aquifer based on water budget data, historic climate data, stream elevations, and well information. The data is stored as a digital Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 2 elevation model (DEM); each cell in the DEM raster represents a water table elevation. The approximate resolution of the data is +/- 20 feet vertically. Therefore the data was considered preliminary and approximate and used as a relative comparison to structure elevations. Citywide development age: Utilizing historic development information, the City assembled a map showing the principal periods of significant residential construction from 1940 (and before) to 1970 (and after) in 10 year increments. The map was digitized by Bolton & Menk in GIS to be used for geospatial analysis, as seen in Figure 3. The City also provided parcel information including the actual age of development and redevelopment. This data is shown in Figure 4. While the parcel information was useful in determining when construction . activity took place on the parcel, it does not always correlate to the age of the sanitary system. Therefore, Figure 3 wa&tised to develop approximate pipe age. Flow meter locations: In 2005, several temporary flow meters were installed throughout the system to. collect wet and dry. weather flows at key discharge points. The locations of the flow meters were used to develop the contributing sanitary service area including_gravity main, force main, lateral lines, and services. These areas are illustrated in Figure 1. The flow meters, in conjunction with approximate - infiltration summary data developed by Bari Engineering, were then used to develop relationships between service area, length of pipe, age of development, and other system parameters and approximate infiltration. • Other statewide and regional data: Additional GIS data was collected in the area from state, county, and local sources including light detection and ranging (LiDAR) mapping, surface water information, and parcels. While most of the data was utilized for display, some was used to develop important proximity relationships. City Wide Sanitary Sewer Model The City of Edina and Barr Engineering established a hydraulic model of the sanitary sewer system using XPSWMM in 2005/2006 to develop dry and wet weather system capacities and to identify areas in the City where III was likely originating. In 2008, an effort to update and calibrate the hydraulic model was performed utilizing Met Council flow monitoring locations at the City's trunk outfalls plus several flow meters along the trunk lines at key locations throughout the City. Figure 1 identifies the metering locations and corresponding service areas. The flow monitoring was performed during drier, winter months to establish a better base flow condition and during the spring months to capture system flows during a high likelihood of rainfall. The difference between the modeled base flow and calibrated peak wet weather flow hydrographs correlated the expected infiltration. The results of this analysis were summarized for each of the meter locations. 2008 Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan Chapter 8-of the City's Comprehensive Plan, addresses Water Resources Management, including a comprehensive plan for wastewater and sanitary sewer. Since the City is fully developed, the Comprehensive Plan addresses system capacity and required improvements for major areas of redevelopment, increases in residential and commercial development densities, and anticipated future land use changes. Based on two development scenarios, increases in the trunk sewer and resulting increase in flow to MCES interceptors were summarized. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that two thirds if the City's sewage flows into MCES meter M -129 and into interceptor 1- RF -491. This interceptor is critical to the planning of Edina's future growth since the majority of planned future flow increases will be directed to this interceptor. As a result, the City has mapped the potential trunk sewer upgrades in their Comprehensive Plan which is utilized to help the City prioritize sewer improvements based on future capacity needs and level of current infiltration. See Figure S -4 in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 3 Field Observations On August 8th, 2013, Bolton & Menk staff completed a field analysis of the trunk sewer lines analyzed in this project. The goals of the field observations were to analyze the trunk system on the ground, locate critical manholes, determine access points for rehabilitation equipment, identify areas where open -cut replacement options were viable, and formulate a set of notes to help establish future project locations. Sewer Televising The City of Edina Public Works Department has televised several thousand feet of sewer to collect critical information regarding the condition of pipes and manholes that indicate sources of infiltration. The City has also contracted for the televising of other critical pipe segments. Televising of pipe segments reveals crushed and cracked pipe, separated joints, root intrusion, leaky services, pipe material where previously unknown, signs of infiltration in manholes, and a wealth of other information that is otherwise impossible to collect. Local Knowledge from Citv Sta The City's cumulative knowledge of the trunk system provided specific information that may otherwise not be evident in the GIS and televising. This includes areas with known issues, lift station conditions, areas of future bypass or relief lines, areas with regular sewer backup issues, specific pipe rehab and concrete encasing projects, and other anecdotal and qualitative information useful in determining the condition of the existing system. IV. ANALYSIS OF AVAILABLE DATA The available study materials and background information was organized and populated in a GIS database to develop geospatial relationships that identify trunk sewer infiltration potential and prioritize rehabilitation. A system was developed to assign a rating to each level of data acquired so that the cumulative "score" could be easily compiled. Quantitate Infiltration Data Infiltration data provided by Barr Engineering and the location of the flow meters in the system were used to establish sanitary service areas, which.are displayed in Figure 1 with additional system information summarized further. Flow.data collected at the meters during dry and wet weather periods and the resulting estimates of infiltration based on hydraulic model calibration was used as a predictor of the degree of infiltration within the service area. It is difficult, however, to directly correlate infiltration on the trunk line to this data because of the unknown infiltration potential in the extensive upstream lateral system. For instance, while the meter -shed associated with temporary meter 4 has the second highest calculated infiltration, it also has nearly 37 miles of trunk sewer and 2500 service connections. Figure 6 shows the overall results of the infiltration analysis for each meter -shed associated with the 2005 temporary meter locations. Another representation of the data is to normalize the data over the area to better predict the severity of infiltration. Figure 7 shows the result of the normalization. When comparing Figures 6 and 7, it is observed that the distribution of infiltration across the city changes when the data is normalized over area. Other techniques were considered, including normalizing the data based on number of service connections along the trunk line or length of lateral or trunk line pipe. However, it is still, difficult to target the source of infiltration without additional flow data and modeling in the lateral systems. Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 4 Compiled Oualitative Data Information regarding known sources of infiltration, historic sewer backups, and previously determined pipe upgrade recommendations was compiled to help further prioritize future rehabilitation projects. While this information was not used to enhance or inhibit a pipe segment's need for rehabilitation, it was used to check the results of this physical system analysis to verify its accuracy. Creation of the Prioritization Database As described above, several sources of system information were provided to compile a database that was manipulated to describe the primary sources of infiltration in the systems In all cases, the study trunk sewer pipe was utilized to create a set of raster, or grid data that describes each of the prioritization criteria. Using this method, rasters are reclassified to rank the importance of layer in terms of infiltration potential, and a summation of the relative infiltration risks is utilized to calculate the cumulative ranking. The final layers used to prioritize rehabilitation projects are described below. The referenced figures, include a color gradation from green to yellow to. red defining low to medium to high (respectively) infiltration potential. This study is focused on the trunk lines' contribution to infiltration only. The upstream lateral system is also a critical component to overall infiltration. The limitations of each analysis layer are also discussed below. • Age of development: Pipe age was correlated to the development age information provided by the City (Figure 3). The result of this intersection is shown in Figure 5. The age categories used were based on the historic development information maintained by the City. In this case, it is assumed that older pipe has a higher likelihood of infiltration. • Groundwater depth: Sanitary manhole structure invert (pipe elevation) data was compared to the Metro Model 2 groundwater elevation model to determine the height of groundwater above the invert. Manholes along the trunk sewer line were selected and used to intersect with groundwater elevations. Subtracting the groundwater depth from the invert generates a depth of groundwater above the invert. In some cases, the manhole invert has two or more feet of separation from the water table. In others, the depth above the invert was as much as 21 feet. The higher the groundwater depth above the invert, the higher the correlation to infiltration. Figure 8 shows the resulting raster generated from the manhole intersection along the trunk sewer line. Dry weather pipe capacity Dry weather pipe capacities were provided by Bar:. Engineering from the 2008 hydraulic model to determine the current level of service of the trunk sewer pipe. While dry weather capacity is not correlated to infiltration, it does provide information on what trunk lines need to be replaced and upsized. ,In an open cut rehabilitation, it is crucial that the City understands the current capacity and installs a pipe that meets future growth patterns. Figure 9 shows the City's service level as of 2008. Lower capacity pipes are given a higher priority of rehabilitation. We understand that .1 City is currently in process of updating the 2008 hydraulic system model with current land use and service flows. This new information, when available, can be reviewed in conjunction with the modeling results of this study to determine if any the recommendations in this report need updating. Pine material: The City's sewer.system GIS contains information regarding pipe material. The pipes in Edina consist of vitrified clay pipe (VCP), reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), cast iron.pipe (CEP), and pipe that has already undergone a cured -in -place pipe (CIPP) rehabilitation. Pipe age, and often condition, can be correlated to pipe material. VCP is the oldest. material in town and has the highest probability of leaking joints or other significant structural issues. While RCP`is strong, it can be susceptible to deterioration by long term exposure to hydrogen sulfide gases. generated by wastewater. This is evident in some recent Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 5 sewer television videos. that illustrate spalling (loss of cement) along the crown of some concrete pipes. This type of deterioration, particularly in the vicinity of individual pipe joints, can often, lead to infiltration. CEP and CIPP are less susceptible to infiltration. Figure 10 shows the locations of pipe material in the City along the trunk lines. This data describes infiltration susceptibility along the trunk line only. A CIP or CIPP trunk line may include lateral systems that are all VCP, indicating that the trunk line is not the only culprit susceptible to infiltration. Service connection frequency: Figure 11 shows the number of service connections per 1,000 feet of trunk line. Service connections are a critical point for infiltration. Therefore, a higher number of service. connections can lead to a.higher infiltration potential. However, service connections along lateral lines must also be considered in the overall infiltration potential. A trunk line with no service connections can still have a large infiltration contribution from a heavily serviced lateral system. • Pipe. Size: Figure 12 is a summary of the'pipe sizes along the trunk lines. In general, pipes with large diameter have a higher surface area susceptible to infiltration issues. Therefore, larger pipes should be targeted over smaller ones where high rates of infiltration are known. Comprehensive Plan Information. The 2008 Comprehensive Plan discusses the impacts of recent significant redevelopment to the sanitary sewer system, including higher density residential and commercial development. The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the majority of this development will impact the area draining to MCES interceptor 1 -RF -491, with smaller portions draining to 1 -RF -490 and 3 -NB -499. With the hydraulic model developed by Barr, the system was analyzed for two development scenarios under a range of population growth projections. Figure S -4 in the Comprehensive Plan shows the areas of the City that may require upgrades as development continues. As growth plans in these areas become more refined, these trunk upgrade areas should be considered for pipe replacement projects, if necessary, to account for increases in service flows. The Comprehensive Plan also addresses future infrastructure improvements based on known I/I related issues. The City's CIP also includes a five -year plan for sanitary system improvement projects. The projects identified in the Comprehensive Plan include manhole rehabilitation, pipe rehabilitation of low lying sewers near Minnehaha Creek, drainage improvements near 70'h and France, and disconnection of systems contributing runoff to the sanitary system. Prioritization of Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation The items listed above are the essential quantitative and qualitative components of the GIS database used to prioritize pipe rehabilitation projects. The process for determining the prioritization factors is discussed below. 1. Populate the GIS: For this analysis, all of the GIS layers used were based on the trunk sewer segments largely delineated by the location of flow metering data. The geometry type includes lines,, broken at each manhole. Therefore, as seen in the figures described above, all data used for the analysis was first converted to line geometry. 2. Convert to Raster: Each line shapefile was converted to a raster with a cell size of 60'. It was essential to ensure that each analysis layer had the same cell size as well as identical alignments. If all of the layers do not overlap exactly, the results of the spatial analysis will be skewed at the non - overlapping cells. i Prepared by: Bolton & Menk,'lnc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 6 3. Reclassify Cells Based on Determined Prioritization Factors: Prioritization factors were assigned to each unique field in the GIS based on the potential contribution to infiltration. For instance, older, clay pipe has a higher susceptibility to infiltration that a newly lined CIPP pipe. Therefore, the clay pipe should have a higher priority for rehabilitation. The prioritization factors range from 0 to 5 and are summarized for each layer in Table 1 below. 4. Calculate Cumulative Prioritization Rankine: Once the rasters have been reclassified, simple raster math was performed in ArcGIS to sum the individual factors and generate a cumulative rehabilitation score. The higher the score, the higher the priority for rehabilitation. The final trunk sewer infiltration abatement priority is displayed in Figure 13. Table 1: Summary of trunk sewer infiltration abatement prioritization factors. Prioritization Factor Pipe Age Groundwater Depth Above Pipe Invert Dry Weather Capacity Pipe Material Service Connection Frequency (per 1000' Pipe Size 0 < -2.0 CIPP 1 >1970 -2.0-3.0 0 -.10% CEP 0 -3 15-1-1611 2 3.0-5.0 11 -50% 3 -10 18" 3 1960 -1969 5.0-7.0 51 -70% RCP 10 -18 20" - 21" 4 1950 -1959 7.0-10.0 71 -100% 18 -31 24" 5 1940 -1949 >10.0 >100% VCP 31 -74 33" V. PIPE REHABILITATION METHODS As a sanitary sewer pipeline nears its end of useful life, there are a variety of methods that can be considered for its rehabilitation or replacement. In general, the pipe can be replaced via traditional open trench methods, or there exists a few different trenchless methods that can also be employed. Open Trench Replacement Open trench pipe replacement basically involves the excavation and removal of the existing pipe and the laying of a new pipe in its place. This approach is typically most feasible for relatively shallow sewers where necessary surface restoration is minimal or when coordinated with overlying road reconstruction projects. It is many times the most feasible way to upsize a pipe's diameter to increase flow capacity. Existing service connections are typically reinstated with traditional wye fittings and couplers connected to the service lines. Cured In Place Pipe (CIPP) Cured in place pipe (CIPP) has become a very popular trenchless method of rehabilitating and effectively replacing existing pipes. The process involves inverting a resin - filled felt tube into the existing (host) pipe that, when cured, results in a new pipe that fits tightly against the inside of the existing pipe. When properly designed, the new liner pipe does not rely on the host pipe for any structural or flow carrying capacity. While the interior of the CIPP liner may have a slightly smaller diameter than the original host pipe, the increased smoothness of the liner plus the reduction of infiltration flows typically result in a new pipe with similar flow capacity as the original pipe. Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 7 The CIPP process can usually be completed via access manholes, with little to no digging required. Service connections are also typically reinstated, trenchlessly, through the use of robotic cutting machines navigated within the new pipe. The flexibility of the pre -cured liner also makes it adaptable to offset . pipe joints, sweeps, and low- degree angle bends along the pipe alignment. Individual runs can typically extend between 750' to 1,000'. Given its typical cost effective nature up to around 48" diameter pipes, it is widely used by cities and MCES, alike. Special consideration should be given to groundwater conditions when implementing a CIPP liner solution. For design purposes, high groundwater increases external pressures on the pipe, which can influence the liner's design thickness. During construction, it may be necessary to lower the groundwater to below the pipe zone if there is potential for significant infiltration flows to interfere with the liner's curing process. Slip Lininie/ Fold - and -Form Liner Slip lining is the process of inserting a new "rigid" pipe into an existing pipe. Unlike the CIPP process that constructs and cures a new pipe inside of the old, the slip, lining process involves sliding a smaller diameter pipe (usually HDPE or PVC) inside of the existing host pipe. For larger diameter pipes ( >48" dia.), fiberglass pipe such as Hobas is sometimes used. The annular. space between the inside and outside pipes is typically filled with grout to complete the process. Fold and form liners are round HDPE pipes that are pre - folded in half, lengt hwise to make a U- shape, then pulled through the host pipe and heated to reestablish their original round shape. In both cases, slip liners and fold and form liners do not rely on the continued integrity of the host pipe, but often time result in greater pipe diameter reductions than CIPP lining. While the - lining processes typically require little to no excavation (sometimes only at the launching or receiving ends), reinstating service connections to these liners typically requires a dig at each location. Compared to CIPP lining, slip lining sanitary sewers typically becomes more cost effective for larger diameter pipes ( >60 "). Pipe Bursting Pipe bursting is a trenchless process which involves the. literal "bursting" of the existing pipe via the use of a larger diameter expanding head which breaks apart the existing pipe, then pulling a new pipe through the resulting opening. The result is the placement of a new pipe (typically HDPE, PVC, or DIP) along the old pipe's alignment. In addition to the trenchless replacement of similar size pipes, as CIPP and slip lining provides, pipe bursting also allows for the upsizing of pipes where additional capacity is required. A disadvantage of pipe bursting is that individual service connections need to be dug up to be reconnected. Pipe bursting is also generally more expensive than CIPP and slip lining. General Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation Recommendations In consideration of the typical characteristics of the City of Edina's trunk sewer system, it is recommended that CIPP lining be considered as the initial approach to rehabilitating the City's system. Factors that support this general recommendation include the need for a trenchless' solution, as much of the:pipe has very limited access potential, such as along Minnehaha Creek. As a trenchless solution, CIPP also conforms well to Edina's trunk sewer pipe sizes of 33" and less, and there are many lines with service connections which could be reinstated trenchlessly with the CIPP system. CIPP also continues to be a cost - competitive method amongst the variety of trenchless rehabilitation methods. Prioritization recommendations and project limit recommendations (discussed later in this report) are based, to some extent, on project costs. The costs of CIPP rehabilitation are a basis of these recommendations. In addition to the mainline lining of a C1PP project, individual projects should be reviewed for necessary manhole and service Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 8 line repairs. For example, manholes within a project area that are found to be deteriorated and susceptible to infiltration may also be lined using various epoxy or cement based coating technologies. Mainline pipe televising sometimes reveals service line problems near the connection point. Short segments of service pipe can also be lined from the mainline in some circumstances. Under certain circumstances, it may be desirable to replace a trunk sewer segment via open trench replacement; particularly in concert with future road projects where the ground surface is already being disturbed. - Figure 14 illustrates the trunk sewer system with an overlay of the City's 5 -year road improvement plans. An example of potential project synergies exists along Minnehaha Boulevard, between West'52nd and 54th Streets — this area is further, detailed in Figure 15. Consideration could.be given to reconstructing this trunk sewer line directly underneath the street, in conjunction with a street reconstruction project. In general, alternative alignments and other factors (such as future capacity and pipe size needs) that could influence pipe improvement project decisions should be considered in conjunction with any future sewer rehabilitation projects. Full evaluation of those factors is beyond the scope of this particular study. Pre - Televising Inspections General knowledge of an existing pipe's characteristics and condition is oftentimes all that is needed to make preliminary recommendations as to what type of trenchless rehabilitation method may be feasible. It is important that pre - televising inspections be done, however, to confirm the suitability of the selected method. Sections of collapsed pipe or service connections that extensively protrude into the pipe, for example, may require "spot dig" repairs in order for a CIPP liner to be installed. If the City can acquire this televising information early on, this information can help inform the design phase of a project. In any case, it is standard protocol for lining contractors to pre - televise, themselves, to confirm existing conditions. Flow Bypassing During Construction All pipeline replacement and rehabilitation methods can, to a certain extent, interfere with normal sewer flows through the pipes. During open trench replacement projects, these flows are typically diverted during the daytime construction hours using pumps to route flows from manhole to manhole around the construction zone. Properties with direct connections within the construction zone are given advance notice to reduce or eliminate sewer discharges during the working hours. It is typically a minor inconvenience lasting for.a couple of days with normal sewer use being granted during the evenings and overnight. Trenchless methods can potentially extend the disruption of sewer service to properties for longer, more continuous lengths of time. In some cases, bypass pumps may need to run 24 hours per day for several days, depending on the rehabilitation processes used and the unique circumstances of the project area. For any specific project, these factors can usually be identified ahead of time and coordinated with affected property owners. Effective communication during the design and construction phases of these projects can help ensure project success. VI. RECOMMENDED PROJECT LIMITS Based on the prioritization maps and estimated project costs, rehabilitation project limits were delineated. Rehabilitation lengths were divided into 2,000 to 2,500 foot segments based on an estimated total project cost of $500,000. It is assumed that all rehabilitation projects will be CIPP. However, it may be more cost effective for the City to consider alternative methods where Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 9 applicable. Project delineations are illustrated in Figures #16 through #32. Project Cost Estimates A review of CIPP cost estimates and recent project bid abstracts was performed,to calculate an average project cost per foot of pipe. Several components to the rehabilitation process were considered, including average cost of CIPP lining for pipes ranging from 15" to 33 "; service connections; temporary bypassing and services; and pre - and post - construction televising. CIPP rehabilitation projects within the range of Edina's trunk sewer diameters cost an average of $200 to $250 per foot. Therefore, based on the City's annual budget of $500,000; the average project length is 2,000 to 2,500 feet. If the City wishes to extend the budget to $1M per year, two project segments could be rehabilitated. Access Considerations Manhole access is very important in determining project segments because CIPP lining begins and ends at a manhole. Based on field investigations performed in August, 2013, manhole access was reviewed for the entire trunk system. Individual project delineations based on project costs, manhole access and other field observations are summarized in Figures 16 to 32. Final Project Prioritization The prioritization recommendations for future trunk sewer rehabilitation investments are summarized in Figure 13. This priority map represents a weighted summation of the various sewer pipe attributes described previously in this report and illustrates the relative potential for infiltration throughout the trunk sewer system. The Minnehaha Creek line stands out as the highest priority trunk sewer for future rehabilitation. Recent televising of this line also confirms our analysis and recommendations, as it revealed active infiltration at multiple locations along this VCP sewer. It is recommended that the City considers including the rehabilitation of this line in its upcoming capital improvement planning schedule. This would include project segments #1 through #5. The prioritization map illustrates a second priority segment, just east of T.H. 100, extending through the Lake Edina/ South Cornelia neighborhoods. Projects #8 and #9 encompass most of this line. This is primarily an RCP line. It is recommended that this line be televised to verify its infiltration potential. If active infiltration is discovered, similar to the Minnehaha line, it is further recommended that this line be considered as a part of the City's upcoming capital improvement plan. If televising does -not reveal immediate and significant concerns, it is recommended that this line be monitored on a more frequent basis, either through televising or flow metering, in response to the infiltration potential this line exhibits. It is important to reiterate the redevelopment growth and resulting flow increases that the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer plan anticipates in this area. Future increases in flow may also dictate pipe size increases in conjunction with future rehabilitation projects. Initial televising is also recommended for the trunk sewer immediately downstream of meter #6, which travels through The Heights neighborhood. Projects #12 through #14 encompass this line. A similar response of CIP planning or more frequent monitoring, depending on the initial, televising . results, is also recommended. Because this is a VCP sewer pipe, it could possibly deteriorate more rapidly than its RCP counterparts, and therefore presents further reason to monitor this line more . frequently if it is not currently exhibiting immediate and significant concerns. Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report — City of Edina Page 10 The City of Edina currently televises its entire sanitary sewer system on a rotation schedule of approximately thirteen years. It is recommended that the remainder of the trunk sewer lines evaluated as a part this study be managed within the City's normal schedule and maintained and rehabilitated in response to any concerns that are revealed. Table 2, below, summarizes the priority recommendations. The recommendations are generally as follows: Include in CIP: These sewers have been confirmed via televising that pipe deterioration and resulting infiltration is present and that they are nearing the end of their service life. Verify Priority: These sewer rank higher in priority for potential infiltration problems and should be televised for confirmation. Regular Televising: These sewers rank lower in priority for potential infiltration problems but should continue to be a part of the City's regular sewer televising schedule. Potential open cut segments are also summarized and correlated to the City's 5 -Year Road Improvement Plan. Table 2: Summary of Rehabilitation Protects. Project # Rehab Length (ft) Recommendation Potential Open Cut? Potential Coordination w/ Upcoming Street Project? Street Imp. Year 1 2115 Include in CIP No No 2 2598 Include in CIP No No 3 2373 Include in CIP No No 4 1727 Include in CIP Yes Yes 2015 5 2142 Include in CIP No No 6 3430 Regular Televising Yes No 7 2800 Regular Televising Yes No 8 2180 Verify Priority Yes Yes 2013 9 2250 Verify Priority Yes Yes 2013 10 2405 Regular Televising Yes Yes 2013 11 1865 Regular Televising Yes No 12 2260, Verify Priority No No 13 2400 _ Verify Priority Yes No 14 2560 Verify Priority Yes No 15 2500 Regular Televising Yes No 16 2540 Regular Televising No No 17 1640 Regular Televising Yes No 18 2570 Regular Televising Yes No 19 2200 Regular Televising Yes No 20 2480 Regular Televising Yes No 21 2330 Regular Televising Yes Yes 2015 22 3040 Regular Televising No No Prepared by: Bolton & Menk, Inc. — T16.106814 Trunk Sanitary Sewer Infiltration Study Report - City of Edina Page 11 APPENDIX FIGURE 1 ..................................... ............................... SANITARY SERVICE AREA SUMMARY FIGURE 2 .............. ............................... ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES & IMPAIRED WATERS FIGURE 3 ............ ............................... DEVELOPMENT & SEWER CONSTRUCTION HISTORY FIGURE 4 ..... ..........................YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FIGURE 5 ....... ............................... ..........................TRUNK SEWER PIPE DEVEOPMENT AGE FIGURE 6 ....................................... ............................... OVERALL INFILTRATION SUMMARY FIGURE 7 ......................... ........................OVERALL INFILTRATION PER ACRE SERVICE AREA FIGURE 8 ............. ............................... ....................GROUNDWATER DEPTH ABOVE INVERT FIGURE 9 ................... ............................... ............................DRY WEATHER PIPE CAPACITY FIGURE10 ..................................................................... ............................... PIPE MATERIAL FIGURE 11 .................... ............................... SERVICE CONNECTIONS ALONG TRUNK LINES FIGURE12 .................................................... ............................... ...........................PIPE SIZE FIGURE 13 ............... ..........................TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT PRIORITY FIGURE 14 .................................... ............................... 5 -YEAR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN FIGURE 15 ................ ............................... ........................EXAMPLE OF PROJECT SYNERGIES FIGURES 16 TO 32 ..................................................... ............................... REHAB PROJECTS E W IL Q W U W W a� u a �a m� a o� =e m Eo �m SA a eD nm m m fo It r� I t L.. i I� pr r - -- , - - - - -; --- •- - - -- -- -- 5 - - -- -T------ Sewersh ed ID: S l Service Area: 607.98 A C I Tot GVfy Mn: 79371 FT._ all Sewr Gvty Mn: 4786 3 FT TNnk Sewr Services 5 �- Trunk Sewr Ara MH: 14 v of Semite Pr Acm 1 47 /A C T"d Ahx. Swv1 : 865 / ry csr GWy M. 6 Se - OArea 56345AC \\ Tot GVty ktn 167197 Fit ^, Tronk Sewr Gvty Mn BB66.7 T nk Sewr Services: 17 y Trunk S.. Arm MH 35 � v� -�� �Num6er of Services Pr Rcn: O.i "_ } � ",", Num. Samlcn: 176 • uu ..- ..- ..- ..- ..- .. -..- - 5awerabad 1D: 13 •- - - -.. - - - - - - - - -- '- 1 jI Service Area: 636.9AC' -s-d -. Tot Gvtykln: 66416.9 FT Nr -' Jrunk Se r Gvty Mn: 0 FT y _ • y - • { trunk sewn servin,: a Tunk $ew -Arm IeH: i, Num b er or Services Per Acro: 1.1 /AC T1 Num. Services :89 �S.-,,U rer11D: 7 1 4 t Service Aram 311.66 AC Tot GVfy Mn.J7174.d F 1 �'-j Trunk Sewer Gvty Mn: 0 F I iI Trunk Sowr S9mlces 0 +- t Trunk Sawr Arm NH : 1 • I , Nu b,, of S4mlcr P9r Acre: 1 4I /AC ti., ' i I Total Num. Services: 441 y 4 �i i'l# of vlllp� Service Arm' 916 59 AC Tof Saw. Mn 1067591 FT 7'� Tunk Gvfy Mn 0 F7��.-- r--�j\ • �~ (. _ T . y .. T Trunk Sawr Sam cel' 0 r�'led Trunk Saw A MM: 0 ServinA a: 1903.77AC Number ofm P Acre 179 /AC Tot Gvty Mn: 190676.9FT Total Nlm.S s:1167�- Trunk Sewer Gvfy rvi 19307.3 FT Services: t-•- -- nk Sew- ce,: r unk Sawr Arm MH: 82 67 ~ Numbero /Senicm PerAcn:13 1AC Total Num. Servlc : 7478 , .1 7j Ice A... h : 402. 3 AC Tot Gvty : 46#6.1AC •..!� 7. Tot GVt Mn: 61136.1 Fr trunk Swr Gvty Mn: 961 f I Tunk Sewr Services: 9 Sewr Arm M T 1 unk H: 4 r ' ' '• Number of Service Per A— 2.111AI Total Num' S ervices: 1019 V r i - 1 1 776.77 AC Se wet sh cd ID. I �. t # 1 • +Service Area: � +} Sewvrshed ID. 3 Tot Gvty Mn: 769879 F I Trunk Sewr ahty M : 0 F1 -: Sarvico Area 455 76 A C 4`'✓ Trunk Sewer Somins: 0 Tof GvtyMn.46953 .9 FT Trunk Sew Arm MH: 0 Trunk Sew -G tyM '7775.9FT TrSewer Trunk Sew S na at y +may Number of Semi— Per ACn' 1.271A C T y' • - I � � Trunk So We, A AM 47 I + --•- -� Tofa/ Num. Servlc �' 976, - Number ofServ1 Par Acre. 1.37 /AC - i Tofal NUm.S ces: 613 -- •` ^ S Sin hafID,.17 AC . 4 r7 of Gvty Mn: 64576.3 FT TNnk Sawr .- G Mn: O FTSv Trunk ewr S Somicos: 0. t R r� Q4i G e•��•��j�� 1_ � Nunrb er of Services Per Acra. 1.61 /AC' 1 1 I+ rt l y Total Num Services 907 \ ! 111 Sewa1, ed 1D: 129 Sewershed ID' 127 iService Area: 198.79 A CJ`• Servin Arm'351. 16 AC,., fi. Tof Gvty Mn: 16564.5FT - [.-e Tot Gvfy Mn. 57801.1 FTC - Trunk Sewer Gvty Mn: 7681.9 F r Se wershed ID: 1 . J Sorvin Area: 104.OB AC Trunk Sewr GVfy Min: 4698.9 FT (- Trunk Sow r ices: 0 Tunk Sawr Services: 74 Trunk Saw r Arm MH. 10 Tot Gvfy Mn: 5553.6 FT ^ i Number o/ Sorvicm Par Acre 0.3 b1C Trunk Sawr GVfy Mn :O FT � TUf S Swr Arm M e 27 •, Number el Srvic es Par Ac re: 3.37 /AC Total N Services: 59 r Trunk Sewr Services: 0 Ce •�• '• -'--q •►� 7o ta/ NUm. Serve s: 1183 Trunk Sewr Arm M;s 0 _ _.•, -"- /,' Numbero/ Smicm Par Acn 017 1AC • e ~ ,j;�3y1 `• TOfalNum Servlcae: nom• 4 ,- ,°r •_.- _- ._.._.._.._.. -.._. S - --- .- _•.- .._..- --- -- --- -- - - - �- Sewersh ed !D: 9 I - ,Srvice Arn: 631.44 AC Tof Gvty Mn: 58676.1 FT Tunk Sewr Gvty ktn. 0 FT Trunk Sewr Services 0 ' Trunk Swr Ar MH:0 Numbrof Sarvfcm Per Acre. 0.991AC I f,/ Total Num S.M.— 636 t L4 f� Sewer Shcd ID: 10 .4 - Service Area: 473.77 AC + Tot Gvfy Mr: 49995.4 FTti_ Trunk Sewr GVfy Mn: 0 FT �y. Trunk Sew- Sarv1-.: 0 D Turk Sewr Arm UH: O : umber of Services Per Acre: 1.661 a Tofal Num. Services: 703r SCWCIShed ID' 12 �-4 Service Area: 349.97 AC Tot GVfy Mn' 428109 FT Trunk Sewr Gvfy Mn 5394.3 FT -+ -Trunk Sewer Services 37•. Tunk Sewr Arm MH: 21 Number f Service Pr Acn: 1351A C Total Mo..Services e71 7 fiz • -: Q-. MN -100 IoL ' mt �a 'y e, (j) v F'T - Aby .e L.00,010 TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT Legend i-z- . r' y .-: Cit Limits Gravity_Main_Study Service Area Flow Meter - Gravity Main Trunk Sewer Study Area Pressure Main F Lift Station Source: City of Edina GIS 0 0 2,500 Feet SANITARY SERVICE AREA SUMMARY Figure 1 NOVEMBER, 2013 m x 'RO�c'era 6 Sin` . E H z O W Z w N� v� 4 �a �m 0 F r a� z� El v 410 =c a c d E °m rn ) o �o r _ — Y� � I�` TRUNK SEWE R INFILTRATION �� I J. r f� • - - - - -- -- ._.._..- - - - - - - - - -• ........... ._..� � O ABATEMENT y..._..— ..— ..---------- ••— ..— . ---------- — — ,._._ — — / • -L { • r��RFURA'SY•O l J4 ' '�i Y .11.•1 � ,."gam '�'. 0 + Indianhead Mdian Pond G� �bpb :` I- ts T Ble k x + Mud Lake Y_ Mirror lake O r 9O ~ .off -J •� HawkeaLake i99 "'s' r - i I HigMantl ke La r aid el � G rden Per Pond �, . r Birchcrest on tilvd - Lak��orneh�( rorthj MelodyLak ,,. ,a _�^• f q Impairments: NutrientlEutro ►a ✓• O MN 1 + No TMdLfs1 Ap¢�roved g - - � 10 r � r �• T y Lake Cornelia (North` ain) - // - + f � F• Lake Cornelia (S I r!h Basin) • j ■S � _ �Gerrison Pond ,. SIF • = r �� 7 i rl � Swim Pool Pond r_ ; Z Pamela + � •� }.,_ Weber Park.Pond Frpnce Ave S S 1 rr C Av 3 Im Avo Centennial lake Cannnnial Lake + , y" • 3 0 •• •- T, York Av .0 '-r •' *" 1.29 1.28 1.27 '� "T'r O x t 85u�£ � � 1 E ui Z Ir cr �I Z w a O w w 0 7 m� ig Q 0 in a z �C E E m � ul nm M 0 li , 171 W61 '��1`• • ._.. i.j .— .sal'.': - �+- r -�r� +� _�- ..� --.�� tj y t Q r i j I j } a Q .................. A L-"- a♦ - lei • - -fir -..� z -.-7 a r.�,,.�.t� __ �. ' S � 13- 7 � � + ,1PJc- x —� * Is .—.. 11 -- - - - - -- -- -� i �� • Ak yl• 1 ................. :1K t dL 1( �SiiAtsr�ca. �. x� •.�,a..:�V�.a�it$�'�'YitFSC! -Sr -��- +sue -ts _ ;�.,�.�i:..�Clr'' u::[.:�`r2- �<. •f` / u9. ��ti8e9 pK� TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION O ABATEMENT Legend 1r -i City Limits Service Area Trunk Sewer Study Area © Flow Meter Gravity Main Pressure Main �--�� ■ Lift Station Dvlpmnt. & Sewer Const. History i1970- Present 1960 -1969 1950 -1959 1940 -1949 Before 1940 Source: City of Edina GIS 0 mmmmc= 0 2,500 Feet DEVELOPMENT & SEWER CONSTRUCTION HISTORY r Figure 3 , NOVEMBER, 2013 �t m � 6i�r� S Sum` x E W (D ai z z w a O w W 0 e� vZ� �a �m N ~ N a z� �f C is E 8� o CO m �o 4 i t jy7:y HNIMS '177 �•� Viµ• � 1 ' Average Age: 41.5 Yrs. 1 •' ' t• Lr�'f Avera e A e: 3 E3 1. ._. V - ' 1 r I rlr .L. - I T Average Age: 43.8 Yrs . -mow ! +—� -._ -Y' �,+r• -.�� :� -•'� rte. -y�. t4 r• I s: I �y! -- Average Age: 48.4 Yrs. . ffr Average Age: 27.2 Yrs verage Age: 5�.2 Yrs Average Age 41.9 Yrs 14 �{E6.r ►�' lam. � � 4, .t i .3 1 Average Age: 46.5 Yrsf `a j {. Average Age: 49.4 Yrs+ j r �e Average Age: 52.3 Yrs . '''`� } Average Age: 58 9 Yrs r 2} Average Age: 54.6 Yrs 1 i Aver age_Agey 5 9`8 Yrs k T�� Age: 39 Yrs -r � �� .-�. a� `k.imd�►� Average Age: 69.9-Yrs•� . _. . � a m xQQ a z 0 9 e . 1 Y � o e \ T .. -�- -;,,.— —..a — — •— • i Source: ►X _.._.. _.._.._.._.._.. _.. _.._.._ slaw. l�G 3 amender• Ave TRUNK SEWER )O INFILTRATION Legend f�•I ;�� -- City Limits 13 SERVICE—AREA Study Area OFlow Meter Gravity Main Pressure Main ■ Lift Station Year of Construction 1995-2012 1977 -1994 1958 -1976 1940 - 1957 1922 - 1939 1904 - 1921 1885 - 1903 1866-1884 0 2,500 Feet YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Figure 4 N NOVEMBER, 2013 � N .-! �.•�s �. '�"'� �'�,€ � � �� , �� �„�.,., � � ;`� A� 3 � � £ � � .,.�ss �k..E ,x x,,.a w9�,r.�,� TRUNK SEWER c { q°"� ,� .��:�� f ti ; i �•� p INFILTRATION % s `�': f' r ` r . • ,, x �, ,s�2 p ABATEMENT n� w•,i, .>m.,� �. � , °°"^ A t� � �,,.,. : y� &g g � � ♦y�Rpp 8 nA,�E9 P s, a a r. rN.• n „,. ox ,.. R•, _ Legend Service Area Gravity Main Flow Meter s .?log . � R! Pressure Main f E e✓a” & rR Lift Station E f" 1 Sa 0 .ter Pipe Age P > 1960 < 1960 `a 5 �s A i'in.G � 'wlel! �o � K � � � se •al.w.. fib` \s rv+.uxs, . - r. � � M' im Si %bPe.�J • ,.,nA� y � ka. � n..�v .! � wsY•.' pa t F 3 2� flfl \t •{�.� � P � ` � { �" 4 t,- .Y•. - -.., it 6' !,M•Y Source: City of Edina GIS ° � � � r = ti � •,va., AM xy � � L � nrxia A 3 •`*•o i z �. a 0 1,500 ommmE== Feet N � 1 TRUNK SEWER PIPE DEVELOPMENT AGE m� � Y nG w.xar Qn Figure 5 n NOVEMBER, 2013 i M= E a cr W O� Z 0 J z Z PI v Q (p N F O a� 2 M OWC N d � t= � O A N LIZI Total Infiltration: 3441I GPM I} I ri r. 1 'M 1 Total Infiltration: 282GPM.. Al �+ Total Infiltration: 160 GPM Totj Totallnfiltration: 44 GPM • -A. P .................................................. . - .. Total Infiltration 53 GPM 1 1 e^ r ° fi y Total Infiltration: 77 GPM l i' Total Infiltration: 98 GPM r . T "r y- Total Infiltration: 41 Total Infiltration: 80 1. -- Total Infiltration: 315 GPM '. - i I Infiltration: 157 GPM w 1.27 ��)14' .,1 i, 197 GPM ,•1' ` t O e, TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION �,? y ABATEMENT • ,y�RPORA�� • 1889 Legend J -1 e J City Limits Trunk Sewer Study Area Service Area © Flow Meter • Gravity Main �--�> Pressure Main Lift Station Infiltration (GPM) 0 5 O 12 1__ 141 O 44 O 53 O 77 D 80 E:7- 96 O 157 D 160 D 197 1 282 O 315 O 344 Ll 362 -'. Unknown Source- Infiltration Values - Barr Engineering (2008) 0 1 0 2,500 Feet OVERALL INFILTRATION SUMMARY 8 Figure 6 ® j NOVEMBER, 2013 0 E U 6 I W a 0 z Z rl vl W 4 `8 a �d ui a z� o� m� E �m 8q ❑w Eo I I I I I I I I I L.� Op TRUNK SEWER �i INFILTRATION ? O ABATEMENT lies �v Legend City Limits Study Area Sanitary Service Area OFlow Meter Pressure Main – -- Gravity Main Lift Station Infiltration /Acre (GPM) -1 0.008 0.045 0.061 1 0.083 0.115 0.152 0.159 0.181 -� 0.247 0.37 0.563 0.619 0.75 0.805 0.897 _I Unavailable ource: Infiltration Values - Barr ngineering (2008) 0 2,500 D NNNEE== Feet IVERALL INFILTRATION 'ER ACRE SERVICE AREA • 'figure 7 " PTEMBER. 2013 0 E x a of W 4 a 00 =N m� E o� io BPI TRUNK SEWER FOB INFILTRATION j. N O ABATEMENT R a ; u i { Legend Service Area © Flow Meter Pressure Main Gravity Main ■ Lift Station GW Depth Above Invert < -2 -2 -3 O 3 -5 D 5 -7 7 -10 >10 Source- City of Edina - Ground Water Elevation Model 0 1,500 K Feet a .< GROUNDWATER DEPTH y E 1 ABOVE INVERT a f a f Figure 8 NOVEMBER, 2013 4 # w N. � Ax.�., � � � TRUNK SEWER *. G e INFILTRATION Via. K� y z E s p ABATEMENT 5 a a ' s A ro^ssrnr I ice" _ C ,,: ✓e � � r. sa., n � X a f. .,,.. � $ •'ten � ,Y.,,a t h E i ts� ..P rrmx f E I 7W P F e � �, ie. iy! ■ �yt� G a E mow.,;, • ,n+1eq q �. (AS yq� t � gg ,vhn d � E IA - U I W I ml i e � � r U �i,nt o a Q N 2 O 0 � a fi E i uE m i O � p N N TO n r a c � �,„Qe rm.nona�av; m, Legend - rres,e. t SERVICE _AREA y ; - Gravity Main ay Flow Meter Pressure Main e W .z � ■ Lift Station r � Pipe Capacity *� Free Flowing Pipe 0 -50% Capacity 51 -70% Capacity E 81 -100% Capacity Pipe Over Capacity F —W Source- City of Edina- Sanitary Sewer Model a 0 1,500 Feet a I h net i a DRY WEATHER PIPE CAPACITY IYAYIt' Figure 9 ' NOVEMBER, 2013 E a W W cLQ a o� �I O O 4 0 Q� Z � �o � C C E E m oN a m m � O �p h A 1 l ty,YU �i i.P„Yap .q4 r A L t IS .Nguvn, Service Area Flow Meter P Pressure Main � .P � � ; r ! ► � a ■ Lift Station Gravity Main 3 wlt3e.,ie;'s:r.F.an.�'a f O 4�.,. ar Tt+hE ry, f •� l ... 4 ,9,• Trunk Sewer Pipe Material y i d tt9 6 f 96 G� e ® ^ ® CIPP kadr nrP.e D CIP -�.• �, �� k e TRUNK SEWER RCP _. _ o VCP INFILTRATION iwPPP r � J �� ID � Y� 6�6s��, N� O ABATEMENT �>wa y CL i Source: City of Edina GIS 0 1,500 mmmmE== Feet mn.d X, maP i p A { u 7a f a PIPE MATERIAL v,frttt T g arm* M, vrP:'.� � � r ♦i � YL3! Legend i.P„Yap .q4 r A L t IS .Nguvn, Service Area Flow Meter P Pressure Main � .P � � ; r ! ► � a ■ Lift Station Gravity Main 3 wlt3e.,ie;'s:r.F.an.�'a f O 4�.,. ar Tt+hE ry, f •� l ... 4 ,9,• Trunk Sewer Pipe Material y i d tt9 96 G� ® CIPP kadr D CIP RCP VCP i Source: City of Edina GIS 0 1,500 mmmmE== Feet mn.d X, maP i p A { u 7a f a PIPE MATERIAL b s Figure 10 NOVEMBER. 2013 t EE N z O U W Z 0 U W U w N1 �I Y g a m $a ro No f N N Z N 4j 0 4j c E ,m 8� oN am �m �o � r � y i 8 O A,,. • paa�.m n a -. j ace„m, "0 a ^sr b A. i 6 f. R. �ec'J ad M!l A✓ � p'vatt a a E� F y 't. 1 9 � p Op TRUNK SEWER �i INFILTRATION O ABATEMENT T II �MOlentt Source: City of Edina GIS nntYt a 0 1,500 Feet SERVICE CONNECTIONS ALONG TRUNK LINES PER 1,000 FT / Figure 11 NOVEMBER, 2013 s � Y ,FAN II �MOlentt Source: City of Edina GIS nntYt a 0 1,500 Feet SERVICE CONNECTIONS ALONG TRUNK LINES PER 1,000 FT / Figure 11 NOVEMBER, 2013 � .�. ,, O P.r TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT ce« � °,a, � a... Q � ..s°°°" � !, �* �n - 4 r � � +�F r.c�. % � • rN�Re S P`'T�'C � ran.. Legend e Service Area • +sy.. "` 4 �s `e O *�• R,_, a € Flow Meter 0 Pressure Main �r...r. '% p� Gravity Main e ■ Lift Station N _ t �g $ `3} ' ' °"" °•,n Trunk Sewer Pipe Size -16 c. r i 24.. � � r t 6t• . .. O A y.,c.v ° *4r h t '� a.nr -ae &�. a � vra fAnat Source: City of Edina GIS F 4 j! 6A 3j W 0 1,500 14 Fn mmmmE== Feet a I � OJG k�p 4 � M•rnr awf<s rr a....e.y ar..nw -, h _ R) -. r i ^�' � : rwser jI• epaarrfa C wvs -. Z rwr.+ � PIPE SIZE ZV 9 Figure 12 8" ,,... 1 E„.w►'� " "" " a �` �. I:, NOVEMBER, 2013 a x ?E F O a ml W �I �I d `8 a fp o r> F� Qa 2 N � r S � d Ev o� a t0 A r� �� T T t►, l 4+a 0 y 4 d r- E � �— rrax •' . -+ . Ij . VO.IB � IYJaII � A' /i1M.e �.• I � e.�%A4 URNS •rknR: y HNS +_ pyy • f -�- t N w9t� I'll '� �w e, TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION �,4, fsr2, p ABATEMENT • zN�aeonP�� • Legend Service Area O Flow Meter Gravity Main Proritization Category °a Score: 22 -30, Highest Priority Score: 19 -22 r— D Score: 16 -19, Moderate Priority Score: 13 -16 .A. ® Score 9 -13, Lowest Priority „mE Pressure Main ■ Lift Station a Source: Prioritization Categories: Sum of Prioritization Factors n •I1Jt S* 0 1,500 Wmmmmc:::� Feet TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT PRIORITY Figure 13 l✓ NOVEMBER, 2013 a E m a W 0 ¢ 0 4 �m Z m �o N d E o rn nm W m � O � - i � �r't.' .� .. � �•.'.: ��..fi'� -; °r '� i� "?s��,•"i•'f?4 � '::"�' r , t.. .!A ! : r._.r:�.•Aa. I-AP ,�.. r 1. r•--------- • - -. —.. — ................... ........................... � �� ` � � � 1, f ►" t Sewe,snedlD ,� I - >I sew—nedlD�s "�..«.,/'•fJ.i ♦: r .. }" I r�} - �•_ \``A j,. � � � � _444 _.�� .. � ' � I` •' .� i 7 - Se—hed ID 6 •� ��_ � ,I Sewershed ID: 9 � AL i I I ELI loi S—.h. d m 4 SewershedlD:2 .. I -shed ID. 3 '� -♦�rt S... -he ID: 129 Se sh Btl ID,1 - - - • - -• -- ............................... V ! {g ` 3 r Seweshed ID. 10 l ti• —1 S— 'Shedl0: 11 17 •.. o T � p a� a n Q CF -� 12� -; o _. s i • •s i 'iY li S �herlesn ve 4l anc Av O le TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION yABATEMENT \�RYURA•T 1888 Legend :-%J** City Limits Service Area © Flow Meter Gravity Main Trunk Sewer Study Area Pressure Main ® Lift Station Street Recon Years 2013 2014 - 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Source: City of Edina GIS QD momow--i 0 2,500 Feet 5 -YEAR ROAD IMPROVEMENT PLAN Figure 14 NOVEMBER, 2013 0 K E Z Z M O Q S Q S W Z Z_ e 3 v s a mg �Q 0 00 �c =N m E$ N ag W� �o _ 1 A, ow9e j�� TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT e Legend Minnehaha Creek Trunk Services Trunk Sewer Pipe Size 15" 16" 18" 20" 21" 24" 33" 2015 Street Improvements 51IN7 LOUIS PARK i .1� 1 MINNE4POL15 EDINA Rlcr -r Flct o' 0 200 Feet �1 EXAMPLE OF PROJECT S1 h 6 ti SYNERGIES ; Figure 15 NOVEMBER, 2013 X W m Y 0 0 m a a Q� u s �< ;m Q A Z °c m E n • o v, a$ a • y. } Y• i y i ,!� �— • µ SUGGESTED 4 y , LINER y INSERTION .,...."' ` C 4 1 1 -4 yb y 0 '196 hOM1�� l� l SUGGESTE LINER INSERTION (ACCESSIBLE Nil yep - ,�•" � .a. -S e0y' {- •. '` k •�eb +'�F f* r` _ NOT AC lowo rl PROJECT # 2 LENGTH: 2598' A ACCESSIBLEM1l IN TREES �" , t1. • F ACCESSIBLE CEMETERY RD _ LINER • F 1 _ 89:5 57 L =130.7 L =39.2 ' /C�0 SRVC =0 SRVC= OSRVG�O S a t *�K PROJECT # 1 LENGTH: 2115' t LINER ,► , 40-1j %L Y + i O a' o _ At fill, M1 , a• I TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT / Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15" e Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18• Gravity Main 20• Trunk Services 21" Creeks 24 Potential Probed Limits 33" ►�► -� Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE {� a } 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION Figure 16 NOVEMBER, 2013 0 E v Y O 0 a �I m s sQ Z� s0 = N C � Ev oW o� as �A �o I, 71� I NO XP CTENTIALLY EASY ACCESS DIFFICULT � t TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT ` SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE /9 �8 17' 16 29 n 1) 26 25' 16 23 11 11 PARTIAL ACCESS FROM CEMETERY 0 200 Feet 57th St A SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION PROJECT # 2 LENGTH: 2598' Figure 17 " 1F NOVEMBER, 2013 Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16" 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 —� — Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" 10►4-- ► Possible Negotiated Access ` SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE /9 �8 17' 16 29 n 1) 26 25' 16 23 11 11 PARTIAL ACCESS FROM CEMETERY 0 200 Feet 57th St A SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION PROJECT # 2 LENGTH: 2598' Figure 17 " 1F NOVEMBER, 2013 14 d Y O O a- a m e m� ¢ r z o `r1 Lo Ev am o W oN n ?? m m �O �• PROJECT # HOLE IN MH LID �►°�� , LENGTH: 2142W2' NEGOTIATE ACCESS � � \ \\ WITH ADJACENT OWNERS '- • ry' T' W 52nd St 11 1 '01 VERY DIFFICULT ACCESS �•i Le173.3 1188'3 P �� SRVCy �� SRVC =f �► - r 44 o � r J. Art I PROJECT # 4 LENGTH: 1720' a 1 ( A • a f e ;A i �1► � �� . . 4� a. N } , Z 7•r' EASY ACCESS IN ►ti, rs PARK AREA A wit- r1 T- p • "it . M1^ 1 . PROJECT # 3 LENGTH: 2373' DIFFICULT ACCESS CLEAR AND GRUB REQ �1W w ,j� TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION �y ABATEMENT \" ire Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15' Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18` — — Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21' Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33' rrit► Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE US 1� 19 �8 17' 16 I9�,, LO 3 ` 26 1 J7 1 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION 0 Figure 18 NOVEMBER. 2013 v E m t v Y O O m s m Z 0 E 0 o. TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 - Gravity Main 20" Trunk Services 21 a> Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" ►► ► ►► Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE r r 1 i i - �Ednei 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION r, Figure 19 NOVEMBER. 2013 Y O O m a a v� �Q ;m z� o� = N m Ev � w � 0 N m ice° SUUG7ESTT LINER- OF INSERTION sp`c 8� EASY STREET ACCESS ,0°91 $ F SR�$O PROJECT #7 LENGTH: 2800` , SUGGESTED LINER I '' INSERTION � o' I: PROJECT #6 ` LENGTH: 3430'`. ° A, �� -�1�� TRUNK SEWER e o INFILTRATION ABATEMENT -b-.- lanhole • Manhole Trunk Sewer PipeSize 1F 1+ a r y , r' R—. ♦ sp�� d _ a _ ....,. • Trunk Manhole 15•, f f � r .[. �! ®moo ! Lakes 16.. K . , 18 +M1 R`C�s" . L�259.7 L =139:6 L =311.4 2005 Temporary Flow Meter L 21L5 1 L =319.2 SRVC.O SRVC =O °e`° SRVC =O '0`^ SRVC =O Gravity Main 20 O • / , run Services SUGG 24, At Creeks R D INSERT EASYS TREETACCESS LINER „ 33" I ft71H wk . + INSERTION Potential Project Limits �.. w 0- + Possible Negotiated Access At 110 f - _'' • .r �� "'_`tH w �f. * SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 1 fa*1RffA�t i � r = ffNll f� tot F ! � _ I ,,� r '�, ,, fie, ' `• ,� �;.* , t z , ,. � ,r A �• r , „ ! + }} 0 200 41 d �-= t=� Feet jF SANITARY SEWER REHAB I f Al , `O F �. S ., PROJECT DELINEATION le ol Il,x Figure 20 ., ... M NOVEMBER, 2013 af! r _ V'I L WW , EASY STREET lob w • � +mow: �. 89.7 L ■58.8 L =251.0 L= 58:5 L ■211.1 t ■78 L.222,3 L ■87.4 L =212.7 L=81.9 L =215:1 , �,� L =340.2 �C■0 SRVC■0 SRVC =O SRVC =O SRVC■0 SRVC■0 SRVC■0 SRVC =O SRVC =O SRVC =0 SR 116=0 SRVC =O S�4 a; +N ' n EASYSTREETACCESS • N Jy PROJECT #8 LENGTH: 2180' f a C C C S a c i c SUGGESTED '� - + INSERTION SUGGESTED � LINER 'T •,�� � - - Pa INSERTION PROJECT #7 ` LENGTH: 2800' m � i LL _ '�` _ y �' •;;;fir"= �R � �4`!� • ���' . i :'F /E 1y 7 i o ril aq + - ,. ff f8rfft s r T +w. t i t i fi 1fo riff 1 f i i f� '�. o .' e •. 1 '�y , . • t�9 ,fie , �t. tfffre!►rfl!ffpf _,,*gVnib,. oil r f 'Mr a w9sN�,l� TRUNK SEWER °� a INFILTRATION �° ABATEMENT fY T 69 Ar` lPtlB Legend n Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PlpeSl2e af! r _ V'I L WW , EASY STREET lob w • � +mow: �. 89.7 L ■58.8 L =251.0 L= 58:5 L ■211.1 t ■78 L.222,3 L ■87.4 L =212.7 L=81.9 L =215:1 , �,� L =340.2 �C■0 SRVC■0 SRVC =O SRVC =O SRVC■0 SRVC■0 SRVC■0 SRVC =O SRVC =O SRVC =0 SR 116=0 SRVC =O S�4 a; +N ' n EASYSTREETACCESS • N Jy PROJECT #8 LENGTH: 2180' f a C C C S a c i c SUGGESTED '� - + INSERTION SUGGESTED � LINER 'T •,�� � - - Pa INSERTION PROJECT #7 ` LENGTH: 2800' m � i LL _ '�` _ y �' •;;;fir"= �R � �4`!� • ���' . i :'F /E 1y 7 i o ril aq + - ,. ff f8rfft s r T +w. t i t i fi 1fo riff 1 f i i f� '�. o .' e •. 1 '�y , . • t�9 ,fie , �t. tfffre!►rfl!ffpf _,,*gVnib,. oil r f 'Mr a w9sN�,l� TRUNK SEWER °� a INFILTRATION �° ABATEMENT fY T 69 Ar` lPtlB Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PlpeSl2e • Trunk Manhole 15" Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 - Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 04 :, - Creeks n 24 Potential Project Limits 33" ►f-►-st Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE © /6 29 Cl 22 25 37 ��2/ 22 21 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION • it Figure 21 NOVEMBER, 2013 E m Y O O a m m 4 m a Z s E 0 0 2 �13A, o�, r�� TRUNK SEWER ° e INFILTRATION o ;A ay ABATEMENT • 7�R�081•9 1 tle Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" r► -►-►► Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 19 �8 16 79 L 27 �_ 75 ® )1 � 14 )1 )O 2 11 Zf 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION 1t Figure 22 NOVEMBER. 2013 0 E Y 0 O g d �a z� o" Ly o Ev m a� n� �o TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION y ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole t5 Lakes 16' 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main 20" Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" ►+ ► ►� Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE to r i 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION • u Figure 23 NOVEMBER, 2013 E Y O O CD 0 3 d U S oQ �77 Z s� C � d E ON m m TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16° 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 1t3 Gravity Main —" 20" Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE III 19 �s 17' i6 29 27 2 25 I9 32 31 30 23-- 3 _ _ 22 21 _ 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION • Figure 24 NOVEMBER. 2013 0 E Y O O 3 m U 4 d �Q Zn o� �C =N 0 in a$ m a �o N TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ° ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" r►-►-►► Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE f9 �B MN 6 17' 19 17 E 15� 10 0 V 13 11 11 IL E) 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION 11 Figure 25 NOVEMBER, 2013 0 E O O CD U s 8Q �m Z Ei �c m E 0 1n a �o TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 40 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33 rs�f a Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 19 18 17 /8 19 f MN C.1 17 `e 15 ' za zz zf OW ML i 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION ID-'r Figure 26 NOVEMBER. 2413 a E m t m YI O O a a v� 3 d 4 v o� �a m � M H io a� Z_ O�- �o = N C � 9 Ev 0 19 n$ A m �0 i p LINERM INSERTION LINERM INSERTION PROJECT #15 LENGTH: 2500' SUGG LINER MILE: CREEK TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT / Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PlpeSlze 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 • Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" 0 -►-►0- Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 19 iB 77 16 29 L 27 25 I4 32 �30 19 22 21 20 IEt 4VC= v °ry�JU ; 0 200 SUGGESTED i Feet LINER E Y O Q 3 • 4 sQ �m a� Z� s� = N C � • J o 'a n$ w m A. o A0 TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16" 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" 0- - Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 0 ------- AJ } cc �' 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION • u C; Figure 28 NOVEMBER, 2013 E Y O O m ig 3 s oQ Z s� m� E m oW o� aB �W �o j a 2 P s . ti, A s -r r„ ;111001- `�� TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION UJ ► �y ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main - 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" 00-0-0► Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 19 16 .1156 7 29 t ��y L"2 wti: 27 �_ 25 ' 31 PC 21 91 21 11 20 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION t Figure 29 NOVEMBER, 2013 Y O O m a 4 m� M m r, an z o� =N� d E d o m' DN � 0 ' .I - 4 ;•. -- �t r +• IR low- PROJECT #20 k . LENGTH: 2480'` r F f M ►' i f !► r , 1! t ft f.fli t!i f f SUGGESTE k. L= 236.6 L =293.7 LINERM 09� L�330.5 L =367.3 L=3�8.3 L�7g53, . INSERTION cc`vr a •,' I CIi1M_sR � ®� SR1/C�9 �! ��� SRI!C�6 SRVr>1.,,, s L`fI8 r if > Y� Y ' PROJECT #19 LENGTH: 2200' , ':a � � b . - ,�. s � �,, f '� �'' 1I► . t t tt�. tt,t tff+ r � �` ;F a tf]•1 � .]`��� � � �+ # \ F� rarw.rar� il gSN�,l�,� TRUNK SEWER o INFILTRATION ABATEMENT IPtle Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16" 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" ►►+►* Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE :r i r 1 r f d F Atli 17 14 a� Ya�71� � I3 12 21 IL A!, a;! ., IF } _ • 0 200 �� .a- I ' ! t , ' .. Feet 1 ' SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION r Fig u a 30 a 4: w X r s •� NOVEMBER. 2013 TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16" 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 T Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" 00 -0-0► Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 19 18 17' i6 Z9 CEO, 25, 24 27 32 in 3, =0 ..e 22 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION Figure 31 NOVEMBER. 2013 E Y O a s �Q Zr Ly °c = N C � 41 � E �m A o v, �0 a TRUNK SEWER INFILTRATION ABATEMENT Legend Manhole Trunk Sewer • Manhole PipeSize 0 Trunk Manhole 15 Lakes 16' 2005 Temporary Flow Meter 18 Gravity Main 20 Trunk Services 21 Creeks 24 Potential Project Limits 33" ►►--►- Possible Negotiated Access SRVC = NUMBER OF SERVICES ON TRUNK LINE 19 18 17 18 19 1� 16 15� 2/ 37 31 11 13 11 0 200 Feet SANITARY SEWER REHAB PROJECT DELINEATION Figure 32 n" NOVEMBER, 2013 To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: December 17, 2013 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received since the last Council Meeting. No action is requested. Agenda Item #: IX. A. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information December 4, 2013 Mayor James Hovland City of Edina Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50'' St. Edina, MN 55424 RE: 2014 proposed property taxes Dear Mayor Hovland: I intended to personally attend the December 3, 2013 Edina City Council meeting regarding the above referenced matter, but was not feeling well. Enclosed is a copy of my 2014 proposed property taxes for 6600 Field Way. It reveals an increase from 2013 by 8.8 %, which, in my opinion is extremely excessive in view of the research I have done, copies of which are enclosed. Please review the enclosed Star Tribune editorial dated November 13, 2013 entitled "Property tax hikes? It's time to speak up." At the top of the second column of the editorial are the aggregate property tax increases that were projected for 2014 as follows: Cities -2.1 % increase; Counties -1.5% increase; Townships -2.1% increase; Schools -2.6% increase and Special taxing districts -2.3% increase. While doing some research on the internet I learned that the Preliminary County Levy Change for property taxers in only Hennepin County in 2014 is a mere 1.0 %. Enclosed is a copy that information. I am also enclosing a copy df the Preliminary 2014 Property Tax Levies from the Minnesota Revenue property tax website, which corroborates the Star Tribune aggregate property tax increases. Lastly, I am enclosing a copy of the US Inflation Calculator which reveals a 1.7% inflation rate between 2012 and 2013. For all the above comparisons to my property tax increase of 8.8% you can understand why I believe the percentage increase for 2014 is extremely excessive and should be reduced accordingly. Y1 e t ly you s, , Ogu a cc: Jonie Bennett w /enc. Mary Brindle w /enc. Josh Sprague w /enc. Ann Swanson w /enc. Hennepin County A -600 Government Center 300 S. Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55487 -0060 612 - 348 -3011 www.hennepin.us Proposed levies; - 2014 L20113 values for taxes payable in 2014 MELVIN OGURAK 6600 FIELD WAY EDINA MN 55436 -1717 THIS IS NOT A BILL — DO NOT PAY Addresses for correspondence Actual 2013 Hennepin County A2400 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487 612- 348-3011 City of EDINA Edina City Hall 4801 M 50th Street Edina MN 55424 952 - 927 -8861 STATE GENERAL TAX School District 273 Voter Approved Levy: Other Local Lovios: School District Total Edina Public Schools 5701 Normandale Rd Edina MN 55424 952 - 848-4916 Metro Special Taxing Dist. Metropolitan Council 390 Robert Street North St Paul MN 55101 -1805 651 - 602 -1647 Other Spec. Taxing Dist: Fiscal Disparity Tax: Tax Increment Tax: TAX EXCLUDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS $3,369.99 $1,840.98 Property ID NO: 31- 117 -21 24 0008 6600 FIELD WAY Property taxes statement schedule Stop Value & classification TAX YEAR PAYABLE CLASS: Estimated Market Values Homestead Exclusion: Other Exclusion /Deforral: Taxable Mkt Value: 2013 HOMESTEAD $628,400 $0 $0 :628,400 2014 HOMESTEAD 4668,300 40 00 $668,300 = . Proposed levies & taxes �^ 2013 TAX $9,060.90 2014 PROPOSED $9,855.89 Percent change 8.8% Now is the time to provide feedback on proposed levies. It is too late to appeal your value or classification without going to Tax Court. 'Stop Property tax statement Coming March 2014, clue May IS, 2014 and Oct 15, 2014 Proposed 2014 "- Meeting date & location 467.93 Nov 26, 2013 6:00 PM Commissioner Board Room v t A2400 Government Center Minneapolis MN 55487 1.29 Doc 3, 2013 PM Council Chamberrs s Edina City Hall 4801 W 50th Street rdina MN 55424 V6 No meeting required % / t-1 t' Dec 16, 2013 7:00 PH $2..193.19 ' / � .. .. 52.015.22.. Room 349 $1.001.37 / 2 b 4 8.0 Edina Community Center $3,194.56 �^ f 3,433.24 5701 Normandale Rd Edina MN 55424 ,1 6 v Doc I1, 2013 6:00 PM $214.13 �1 $2 6. 2 Metropolitan Council b 1 390 Robert Street North •Z r St Paul MN 55101 -1805 $441.24 $497.01 No meeting required No meeting required No meeting required $9,060.90 59,855.89 Check out the convenient payment options available to pay NEXT YEAR's property taxes http: / /www.henhepin.us /propertytaxpayments or call 612 348 -3011 Learn about property taxes: wtvw.hennepin.us /propertytaxes THIS IS NOT A BILL — DO NOT PAY Al2 - STAR TRIBUNE - WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2019 Editorials Editorials represent the institutional voice of the Star Tribune. They are researched and written by the Editorial Department, which Is independent of the newsroom staffm ne MICHAEL T1'. SWEUW Chairman MICHAEL 1. KLINGENSMITH, Publisher and CEO SCOrr GILLESPIE, Editor, Editorial Pages P hike ...., s? It's time to.: speak up • Newstate spending should end the long mn of local increases. You're irritated thafthe "Truth in Taxation" statement you recently AIMING HIGH received shows'a property tax These aggregatepropertytax increase coming next year? You've increases wereprojectedlast got company. The State Capitol is week for 2014: full of annoyedDF47 majority polid'' taitieis sL97bllion,62.1 pekent cians•who beefed up state aid to city increase les, counties and schools last spring • Counties:: $2.75 billion, a 1.� per- ' in the expectation that most of those:' cent increase.. • jurisdictions would curt: or cut their.' : ; : towinthipst $234 million, a 2.1 levies in response. percent increase. Instead, preliminary: totals show • Schools: $238 billion, a 2.6 per -' more increases than. rollbacks, centincrease. enough to produce projected average ? Special iaxirtg diswctst $328 statewide increases:of 2 percent, state million, a 2.3 percent increase. revenue officials reported last week minnesa DepanmentofRmeLme. (See box, right) i Republicans, too; are outraged — or so several of their said in state- nesses to pay for a major, increase in ments that barely hid their" glee over pre-K-12 school funding ($485 million the possibility that they can make over two years); asales tax exemption political,hay with higher property for local govemtnents =9 millloo) taxes next year. and increases in city. ($80 million) Allthat angst may beoverwrought. and county ($40 million),program "Truth in Taxation" statements aren't aid: , the final wordon 2014 taxes. They The-Re4enue' Department ,said are preliminary bids that serve as'a in July that it expectedthe city• and high-water mark from which, in most 'county share of those aid increases. years, actual tax bills recede before to translate into property tax cuts of, they are issued:-in March.'Vhat's at least $121•milllon next ycar.Itstill' more, the numbers omit the enriched, .can, provided local governments act refunds that the Minnesota Budget ` accordingly between now an'd•the� Project says will reach SS0,000 rent- 27 levy ceitiflcation date., ` ing and owninghousehoidinext year, `• Some jurisdictions are sh&W* the 140,000 more of them than in 2013. way. (Tb'see your local jurisdiction's. :•lather; In many parts of the state, preliminary'nuMbers, visit httpV • responsibility for higher property tinyurl.com%lksuic.) State Revenue taxes lies not with elected 'officials, Commissioner Myron Frans was in but with voters themselves. Nearly Hastings this weekio praise its pro= A Al1ATfP1' Af t'l7P tf afPc crh....t .i:e- :nn►n.1 7C w ....• 1..:...... J... -L.. _�__,....�.. uint most of those jurisdictions ,kould curb or cut their levies In response. Instead, preliminary totals show more increases than rollbacks, enough to produce projected average statewide increases of 2 percent, state revenue officials reported last week (See box, right.) Republicans, too, are outraged — or so several of them said in state- ments that barely hid their glee over the possibility that they can make political hay with higher property taxes next year. All that angst may be overwrought. 'Iluth in Taxation" statements aren't the final word on 2014 taxes. They are preliminary bids that serve as a high -water mark from which, in most years, actual tax bills recede before they are issued in March. What's more, the numbers omit the enriched refunds that the Minnesota Budget Project says will reach 550,000 rent- ing and owning households next year, 140,000 more of them than in 2013. Further, in many parts of the state, responsibility for higher property taxes lies not with elected officials, but with voters themselves. Nearly a quarter of the state's school dis- tricts went to their voters on Nov 5 to request either higher or extended levies; in 90 percent of those districts, voters answered yes. The result, the Revenue Department projects, is a $60 million school levy increase statewide, compared with a projected $59 million drop before the election. Still, we're not urging that concern about higher property taxes be stifled. We recommend the opposite. The stewards of local government bud- gets deserve to hear promptly from property- owning and renting con- stituents who consider their Truth in Taxation bids too high. (informa- tion on how and when to register concern is printed on Truth in Tax- ation forms.) Minnesota taxpayers endured U straight years of property tax Increases while a squeeze on the state budget deprived schools and local governments of needed sup- port. That squeeze ended with the 2013 legislative session The string of tax hikes ought to run out, as well. Unhappy state leaders, starting with Gov Mark Dayton, are also right to jawbone local officials to rein in their appetites for higher taxes. Day. ton and the 2013 Legislature's DFL majority put themselves at political risk for local governments' sakes. They raised taxes on high -end indi- y1duals, smokers and some busi- .�. - .......nya 1.7 per- cent increase. 9 Townshiprt $234 million, a 2.1 percentincrease. • Schools: $2.38 billion, a 2.6 per- cent increase. • Special taxing distrletst $328 million, a 23 percent increase. Minnesota Departrne t of Revenue. nesses to pay for a major Increase In pre-K-12 school funding (5485 million over two years), a sales tax exemption I for local governments ($129 million) and increases in city ($80 million) and county ($40 million) program aid. The Revenue Department said in July that it expected the city and county share of those aid increases to translate into property tax cuts of at least $121 million next year. It still can, provided local governments act accordingly between now and the Dec. 27 levy certification date. Some jurisdictions are showing the way. (To see your local jurisdiction's preliminary numbers, visit http :H Q tinyurl.com/olksutc.)'Statc Revenue f Commissioner Myron Frans was in Hastings this week to praise its pro- jected 2.5 percent levy reduction, which when combined with Dakota County's 0.5 percent rollbac land the Hastings school district's estimated 3.9 percent cut should bring its prop- erty owners and renters smaller tax bills next year. (Those are averages; individual tax bills also depend on ' property valuation changes and shifts within jurisdictions, and can vary widely.) ' The commissioner also had praise for Minneapolis. Its city levy is pro- jected to fall by 0.9 percent next year. By comparison, St. Paul's projected levy is unchanged from 2013. To be sure, local circumstances vary. In many places, a pent -up demand is waiting to be satisfied. Equipment purchases, infrastructure ' repairs, building improvements, new hires and salary increases were put on hold as state officials squeezed local aid to cope with recurring deficits from 2002 through 2012, One more year of increases is needed to catch up, many are likely thinking. They should also think this: In 2014, they won't be able to cre dibly , deflect responsibility for higher taxe to St. Paul. Minnesota taxpayers are Informed citizens who know that the 2013 Legislature set the table for prop- erty tax restraint. If restraint doesn't ensue, citizens will know who to ask "Why not?" Preliminary County Levy Changes for CY 2014 November 12, 2013 COUNTY NAME Pay 2013 Final Levy Pay 2014 Preliminary Levy $ Change % Change Levy Levy TOTALS 2,703,942,268 2,744,530,438 40,588,170 1.5% AITKIN 11,725,696 11,725,696 0 0.0% A40KA 118,392,892 119,359,397 966,505 0.8% BECKER 18,592,732 19,064,032 471,300 2.50/6 BELTRAMI 17,486,013 17,486,013 0 . 0.0% BENTON 20,228,287 19,821,893 (406,394) -2.0% BIG STONE 4,386,372 4,602,481 216,109 4.9% BLUE EARTH 29,036,661 29,036,661 0 0.0%0 B_RO_WN_ 11,384,513 11,747,300 362,787. 3.2% CARLTON 21,599,075 22,906,025 1,306,950 6.1% CARVER 45,629,720 47,546,920 1,91.7_,200 4.2% LASS 20,046,613 20,046,613 0 0.0% CHIPPEWA 8,165,769 8,598,679 432,910 5.3% CHISAGO 31,397,021 31,347,021 (50,000) -0.2 % CLAY 24,294,546 25,151,532 85_6,986 3.5% CLEARWATER 5,357,857 6,135,730 777,873 14.5% COOK ' 6,109,103 6,286,357 177,254 2.9% COTTONWOOD 7,949,571 8,191,154 241,583 3.0% CROW WING 34,737,542 34,737,542 0 0.0 %i DAKOTA 129,152,073 128,506,313 (645,760) -0.5 %I DODGE 10,765,634 11,361,884 596,250 5.5% DOUGLAS 24,548,839 26,655,090 2,106,251 8.6% FARIBAULT 9,238,472 9,551,480 315,00.8 3.4% FILLMORE 8,435,205 8,435,205 0 0.0% FREEBORN_ 19,457,478 19,457,478 0 0.0% GOODHUE 26,936,658 27,399,013 462,355 1.7% GRANT 5,309,244 5,761,613 452,369 8.5% HENNEPIN_ 674,616,060 681,253,275 6,637,215 1.0% HOUSTON 10,473,779 10,855,549 381,770 _ 3.6% HUBBARD 11,850,000 12,400,000 550.000 4.6% ISANTI 15,476,446 16,479,667 _1,003,221 6.5% ITASCA 31,544,803 32,984.087 1,439,284 4.6% JACKSON 9,200,194 9,704,487 504,293 5.5% KANABEC 10,717,954 10,717,954 0 0.0% KANDIYOHI 28,670,611 29,008,411 337,800 1.2% KITTSON 3,115,563 3,324,902 209,339 6.7% KO_OCHICHING 4,032,063 4,019,469 (12:594) -0.3% LAC QU) _ PARLE 4,882,431 5,084,355 201,924 4.1% LAKE 8,006,192 8,266,472 260,280 3.3% LAKE OF THE WOODS 2,448,318 2,497,284 48,966 2.0% LE SUEUR 14,720,132 15,574,323 854,191 5.8% LINCOLN 4,561,658 5,013,823 452,165 6.40% LYON 12,164,341 12,730,746 566,405 4.7% MCLEOD 18,293,585 18,709,215 415,630 2.3% MAHNOMEN 4,065,096 4,067,046 1,950 0.0% MARSHALL 5,251,059 5,513,612 262,553 5.0% MARTIN 11,444,862 11,805,424 360,562 3.2% MEEKER 12,499,671 12,708,485 208,814 1.7% MILLE LACS 14,726,000 14,726,000 0 0.0% MORRISON 16,221,756 16,600,172 378,416 2.3% MOWER 17,224,698 17,603,221 378,523 2.20/a MURRAY 5,786,582 6,014,632 228,050 3.9% Minnesota Department of Revenue Property Tax Division Preliminary 2014 Property Tax Levies MINNESOTA- REVENUE Property tax Preliminary 2014 Properly Tax Levies Page 1 of 2 Lest Updated: 11/122013 Every year at this time, the Minnesota Department of Revenue releases a list of the preliminary maximum property tax levies that have been reported by local governments and have been passed by local school referenda. Local governments are required to set their preliminary levies by September 15 to provide citizens an opportunity to learn of and comment on proposed tax levels at Truth -in - Taxation hearings. Cities The 2014 preliminary property tax levies for cities will total approximately $1.967 billion compared with $1.927 billion in 2013, a 2.1% increase. Counties The 2014 preliminary property tax levies for counties will total approximately $2.745 billion compared with $2.704 billion in 2013, a 1.5% increase. Townships _ - - - - - -- - - -- - - — The 2014 preliminary property tax levies for townships will total approximately $234 million compared with $229 million in 2013, a 2.1% increase. Schools The 2014 preliminary property tax levies for schools will total approximately $2.377 billion compared with $2.317 billion in 2013, a 2.6% increase. School levies were set to decline by $59 million. Voters approved $119 million in new and renewed referenda, for a net increase of $60 million in 2014. Special Taxing Districts The 2014 preliminary property tax levies for special taxing districts will total approximately $328 million compared with $321 million in 2013, a 2.3% increase. http: / /www. revenue. state. mn. us/ propervytax /Pages/ptievies_14p.aspx 12/4/2013 Inflation Calculator I Find US Dollar's Value from 1913 -2013 Page 1 of 7 US Inflation Calculator Easily calculate how the buying power of the US dollar has changed from 1913 -2013; get inflation rates, and inflation news. n RSS Feed -„I Comments • Home • About • Inflation News • Inflation FAD's • Inflation and Prices • U.S. Coin Melt Values Calculator • Inflation vs. Consumer Price Index (CPI1. How They Are Different • Consumer Price Index Data from 1913 to 2013 • Consumer Price Index Release Schedule • Current US Inflation Rates: 2003 -2013 • Historical Inflation Rates: 1914 -2013 • Annual Averages for Rate of Inflation • Terms & Privacy Policy Search this website... GO The US Inflation Calculator measures the buying power of the dollar over time. To begin, just enter any two dates between 1913 and 2013, an amount, and then click 'Calculate'. Inflation Calculator If in 2012 (enter year) I purchased an item for $ 1 20.00 then in 1 2013 (enter year') that same Item would cost: $20.34 Cumulative rate of inflation: 1.7% Calculate Print •Learn how this calculator works. This US Inflation Calculator uses the latest US government CPI data published on November 20, 2013 to adjust for Inflation and calculate the cumulative Inflation rate through October 2013. The Consumer Price Index (CPQ and Inflation for November 2013 Is scheduled for release by the United States government on December 17, 2013. (See Inflation rates sinco 2003.) http:/ /www.usinflationcalculator.com/ 12/4/2013 N` MINNESOTA• REVENUE December 2, 2013 The Honorable James Hovland Mayor City of Edina 4801 W 50th St Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Dear Mayor Hovland: 1 am writing to provide information about the new sales tax exemption for cities and counties to help you implement the change fully and accurately. Since 2002, statewide property taxes have increased over 80% as state aid to cities and counties was cut eight times. This year was different. h1 May, the Governor and Legislature provided tools to rebuild the state -local fiscal partnership, including: (1) a $129 million sales tax exemption; (2) a $140 million increase in direct property tax refunds to homeowners and renters; (3) a $130 million increase in local government aid to townships, cities, and counties; and (4) an increase in local school aid. Starting January 1, 2014, most city and county purchases will be exempt from sales tax, except oil purchases used to provide services that are commonly provided by private businesses (such as a golf course). For example, cities and counties will no longer pay state sales tax on: • Office supplies, equipment, telephone service • Machinery and equipment, accessories for public safety, road/bridge maintenance • Lawn care, tree, bush, stump removal services • Gravel, sand, salt, salt/sand mixtures • Qualifying public transit vehicles, fire trucks, marked police cars, ambulances • Construction materials used by city or county workers Fuel (state road tax still applies) You can find detailed information about the exemption by reading Fact Sheet 176 or visiting our website. To access the fact sheet and related information, go to www.revenue.state.inn.us and type "local government exemption" in the Search box. As you set final 2014 tax levies, please contact us if you have any questions about how the sales tax exemption will apply to your budget. My direct dial phone number is 651 -556 -6003. We are committed to working with you to make sure this new exemption functions as intended. Your hard work in serving the public is vital to Minnesota's success. Thank you for your service. Sincerely, / Myron Frans Commissioner of Revenue Commissioner's Office 600 North Robert Street St. Paul, MN 55146 651- 296 -3403 Minnesota Relay 711 (TTY) An equal opportunity employer Deb Mannen From: johnsnowl984 @gmail.com on behalf of Yaohua Sun <ysun @cs.umn.edu> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 4:08 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast); joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: plea from a MN taxpayer regarding the edina eminent domain dispute Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged HI, City Council members of Edina, I am an Engineer, an immigrant -to -be from China, and an MN resident and tax payer for the past 5 years. I found your contact info from the City council member directory in the Edina City government website. I read from the newspaper that you are going to try to use eminent domain to condemn the property on 3944 W. 49Y2 St: littp:HNvNvNv.startribune.com /local /west/233888061.httnl while the negotiation is still going on(if broken, you will go to pursuit eminent domain), I want to sincerely remind you that this isn't just a dispute about a parking lot, or a family's property. this is a dispute that will possibly fundamentally changes my view towards the core value of the United States, that is, freedom and individual rights for every law abiding citizen. and that is why I choose to emigrate out of communist China, this past September, my parents house in Jiangsu Province, China, was broken in by 8 gang members in the middle of the night, trying to demolish my house(which I lived for 18 years until I went to college), and they are in the righteous side of the Chinese government, who asks my parents to "support the city construction" and "make necessary sacrifice of their own ". cases like this in China is numerous. I feel so disgusted about the Chinese government, and I choose to leave it for now; I thought I am in a land where this kind of thing might never happen again, but I am stunned after reading this article from the Star Tribune. this is wrong, please stop trying to condemn this small property using eminent domain, this is so un- American and so wrong. as a taxpayer, I urge you to stop going on this path, for this family, for other MN citizen, and also for the protection of individual rights of every citizen, including yourselves. Thank you, Sincerely, Yaohua ysun(@ 507- 407 -0264 Deb Mangen From: dmswan2124 @aol.com Sent: Monday, December 09, 2013 3:37 PM To: Cary Teague; Kris Aaker; Jackie Hoogenakker; Edina Mail; jonibennetl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast), joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: 6609 Blackfoot Pass Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Completed In talking with our neighbors there is still a great disappointment as to the outcome of the decision to subdivide 6609 Blackfoot Pass. One of our friends who is a civil engineer looked at it and could not believe that there would not be major drainage problems. Many of us felt a bit short changed as the City Engineer did not attend this final meeting and some of the questions council members had about drainage and topography could not be answered because of his absence. It also seemed strange that planning and zoning had voted not to subdivide because of the topography. There was one engineer and one architect on the planning and zoning board who both immediately deemed it unbuildable for a second home after visiting the property. We had a neighbor, a well esteemed retired professional engineer, who was to speak at the meeting. Unfortunately he passed away the day before the meeting. He would have explained from a professional viewpoint the reasons the lot was unbuildable for two homes. Many of us would have accepted this decision much better if we felt that we had good engineering input. This was denied to us and many of us felt the resulting decision to subdivide was very unfair. After the water problems begin, it is too late and Pat Kreizinger will pay the price once again. She now has a huge drain in the back of her lot with a 200 ft pipe to the street after assurances from the builder behind that it would not happen. None of those in favor of this subdivision will live in our neighborhood or deal with water issues. It was to them, simply about money. We all hope the 500ft means ordinance will be changed so that our special neighborhoods will not fold in to the center and destroy the unique character of Indian Hills and others like it. Yours truly, Mary Swanson 6617 Cheyenne Tr Edina, Mn Deb Mangen From: John A. Palmer <jpalmer @usfamily.net> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:25 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Mayor Jim Hovland Dear Mayor Hovland, I was at the public hearing on the Roadway Improvements Project for the Birchcrest B neighborhood this evening and I simply wish to say - thank you Mr. mayor! I believe you made imminent sense of a difficult situation and I truly applaud your resolution of the issues. Sincerely, John Palmer Deb Mangen From: Griffiths, Barbara 4Barbara .Griffiths @districtl96.org> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:20 AM To: jonibennettl2 @comcast.net Cc: Edina Mail Subject: city turned off water without notice Sent from my iPad Hello Joni, Not another good day for Creek Valley neighborhood. Flushed toilet at 8:2OAm today- no water return, then no water out of faucet. At 10:OOAM a city worker came to the door saying they had to turn off our water for a project and they were hopeful it would maybe get turned back on in 4 hrs. I have company coming at noon today. Went to grocery store to get water and asked elderly neighbor if she needed water too. I expect better communication and notification and front our City. In addition when driving back on Tracy at the Countryside school there was a new Edina pick up truck in front of me and they went right through the stop sign and rolled through the next. Unfortunately I did not get the license plate number. Thanks for your help Barbara Griffiths 5844 Creek Valley Road Edina MN 55439 Deb Mangen From: lean Colwell <jeancolwell13 @gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 10:17 AM To: Edina Mail; Joni Bennett; Mary Brindle (Comcast) Subject: 54th Street reconstruction Dear Jim, Joni and Mary, I attended the City Council meeting Tuesday night and want to thank you for listening to the needs of the neighbors who live along 54th street and will be most directly effected by this project. I also want to thank you for your dedication and commitment to the City of Edina. It can not be easy to sit through six to seven hour meetings! Happy Holidays to you All! Jean Colwell 5401 Oaklawn Ave 5 F-A rct�eo �j� Izbl `ia�,���� �Ct,�, 746 e✓ 1 REP .COlVIMEI�TDATIOO N �a To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL From: Debra Mangen City Clerk Date: December 17, 2013 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AFTER PACKETS 49�N�lfl Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received after the packets were delivered to you. No action is necessary. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501' St. Edina, MN 55424 v � � o leR as Agenda item #: IX. A. Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information ❑X Action Requested: Attached is correspondence received after the packets were delivered to you. No action is necessary. City of Edina • 4801 W. 501' St. Edina, MN 55424 Deb Mangen From: K B Montgomery <kmschoolmail @aol.com> Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 6:50 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: To the Edina City Council Attachments: GranclView CAT Itr 121213.doc Hi Lynette, Could you please distribute this letter to the City Council. Many thanks; Kim K B Montgomery Kimberly Montgomery 5300 Evanswood Lane Edina, Mid 55436 952 -931 -2119 December 12, 2013 To the City of Edina GrandView Community Advisory Team (CAT): CC: Edina City Council Ann Kattreh Michael Frey Dear GrandView CAT: I appreciate having the opportunity to hear Michael Frey speak to the members of the 12/9/13 CAT meeting about the Edina Arts Center, the Arts and Cultural Commission and how the arts might fit into a GrandView plan. Michael spoke of the limitations of the current Art Center building and the need for additional space in order to meet the needs of arts in Edina, including both visual and performing arts. He further talked about the need for a first rate gallery space. Ann spoke about the need for a multigenerational building with an arts focus. When asked where Edina residents go for recreation, she said "If we had a chance to start this before all of the enterprises, creating a traditional community center, would be ideal." She further said that we have struggled with Edinborough, in part because of the surrounding competition from facilities like the Y and other private health clubs. She mentioned that whatever should be economically feasible. To be sure, arts and culture can play a critical role in GrandView if paired with compatible and sustainable uses. In that context, it is important to have facts regarding the financial health of area arts facilities. Here are a few nearby examples: Minnetonka Center for the Arts (from the 990) Fiscal 2011 Revenue $1,179,679 (including $316,625 of grants and contributions) Revenue less expenses - $215,156 Fiscal 2012 Number of visitors: approximately 10,000 Revenue: $1,380,084 (including $422K of grants and contributions) Revenue less expenses: - $86,548 Burnsville Center for the Arts (Sun Newpaper- 10/31/13) Net Loss 2012 - $285,747 Net Loss 2011 - $304,853 Hopkins Center for the Arts (from the City of Hopkins website -page 41) Year ended December 31, 2012 Revenues: $575,916 Expenditures: $765, 546 Net Loss: - $189,630 (covered in part by a transfer in from the City's General Fund of $147,920) Art Fund Balance: - $1,109,599 The Friends of the Hopkins Arts Center (2012 990) showed $118,000 in income and $113,000 in expenses, for net revenue of approximately $5,000. Bloomington Center for the Arts (from the City of Bloomington 2013 Budget - Enterprise Funds: http: / /www. ci. bloomington.nm.us/ cityhall /dept/finance/budgetfbudget 13 j_enterprise_inte rnal.pdf 2011 Actual Operating Income: $116,656 Non - Operating Income: $451,549 Expenditures: $636,115 Net Loss: - $67,910 2012 Budget Operating Income: $117,350 Non - operating Income: $496,467 Expenditures: $702,654 Net Loss: - $88,837 2013 Budget Operating Income: $147,000 Non - operating Income: $514,000 Expenditures: $694,018 Net Loss: - $33,018 Walker Art Center (from the 990) Year Ended December 31, 2012 Revenues $21.3MM Net Loss - $2.2MM Guthrie Art Center FY 2013 Operating Loss: 4438,000 Season subscriptions declined to 17,225 from 32,000 in FY 2000. The Edina Art Center has also seen a decline. When asked the number of visitors the Edina Arts Center has per year, Michael answered that in 2000 the Center had roughly 7000 visits per year. Today, he said with the economy, the center has roughly 4,800 to 5,000 visits per year. As a 30 -year supporter of the arts, I understand the difficulties arts organizations face. I owned my own gallery downtown for nine years and have served on the executive board of a $50 million David Chipperfield designed museum with $2.5 million per year operating budget. I continue to be involved with a number of Twin Cities' arts organizations. While Michael Frey is correct in saying that studies show that arts contribute to the economic vitality of the Twin Cities, individual arts organizations continue to struggle. Most are heavily reliant on grants and contributions both of which are difficult to attract in the current economic climate. By contrast, recreation facilities and programming are financially successful. See Star Tribune "Popularity of city -run fitness centers skyrockets ": (http://,A,w,A,.startribuile.com/local/west/22173802L.html) In Edina Community Education, adult fitness classes have been a "cash cow" for the program despite inadequate facilities. A nearby example of a successful community program is Minnetonka's Williston Fitness Center. Williston has over 8,000 community members of all ages and 300,000 visits annually despite being 1/2 mile from The Marsh and approximately one mile from a L.A. Fitness Center. Here is a brief recap of Williston Fitness Center's financials and key measures: 2011 Revenues: $1,398,921 Net profit: $5,428 Average active members: 3,694 Total facility visits (captured electronically): 203,408 2012 Revenues: $ 2,113, 292 Net profit: $ 464,166 Average active member: 6,638 Total facility visits: 292,847 2013 Projected numbers Revenues: $2,360,000 Net profit: $544,500 Average active members: 8,200 Total facility visits: 300,000 Kevin Staunton asked Michael Frey what uses might be compatible with an arts center saying we don't want to design something no one uses. A fitness/health center could provide a visitor and revenue stream to offset any operating losses incurred by a visual /performing arts center. Furthermore, it could provide a healthy profit to support a bond financing. Ultimately, with hundreds of thousands of "stay -at" visitors, it could be the economic driver for surrounding area businesses and provide the place - making necessary to attract families and young people to the area thus driving a demand for housing. There are a host of other compatible uses that bear fact -based exploration of which a community survey is just one part: • Teen Center —Look at Rochester Athletic Club and Northfield models • Shared work spaces —Look at CoCo model • Coffee shop (alternatives to Starbucks) • Alternative dining options • Adult Education and ECFE as possible tenants given that current community Center is likely to be taken back by school district for school use. Looking at these uses in tandem is likely to create the kind of economically feasible model that Ann Kattreh says is necessary. As Mike Fisher says "It is exciting to consider all of these things in one place." Respectfully yours, Kim K B Montgomery kmschoolmail@aol.com Deb Man en rrom: Matt Black <matt @mnvapers.com> ent: Friday, December 13, 2013 8:52 PM ro: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast);joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @ gmail.com Subject: Ordinance No. 2013 -13 Greetings, I live in south Minneapolis and I am very disappointed to hear that Edina is considering ordinances that will result in .fewer of it's citizens making the switch smoking to vaping. I understand that as.government officials, you want Minnesota residents to be healthy and often pass regulations and ordinances that are intended to keep your citizens safe. That's why I feel that these ordinances are a step backwards, because we all know how dangerous smoking is, and all of the studies available prove that e- cigarette s& vaping are, AT LEAST, far less "harmful than cigarettes; while most studies' conclude that vaping poses "no health risks to either users or bystand &s." as concluded by the National Institute of Health. So, I don't understand why Edina would want to limit access to. these - products. I'm also unable to find any research, or scientific evidence to back up council member Sprague's statement that there's, "toxic secondhand vapor." (http: / /edina patch coin/croups /politics- and - elections /p /edina- considers- banning- ecigarettes- from- city- propertV). In fact, the National Institute of Health says exactly the opposite. I would urge you to do further research, as there have been many recent,and comprehensive studies done which focus on, current products & ingredients being used that show that vaping poses no health risks. These studies have been conducted by the National Institute of Health, Drexel University, and many others. I will provide links to these studies at the end of this email. Smoking bans are enacted to protect the public from the harm of secondhand smoke, but e- cigarettes have not been shown to cause harm to bystanders. In fact, all evidence to date shows that the low health risks associated with a -. cigarettes is comparable to other smokeless nicotine products. Additionally, the low risks of e- cigarettes is supported by research done by Dr. Siegel of Boston University, Dr. Eissenberg of Virginia Commonwealth, Dr Maciej L Goniewicz of the Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Dr. Laugesen of Health New Zealand, Dr. Igor Burstyn of Drexel University, and by the fact that the FDA testing, in spite of its press. statement, failed to find harmful levels of carcinogens or toxic levels of'any chemical in the vapor. I appreciate council member Sprague's concern regarding youth smoking, however studies have shown that the youth who are turning to e- cigarettes are already smokers. This indicates to me that even though smoking is now banned indoors, cigarette_ prices are up, and every regulation that we have in place is meant to keep cigarettes out of the hands of minors, they're still obtaining them and still smoking. Preventing e- cigarette shops from operating within Edina would be similar to preventing liquor stores from operating within Edina to prevent children from drinking. It's an ineffective way of managing this problem and it wont have the desired result. Additionally, by banning vaping indoors within Edina, you're banning vaping inside of vape shops, as well as bars, and other age restricted areas. You have vape shops in your city, so I would urge you to visit one of them and find out more about the products, the type of people who are using them, and the stories of those who. have made the switch from smoking to vaping. I quit a 17 year habit of being a, pack a day smoker'on the same day.-that I picked up an e- cigarette and my story is not unique. Passing legislation that makes it unfavorable for shops to operate in your city, and prohibiting'their public use, will keep e- cigarettes out of the hands of smokers, who will then continue to smoke, and ultimately wind up dying from cancer, emphysema, or one of the hundreds of other illnesses caused by smoking. Please take a moment to read some of the conclusions found in the studies below. These are studies conducted by organizations and universities unrelated to the e- cigarette industry. Also, please feel free to contact me; or my organization, if you have any questions or concerns that you would like to have addressed. We've worked with major cities in our state on this exact issue, and will be working with the state directly on this issue during the next legislative session. Thank you, Matt Black Matt Black - President Minnesota Vapers Advocacy Group matt a)-mnvapers.com ph. 612.217.4069 http://www.mnvapers.com http://www.facebook.com/mnvapers Dr. Keith Ablow's E -Cig Study Has Dramatic Results - Predicts a -rigs could be "the most effective anti- tobacco tool we've known" http://www. r-spnet.com/ news / tobacco /articles /dr- keith- ablows- e -cig- study- has- dramatic- results #.Uh50SHLIKKs.twitter Peering through the mist: What does the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tell us about health risks http: / /publichealtli.drexel.edu /SiteData/ does /mso8 /f9O34926425oe603/msO8.pdf National Institute of Health's Comparison of the effects of e- cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality. htLp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov /pubmed/23033998 E- cigarette study hints at quit -aid potential http: / /news.yahoo.com /e- cigarette- study -hints -quit- aid - potential- 210528041.html EffiCiency and Safety of an eLectronic cigAreTte (ECLAT) as Tobacco Cigarettes Substitute: A Prospective 12 -Month Randomized Control Design Study http: / /wwl,v.plosone.org /article/ info: doi /io.1371 /J*oumal.pone.0066317 Evaluation of Electronic Cigarette Use (Vaping) Topography and Estimation of Liquid Consumption. Implications for Research Protocol Standards Definition and for Public Health Authorities' Regulation http: / /www.mdpi.com /1660 - 4601/10/6/2500 Cytotoxicity evaluation of electronic cigarette vapor extract on cultured mammalian fibroblasts (ClearStream- LIFE): comparison with tobacco cigarette smoke extract http: / /informahealthcare.com/ doi /abs /10.3109/08958378.2013.793439 `Vaping' profiles and preferences: an online survey of electronic cigarette users http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/io.iiii/add.i2l5O/abstract Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes http: / /tobaccocontrol.bmi. com /content /early/ 2013 /03 /05 /tobaccocontrOl- 2012- 050859.short Impact of an electronic cigarette on smoking reduction and cessation in schizophrenic smokers: a prospective 12 -month pilot study. http: / /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov /pubmed /23358230 E- cigarettes: harmless inhaled or exhaled - No second hand smoke http://v,r",Nv.healthnz.co.nz/ECigsExhaledSmoke.htm New Study: Smokeless Tobacco is NOT Associated with Pancreatic Cancer http: / /rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/ 2011/02/ new - study - smokeless- tobacco -is- not.html Pfizer's study on their nicotine inhaler product (Nicotrol). Discusses absorbtion rates and risks. http: / /www. pfizer.com/ sites / default / files / products /uspi_nicotrol_inhaler.pdf Australian Pharmacist Volume 25 Number 12 1 December 2oo6 - Nicotine and nicotine replacement therapy — the facts 2 http://vape4lyfe.com/-.Arp-content/uploads/2013/68/nicotine.pdf Propylene glycol in a cigarettes might keep us healthy, says researchers littp: / /w-ww.news- medical. net / news /20091104 /propylene- glycol -iii e- cigarettes - might- keep -us- healthy -says- esearchers.aspx ?page =2, Q 3 Deb Mangen From: Alex Carlson <alexinterstate @ gmail.com> Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 8:53 PM To: Edina Mail;jonibennettl2 @comcast.net; Mary Brindle ( Comcast );joshsprague @edinarealty.com; swensonannl @gmail.com Subject: Your stance on e- cigarettes is requested. Dear Edina City Council Members, I am a volunteer member of the Minnesota Vapers Advocacy. My purpose is to send our guiding principals to each representative facing a decision on electronic cigarettes. Your response may be directed toward me, or info(a)mnvapers.com . We hope you keep our guiding principals in mind when making your informed decision. Please visit www.mnvapers.com or casaa.org for a multitude of studies for your review. You may also contact me personally.at the phone number listed below. Guiding Principals. The Minnesota Vapers Advocacy has a very strict set of guiding principles. We understand and support common sense regulations that don't result in far reaching bans of a product that has been proven safe in countless studies. We believe that these regulations are being made out of fear and rhetoric. We believe... 1. That under no circumstances shall e- cigarettes, e- liquid, accessories, or components be sold to minors. We believe that each store should adopt a strict policy to I. D. any customers who appear younger than 35. 2. That business owners have the right to choose whether or not to regulate e- cigarettes and their use within their establishment based on their own beliefs and policies. 3. That the City and State Government need not unnecessarily use revenue to over regulate the use and sale of e- cigarettes. 4. That long -term studies must be done, but that the extensive short-term studies prove that e- cigarettes are substantially safer than traditional cigarettes and pose no risk to the user of e- cigarettes, nor bystanders (conclusions. http: / /www.ncbi .nlm.nih.gov /pubmed/23033998) 5. That common sense regulation regarding the safe handling, distribution, and creation of e- liquids and nicotine is necessary. 6. That those who vote in favor of limiting adult access to, the unfair taxation of, or limiting the use of e- cigarettes, is a vote in support of smoking, COPD, cancer, stillbirths, SIDS, and death of Minnesota citizens. All members of the Minnesota Vapers Advocacy support these principles and advocate in favor of them. For any questions, please contact info(cD-mnvapers.com Sincerely, Alex Robert Eldan Carlson 1600 -23rd St. NW 408 Bemidji, MN 56601 alex.carlson(cDmnvaDers.com 651 - 347 -7585 I'm writing to disagree with adding sidewalks to Scott Terrace as part of the BA406 improvement. Our street already has 1 sidewalk, and there is really no more demand or need for another sidewalk on the West side, whereas 42nd St. still has no sidewalks and many people walk in the street. I bet you can't find more than 1 -2 residents on Scott Terrace who . want an additional sidewalk. 1 Deb Mangen From: Carol <ckfrisch @aol.com> Sent Saturday, December 14, 2013 4:36 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: mcneiledina @aol.com; kayeaho @yahoo.com Subject: Mayor Hovland speaking request Dear Mayor Hovland, I have left several calls at your law office but have decided that must not be the best way to reach you with a League of Women Voters request. I am writing to ask you to be part of a panel Sunday afternoon, January 26 2 -4:30 pm at a LWVMN Be: Part of the Conversation event at the Tower at Normandale Lake activity room 8301 Creekside Circle, Bloomington. I have hopes of having Mayor Winstaed of Bloomington and Mayor Kathi Hemken of New Hope who is a LWV member lead off a "conversation" on the theme of" Politics without Partisanship: How do cities get the work done and what is the role for grassroots organizations ?" That will be followed by table discussion and questions for the panel. This is the first of a number of parlor or house parties to introduce or remind community and LWV local League members to our role in communities and the goals of our Be: Part of the Conversation Campaign. It is an education event. LWV Edina President Debby McNeil and LWV Bloomington President Kaye Aho support this event and members from both Leagues will be at the tables. We are reaching out to the community to broaden understanding of our efforts. You have been a member of LWV Edina for some years and are a great supporter by your presence. You will be a valuable participant if can be part of this afternoon event. Thank you so much for your consideration! Carol Frisch, Co -chair LWVMN Be: Part of the Conversation Campaign 952 - 829 -0604 Deb Man en From: Alex Carlson <alexinterstate @gmail.com> ent: Monday, December 16, 2013 11:24 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: RE: Your stance on e- cigarettes is requested. Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged The Minnesota Vapers advocacy will be sending a couple people to speak. Do they need to sign up before hand? On Dec 16, 2013 11:19 AM, "Edina Mail" <mail edinamn.gov> wrote: Dear Alex, Thank you for your interest in the City of Edina. I have forwarded your message to Mayor Hovland. If I can be of additional assistance to you please contact me Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 r` v. t � IrT . � Ibiunno(rDEdinaMN.aov I www.EdinaMN.gov For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Alex Carlson [ma i Ito: alexinterstate @clmai1.com] Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 8:53 PM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2Ca)comcast.net; Mary Brindle (Comcast); ioshsprague edinarealty.com; swensonann1O)gmail.com Subject: Your stance on e- cigarettes is requested. Dear Edina City Council Members, I am a volunteer member of the Minnesota Vapers Advocacy. My purpose is to send our guiding principals to each representative facing a decision on electronic cigarettes. Your response may be directed toward me, or info(a-)mnvapers.com . We hope you keep our guiding principals in mind when making your informed decision. Please visit www.mnvapers.com or casaa.orq for a multitude of studies for your review. You may also contact me personally at the phone number listed below. Guiding Principals. The Minnesota Vapers Advocacy has a very strict set of guiding principles. We understand and support common sense regulations that don't result in far reaching bans of a product that has been proven safe in countless studies. We believe that these regulations are being made out of fear and rhetoric. We believe... 1. That under no circumstances shall e- cigarettes, e- liquid, accessories, or components be sold to minors. We believe that each store should adopt a strict policy to I.D. any customers who appear younger than 35. 2. That business owners have the right to choose whether or not to regulate e- cigarettes and their use within their establishment based on their own beliefs and policies. 3. That the City and State Government need not unnecessarily use revenue to over regulate the use and sal, of e- cigarettes. 4. That long -term studies must be done, but that the extensive short-term studies prove that e- cigarettes are substantially safer than traditional cigarettes and pose no risk to the user of e- cigarettes, nor bystanders (conclusions. http: / /www.ncbi .nlm.nih.qov /pubmed/23033998) 5. That common sense regulation regarding the safe handling, distribution, and creation of e- liquids and nicotine is necessary. 6. That those who vote in favor of limiting adult access to, the unfair taxation of, or limiting the use of e- cigarettes, is a vote in support of smoking, COPD, cancer, stillbirths, SIDS, and death of Minnesota citizens. All members of the Minnesota Vapers Advocacy support these principles and advocate in favor of them. For any questions, please contact info(a-)mnvapers.com Sincerely, Alex Robert Eldan Carlson 1600 -23rd St. NW 408 Bemidji, MN 56601 alex carlson(amnvapers.com 651 - 347 -7585 Deb Mangen — From: Barbara La Valleur <barbara.lavalleur @gmail.com> ;ent: Monday, December 16, 2013 7:06 PM To: James Hovland; Ann Swenson; Mary Brindle (Comcast); Josh Sprague; Joni Bennett Cc: Scott Neal; Jennifer Bennerotte; Ann Kattreh; Kaylin Martin; Karen M. Kurt; Molly Anderson; Jeff Long; Ross Bintner, Tim Barnes; Susie Miller, Lynette Biunno; Scott Denfeld; Susan Faus; Michael Frey; Tom Shirley; Jordan Gilgenbach; Amanda Holle; Edina Mail; Patty McGrath; Bill Neuendorf; Brian Olson; Frank Petrovic; Kevin Rofidal; Lisa Schaefer, John Scheerer, Cary Teague; Donna Tilsner, Lori Syverson; Arnie Bigbee Subject Greeting for a blessed holiday season... Attachments: 2013_Christmas_Letter.pdf; ATT00001.htm Arnie and I are honored to volunteer for the great city of Edina and salute you — employees of Edina — for ALL THAT YOU DO — to make our city a great place to live. May you and your families be blessed with good health; much love and understanding and peace this holiday season. Arnie & Barbara Lots of great meals at La Farm & La Condo We saved Spaulding! Du.Y 2.0 3 h ue) l,t @ I�lts �w p�atu.res ..... Tom's & Arnie's 70th Jackson Alexander Bigbee born to Allison Bigbee on May 18, 2013 visiting Gran & Gramps Barbara's 50th High School Class Reunion Newport Coast, CA holiday Kieran & Sydney recitals & Childish Films [below] Family visits with Phyllis & Susie La Valleur Sisters celebrate La Farm i u Andrea & Claire in Seattle GJe enJ oy/ SPend� w,;eh -/a , /y, & �}- %ends . tQnd ✓o/unfeet`; n9 Ed; nay L�.cnd�cu -�� LJeSZ`�- r %nSfet -� the Chal'76et• off' Cort�et Ce & ou Condo 1QSSn. �J; sh %n9 you all a 6 /e.5\5en( ap►y! 4t-n; e & Bat-6a' -a Jackson's baptism was the day after Gretchen's & Maureen's marriage, a BIG double celebration! Deb Mangen From: Rosedahl, Leslie W. <Iwrosedahl @locklaw.com> mt: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 12:23 PM a: Edina Mail — -- Subject: For Mayor Hovland: truck size and weight issues Attachments: TS &W one -pager for local officials.pdf Dear Mayor Hovlan: Good morning! I work with Dan Larson and Ted Grindal at Lockridge Grindal Nauen' s government relations team in Minneapolis and am contacting you regarding an issue we are working on at the State Capitol in St. Paul. During the 2013 Legislative Session, a bill was ,introduced to increase heavy semi -truck size and weight limits for all of Minnesota from 80,000 pounds to 97,000 pounds.. We are concerned about negative consequences with this, particularly with road safety and road /bridge infrastructure repair issues. We support maintaining the current limitations. This may impact Edina because if the state legislature.changes the statues, there could be much larger trucks travelling through your city. I'm reaching out to local officials that may want to sign onto a group letter. We have a variety of supporters, including folks listed on the sheet (ATTACHED). I'm not sure how familiar you are on this issue — if you have a position either way, or would like more information? ** *Would you be interested in meeting quick? * * * ** thank you for your consideration, Leslie Leslie W. Rosedahl I Director of Communications and Grassroots Advocacy LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Avenue South I Suite 2200 1 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Mobile: 651- 353 -1818 1 LWRosedahlQLockLaw.com I @LeslieRosedahl * * * * * * * * * * This e -mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient or otherwise have received this message in error, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you are not the intended recipient or otherwise •have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by e -mail, discard any paper copies and delete all electronic files of the message. * * * * * * * * * * Maintaining current truck size and weight standards is an important investment in Minnesota A strong and safe transportation infrastructure is essential to move people and goods securely and efficiently. Minnesota's ability to sustain its infrastructure not only relies on smart investments, but commonsense standards on truck size and weight that protect roads and vehicles while maintaining safe roadways. Minnesota's current law generally allows trucks a gross weight of 80,000 pounds on state roads, which mirrors long- established federal standards. To accommodate aspects of Minnesota's economy, statutory exemptions permit heavier loads for certain agriculture products, the logging industry, specific construction equipment, snow removal equipment, and other unique conditions. Maintaining current truck size and weight helps: Ensure road safety. Bigger trucks stop more slowly, are less stable, have more brake maintenance problems, and are less able to maintain consistent speeds. All of this results in more dangerous roads and significant negative consequences for motorists. Trucks with additional size and weight are 11 percent more likely to be involved in fatal accidents on roadways than single - trailer trucks (according to USDOT). The severity of a crash is a matter of physics — when weight increases, so does the severity of the accident. Save taxpayer and local government dollars. Heavier trucks have the greatest negative impact on the condition of roads and bridges, particularly in Greater Minnesota, which account for almost 44 percent of total roadway miles in the state. Increasing the current size and weight of trucks will deteriorate roads faster, as well as require more bridges in the state to be replaced, strengthened, or posted — adding new costs on both taxpayers and local governments to maintain or repair infrastructure. Maintain our transportation infrastructure. Heavy trucks literally make bridges bounce, A,&buckling pavement, and stressing steel. A recent report by Governor Dayton's Transportation Finance Advisory Task Force showed nearly 10 percent of Minnesota's bridges are structurally deficient. Engineers agree that trucks cause damage to bridges and allowing heavier trucks will accelerate that damage. Lastly, under the MAP -21 federal transportation legislation, truck sizes and weights are currently being studied by the USDOT. Let's see what the study says when it is released this fall, 2014. Public safety organizations, elected officials, community leaders and concerned citizens support maintaining current truck size and weight levels. Supporters include: • Minnesota State Patrol Troopers Association • Owner- Operator Independent Drivers Assoc • National Troopers Coalition • National Sheriffs' Association • National Association of Police Organizations • National Association of Emergency Management Technicians • National Association of Counties • National League of Cities • National Association of County Engineers • US Conference of Mayors • MN United Transportation Union • MN Intl Brotherhood of Teamsters Joint Council 32 • Coalition Against Bigger Trucks (CART) • Minnesota County Commissioners: Mike Opat (Hennepin) Randy Maluchnik (Carver) Steve Raukar (St. Louis) Ted Bearth (Washington) Ken Brown (Olmsted) and more __0 MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Edina City Hall — Community Room Tuesday, November 12, 2013 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. 11. ROLL CALL Answering roll call was Chair Moore and Members Mellom, O'Brien, Weber, Sussman, McDermott, Birdman, Johnson and Brandt. Absent were members Holtan and Christiaansen. Staff present was Senior Planner, Joyce Repya. Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel was also in attendance. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member.O'Brien moved to approve the meeting agenda. Member Mellom seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES October 8, 2013 Member Birdman moved to approve the minutes from the October 8, 2013 meeting. Member Mellom seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. . V. COMMUNITY COMMENT —. None VI. REPORTS & RECOMMENDATIONS A. H -I3 -8 4400W. 50`h Street (Baird House) — Construction of a new outbuilding on the property Planner Repya explained that the historic Baird House is located on the north side of West 50`h Street west of Bruce Avenue and East of Edina Circle. The home, built in 1 886 is part of the original George and Sarah Baird farmstead. The property was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980 and designated an Edina Heritage Landmark (EHL) in 2003. The nomination study associated with the heritage landmark designation of the property identified the existing outbuilding as "A one -story frame outbuilding, itself an amalgam of different structural elements assembled at different times ". Located near the historic home,-the nomination study points out that the outbuilding or "barn" does contribute to the historic character of the property. However, the property's, plan of treatment specifies that the structure may be removed as long as photographic documentation of the structure is provided prior to demolition so that a body of information will be preserved. That being the case, a CO is not required for the barn's demolition; and if demolished, there is no requirement that the outbuilding be replaced. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 The request under consideration entails construction of a new barn on the site of the historic outbuilding as established by city ordinance 850.20, subd. 10. A.4., requiring a COA for new construction built on EHL designated properties. • Ms. Repya pointed out that the property owners, Brad and Arlene Forrest have explained their goal in replacing the existing "barn" is to construct a sound structure that is similar in footprint and appearance to the existing building. The narrative included with the COA application pointed out that the proposed barn will bear a strong resemblance to the old barn; having a two stall garage bays on the east side and a storage /work room on the west. The main difference in appearance is found on the front facade where the westerly portion is slightly recessed, thus providing a covered entrance for a service door. The building has been designed to complement the property, while still maintaining the utilitarian design of the original outbuilding with selected board and batten siding and a metal roof. If possible, they also propose to reuse the roof ventilator from the existing building. Preservation Consultant Vogel provided the board with a written evaluation in which he observed that the digital photographs and written information submitted in relation to the old "barn" does a good job of preserving an accurate record of the building prior to demolition and satisfies the requirements of the plan of treatment. He pointed out that the documentation will be placed in the permanent records of the HPB, where it can be used in research and other preservation activities. Mr. Vogel advised the board that the proposed plans for the replacement outbuilding demonstrate a structure that will be architecturally compatible with the size, scale, color, material and character of the historic house. No historic fabric will be lost and the essential form and integrity of the Baird house will not be impaired. Restoration of the old "barn" is not required. The proposed new construction incorporates traditional building forms, materials and detailing but does not attempt to create an earlier or faux historical appearance. Mr. Vogel completed his evaluation with a recommendation for approval of the COA subject to the plans presented and a year built plaque to be displayed on the structure. Planner Repya stated that she agreed with Consultant Vogel's observations and also recommended approval of the COA request subject to the plans presented and a year built plaque installed on the exterior of the structure. Findings supporting the approval recommendation included: • No important historic architectural features or fabric of the home will be destroyed. • The proposed alterations are compatible with the historic character of the Baird House. • The plans provided with the subject request clearly illustrate the scale and scope of the project. • The information provided fulfills the requirements set out in the historic Baird house's plan of treatment. 2 ;y i Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 Property owners Brad and Arlene Forrest were present to address board members' questions. Board members asked for clarification regarding some of the design elements proposed for the new outbuilding. Property owner Arlene Forrest answered their questions and provided several design boards which ,depicted the proposed structure. She pointed out that while the plans call out white trim boards, they are opting not to include those. She also pointed out that they are not -going to install - windows on the north (rear) elevation as depicted on, the plans; however a window will be installed on the east and west elevations to provide daylight into the workspaces. Member Sussman stated that he was pleased with the submittal and appreciated Ms. Forrest's.clarification of the plans. He then asked that the changes identified by Ms. Forrest be identified in the final plans approval. Following a brief discussion, Member McDermott moved for approval of the COA subject to the plans presented reflecting the changes identified by the homeowner. Member Birdman seconded the, motion. Members Sussman, O'Brien, Weber, Moore, Birdman, and McDermott voted aye. Member Mellom voted nay, stating that while she liked the plans for the outbuilding,'it goes against her principals to support the demolition of one of the few remaining historic farm buildings in the city. The motion carried. B. H -13 -9 4916 Sunnyside Road —Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for changes to the street facing facade Planner Repya explained that the subject property is located on the 4900 block of Sunnyside Road abutting Hwy 100 to its west. The-home, constructed in 1945 is an American Colonial Revival style with an attached, front loading single stall garage, accessed by a driveway on the north side of the property. The proposed plans for the home include adding a 4' x 7.5' front entry canopy and converting the front loading single stall attached garage to 2 stories of living space and building a single- story, attached 2 -car garage in the rear yard. The plans illustrate the addition of a side porch on the north side of the home in front of the former attached garage /proposed living space. The width of the converted garage will. be reduced from 14 feet to 7 feet to provide for a 12.5 foot wide driveway on the north side of the home, providing accessing to the new attached garage in the rear yard. A new curb cut will not be required; however a new driveway is proposed. Ms. Repya pointed out that the materials proposed for project include cedar shingles on the front facing fagade and north wall of the porch (to include the 2 "d story); and LP Smartside composite siding on the remaining structure. Consultant Vogel provided the board with a written evaluation in which he observed that Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 R because the subject property was constructed in 1945, it technically falls outside the district's period of significance; however since it is over fifty years old and physically located within the district's boundaries, the HPB needs to consider its potential heritage resource value. Notwithstanding the post -1944 date of construction, the subject property contributes to the historical significance of the Country Club District because it is a representative example of the "neo- colonial" style dwellings that were built during the latter part of the district's period of historical significance. The Secretary of the Interior's standards for rehabilitation and the Country Club District Plan of Treatment allow for the alteration of street - facing facades and the construction of new garages. City policy encourages homeowners in the district to preserve the distinguishing original qualities and historic character of their property: facade alterations and structural additions which make possible "an efficient contemporary use" are considered appropriate when the when the new work is visually compatible with the district's architectural characters and preserves those portions of a house which are significant to its historical and architectural values. Mr. Vogel's opinion concluded that the proposed remodeling at 4916 Sunnyside Road will not have an adverse effect on the historical significance and integrity of the Country Club District. The subject property is not a significant heritage preservation resource in its own right, although it does contribute to the overall character of the district as a whole. The proposed fagade alterations are appropriate and compatible with the character of the house and the neighborhood. No significant architectural details will be destroyed or obscured. The new attached two -car garage is appropriately scaled and sited on the rear elevation, facing Highway 100. The cedar shake siding that is proposed to be applied to the street facing fagade and the side porch (the converted one -car attached garage) is an appropriate contemporary design treatment. Considering the aforementioned, Mr. Vogel recommended approval of the COA subject to the plans presented. Ms. Repya agreed with Consultant Vogel's observations and recommended approval of the COA request subject to the plans presented. Findings supporting the approval recommendation included: • The proposed remodeling will not have an adverse effect on the historical significance and integrity of the Country Club District. • No significant architectural details will be destroyed or obscured. • The proposed alterations are compatible with the historic character of the house and neighborhood. • The new attached two -car garage is appropriately scaled and sited on the rear elevation facing Highway 100. • The cedar shake siding that is proposed for the street_ facing fagade and side porch is an appropriate contemporary design treatment. • The information provided supporting the subject Certificate of Appropriateness meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and the Country Club District Plan of Treatment. 4 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 Ms. Repya added that an email supporting the COA was received from Larry & Sue Seckinger, 4912 Sunnyside Road, abutting neighbors to the north. Property owners Steve and Amy Schmitz were present to address questions of the board. Members Sussman and Weber asked for several clarifications of the proposed plans which were provided by property owner Steve Schmitz. Member Moore commented that he liked the,new front entry, pointing out that it adds nice detail to the front facade of the home. Mr. Schmitz commented that as they developed the plans for their home, a great deal of research was involved to ensure-that the design was consistent with the Colonial Revival style of the home. He added that they were also very particular with the contractor they chose, wanting to be sure that the company was familiar with rehabilitating the historic homes in the Country Club District. Following a brief discussion, Member Weber moved for approval of the COA application subject to the plans presented. Member McDermott seconded the motion. All .voted aye. The motion carried. VII. OTHER BUSINESS A. Edina Heritage Landmark Determination of Eligibility Consultant Vogel explained that The Edina Heritage. Landmarks (EHL) program, authorized by Section 850.20 of the City Code, exists to. identify heritage preservation resources worthy of preservation and consideration in community planning; and as part of its Comprehensive Plan, the City of Edina has adopted policies that encourage the preservation, protection, and use of significant heritage resources. The City Code authorizes the HPB to evaluate the heritage preservation values of historic resources and issue findings of significance — referred to in the ordinance as "determinations of eligibility" (essentially the same process carried out by the State Historic Preservation Office for properties evaluated for National Register eligibility). The HPB determination of eligibility (DOE) ,is basically a decision that a particular property meets the Edina Heritage Landmark criteria for historic significance and integrity and has been deemed worthy of preservation. A DOE does not require property owner consent or city council action; nor does it automatically lead to rezoning of a property as a heritage landmark. Unlike properties with EHL designations, properties determined eligible are not subject to a plan of treatment or required to comply with the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) for proposed changes. Mr. Vogel observed that while in practice the HPB has an understanding with how properties determined eligible differ from those "designated" EHL's, he recommended that the board adopt a clear policy with regard to the preservation of properties "determined eligible" for 5 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 heritage landmark designation. He added that the approach he recommends is similar to the policy used by the National Register program. Mr. Vogel pointed out that the purpose of the policy would be to require city officials to consider the effects of City of Edina undertakings (public works projects, certain large development projects where the city is directly involved, any activity that is funded by the city) on significant heritage preservation resources, including properties with DOEs issued by the HPB as well as those properties zoned as Edina Heritage Landmarks. Vogel added that the list of properties determined eligible by the HPB would become the authoritative guide to be used by city staff, the city council, boards and commissions to indicate those heritage preservation resources which need to be considered in project planning. He added that he understood that, this practice is currently part of the planning staffs procedures, but not set out in a policy statement. Mr. Vogel elaborated that the adoption of a DOE policy would have the following positive outcomes: • Properties determined eligible for heritage landmark designation would become part of an official list of Edina properties deemed historically significant and worthy of preservation. • More heritage preservation resources would receive protection from the adverse effects of city- sponsored development activities. • The work of the HPB would become better integrated with other city planning for community development, transportation, economic development, etc. • The DOE process would not impose any new regulations on privately owned properties. • Determined eligible properties would acquire prestige and distinction as significant heritage preservation resources. In closing, Mr. Vogel proposed the following policy statement for consideration: a). It shall be the official policy of the City of Edina to avoid any adverse effects to significant heritage preservation resources (defined as properties designated or determined eligible for designation as Edina Heritage Landmarks) arising from public works and other types of development projects sponsored, funded, or assisted by the city. b) The City of Edina will consider the effects of city projects, including projects that involve city funding, on properties that have been designated Edina Heritage Landmarks or have been determined eligible for designation as Heritage Landmarks by the Edina Heritage Preservation Board. City officials, departments, boards and commissions will afford the Heritage Preservation Board and its staff a reasonable opportunity to review and comment on such projects. c) If a significant heritage preservation resource must be damaged or destroyed as a result of any City of Edina undertaking, the Heritage Preservation Board shall be authorized to 0 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 make a reasonable effort to recover important historical, architectural, or archaeological data the property contains. The board had a lengthy discussion on the treatment of properties "determined eligible" for EHL designation. Member Moore recalled a suggestion made at the work session with the City Council regarding the creation of an in- between heritage landmark designation that honored a property, but required no adherence to rules or regulations; and wondered if the "determined eligible" designation didn't fit that nitch. Many on the board agreed, but wondered if there was not a better term that could be used that would be more appealing and potentially marketable. Planner Repya suggested the term "Honor Roll of Historic Properties ", noting that achieving the honor roll is well respected. The board agreed that having an honor roll of historic properties could be a positive tool to promote future heritage landmark designations. Following a discussion regarding the content of the proposed DOE policy, the board agreed that they would like the language to be consistent with policies they have adopted in the past. Member O'Brien volunteered to research other HPB policies and recommend revised language for the board to consider. The board agreed to table the discussion of the proposed DOE policy to a future meeting. No formal action was taken. B. Suburban Development in Edina Report Planner Repya explained that The �Executive'Summary of the Suburban Development in Edina Since 1935: A Historic Context Study was completed and will be included with the main report on the HPB website page. She added that City staff will also ensure that the study is integrated with the historic context statements outlined in the city's Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Repya pointed out that the summary provides a thumbnail sketch of the important elements of the study; as: well. as defining the information gaps .an.d a recommended action plan. At this time, Consultant Vogel has asked for guidance from the board regarding a timeframe for implementation. Board members observed that they accomplished the first of the six action plans by adopting the context study. The remaining action items discussed were: • Develop an initial list of 20 to 50 Midcentury Modern buildings and landscapes that the HPB considers' historically important and worthy of further research. • Continue the neighborhood survey according to the priorities set out in the 2008 comprehensive plan; review and adjust survey strategies for the upcoming plan revision (scheduled for 2015 -16) to reflect the findings of the present historic context study. 7 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 It • The redundancy of the most common Midcentury Modern property types calls out for a modification of heritage resource identification and. evaluation methods — research designs for future surveys should emphasize neighborhood - specific historic context research, windshield reconnaissance of selected subdivisions (or selected blocks within subdivisions), and intensive survey of properties believed to be well preserved, representative examples of important resource types. In light of the large number of residential subdivisions platted between 1935 and 1975, it may be more cost - effective to conduct neighborhood -level surveys in the areas with the oldest housing stock first. • More emphasis on cultural landscapes is needed. Because they are often fragile, it is important to identify and record historic gardens and other mid -20`h century landscapes, including examples of vernacular forms. In addition to identifying properties potentially eligible for heritage landmark designation, such a project would also be an important educational tool and an opportunity to promote awareness of Edina's cultural landscapes. The HPB should consider undertaking a suburban landscape survey in collaboration with neighborhood groups, garden clubs, or the Edina Historical Society. • Research should be. carried out to identify important architects, designers, landscape architects, engineers, developers, builders, and contractors who worked in Edina between circa 1935 and 1975. Board members agreed that there is no expectation that the action items should or need to be addressed immediately, however, to ensure that the study remains vibrant; its implementation should be taken into consideration as the HPB addresses the annual work plans. Member Sussman added that the board needs to be cognizant of what is feasible to budget from both a time and financial standpoint. Member Weber agreed, pointing out that identifying resources from the Edina Historical Society would be a very good start. He added that the new committee formed to assist residents in exploring the history of their homes could get the public involved in the research identified in the action plan. Mr. Sussman liked the proposed public involvement in the project, and suggested that it be promoted during the televised December meeting. Board members agreed that would be a . very good idea and a great way to promote the work of the HPB. C. Southdale Center Historic Interpretation - Update Planner Repya reported that in light of the national .attention showered on Southdale Center for being included in the PBS special "10 Buildings that Changed America ", she sent Ben Martin, the center's General Manager an email to ask if they had plans for a display recognizing Southdale's unique history. Mr. Martin responded by asking what we had in mind, so Ms. Repya explained that some type of pictorial interpretation of the mall's history would do an excellent E3 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 job of recognizing its importance to not only Edina, but the entire Twin Cities region. She added that since the Garden Court serves much the same purpose it did'in Southdale's early days; somewhere near the current information center /escalator area would seem a fitting spot. Ms. Repya also shared with Mr. Martin that some large local corporations such. as 3M, General Mills, American Express (IDS), and even downtown Macy's have photographic displays of their successes over the years. In closing, Ms. Repya offered the assistance of the HPB in creating a historic interpretation, and welcomed a future meeting with.him. It has been several weeks since Ms. Repya corresponded. with Mr. Martin; however she agreed to keep the board advised if and when she has future contact with him. The board thanked Ms. Repya for the follow -thru they requested at the October meeting, and expressed their hope that Southdale Center will be open to creating a permanent visual history display. D. W. 54`h Street Bridge over Minnehaha Creek - Update Planner Repya reported that after the October HPB meeting, she contacted the Leslie Yetka, the Education Manager with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District regarding the potential for creating an educational interpretation like that installed at the Mill'Site near Browndale Bridge. Ms. Yetka responded. that at this time they had no formal plans for educational signage in the Arden Park area. However, the Watershed District has been working with the group Citizens for Minnehaha Creek Corridor to develop some signage standards along the creek, including educational /interpretive signage at relevant locations. Ms. Yetka explained that the goal would be to work with cities and have some consistent signage along the entire creek to enhance the creek experience. She added that they are currently in the very early stages and the board hasn't discussed how to proceed. Also, they have not yet engaged the cities; however she promised to keep me in the loop as the project unfolds. Ms. Repya concluded that she would let the board know when she receives further communication from Ms. Yetka. The board thanked Ms. Repya for the report. No formal action was taken. E. Plan for December 9 h Televised Meeting Planner Repya reminded the board that their regular December meeting which will be the annual televised meeting has been rescheduled from Tuesday, December 10`h to Monday December 9`' to accommodate the Council's need to hold public hearings on road improvements on the I Oth. The board briefly discussed the format of the meeting. Ms. Repya explained that in addition to the conducting the regular business (potential COA's, etc.) the televised meeting is an- excellent opportunity for the board to share their mission, and spark public interest in the heritage preservation program. The last televised meeting in December 2011 included a brief overview of the work accomplished that year as well as a look to the future. Ms. Repya suggested using 9 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes November 12, 2013 the HPB 2013 Annual Report.that was submitted to the MN State Historic Preservation Office as an outline for the agenda — board members agreed. The board briefly discussed how the televised meeting will provide an opportunity for some positive PR for their current initiatives, such as the "Explore the History of Your Home" project. Planner Repya promised keep the board apprised of the plans for the televised meeting. No formal action was taken. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE & PETITIONS • Copy of a future article for the Twin Cities Bungalow Club newsletter entitled "Edina offers Historic Designation to Bungalow Owners ". • Letter from Council Member Joni Bennett representing the Quasquicentennial Committee IX. CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Member Weber advised the board that he has been working on a design for a home in Southwest Minneapolis, and discovered that the City of Minneapolis requires projects where 60% or more of the home is demolished to go before the city's Heritage Preservation Board for them to evaluate the heritage significance of the property. Board members found the practice very interesting, and commented that with all of the residential demolitions occurring in Edina, such a practice could become a full -time job. X. STAFF COMMENTS Planner Repya reminded the board that they received a letter in their packets from Council Member Bennett who serves on the Quasquicentennial Committee. In the letter, Ms. Bennett invited them to attend the Founders Day festivities on Thursday, December IT'. Starting at 5:00 pm with an open house at the Cahill School /Grange Hall, the festivities then move across the street to City Hall for a program and social hour, wrapping up at 8:00 pm. The board was pleased to receive the invitation, and looked forward to celebrating the City's 125t. anniversary. XI. NEXT MEETING DATE Monday, December 9, 2013 XII. ADJOURNMENT 8:45 p.m. Member Birdman moved for adjournment at 8:45 p.m. Member Mellom seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Joyce Repya 10 ,4 i6k MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS NOVEMBER 13, 2013 6:00 PM I. CALL TO ORDER 11. ROLL CALL Answering Roll Call: Scherer, Fischer, 'Potts, Kilberg, Halva, Carr, Platteter, .Forrest, Staunton Absent from Roll Call: Schroeder, Grabiel Ill. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Commissioner Platteter moved approval of the November 13, 2013 meeting agenda. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Carr moved approval of the October 23, 2013, meeting minutes. Commissioner Potts _ seconded.the_motion. —All voted- aye;_motion..car-r-ied._ 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. SKETCH PLAN A. Pentagon Office Park, Edina, MN Planner Teague introduced Scott Takenoff of Hillcrest Development to speak to this unique area of Edina. Page 1 of 19 Mr. Takenoff addressed the Commission and explained Hillcrest purchased the subject property in the fall of 2012. Takenoff acknowledged that the property had been neglected, adding their goal is to reverse the decline and revitalize this unique area as it should be. Takenoff told the Commission at this time the development team is ready to share their ideas, adding everything is. preliminary and an architect has not yet been retained. Takenoff stated their focus has been on what's the best land use for the area. Continuing, Takenoff said this site contains all the right pieces to facilitate development of'a great project. Takenoff said what they propose won't exceed the density currently approved for the site. Takenoff acknowledged the site is now zoned MDD -6; however, they believe they will request a rezoning to PUD with the majority of the land use as office. With the aid of a power point presentation Takenoff presented the following issues, principles, potentials and concepts they envision for the site. Issues: . - I • Integrated stormwater • Regional trail • Shared parking • Improve park access • Connect green spaces • Pedestrian. friendly 77th street • Passive recreation • Active recreation • Bus transit • New trail link - ---- - - - - -• —Bus_ stops---- - - - - -- Principles • Green streets • Integrated stormwater • Pedestrian friendly West 77th Street • Connect West to East • MultimodarConnections • Shared Parking Concepts • Dockside Green Concept • The Upper Landing Concept • Upper Landing Hybrid Concept • Chain of Lakes Concept • Centennial Lakes Concept • Minnehaha Creek Concept • Three - pronged approach to parking Page 2 of 19 A lk Takenoff concluded his presentation expressing their excitement with the project Discussion /Nonbinding Comments: Commissioner Carr complimented the,development team on paying close attention to and acknowledging the importance of Living Streets. Carr said their ideas and the attention paid to Living Streets are'appreciated. Commissioner Fischer stated in his opinion this concept is very exciting. He commented that he was curious why the" land use" element doesn't include housing. Continuing, Fischer stressed the importance of the 77th Street "edge" sharing he has concerns on parking and how new structures would address the street. Mr. Takenoff in response to Commissioner Fischer's comment on the lack of housing reported that his team looked at a number of different scenarios and the numbers appear to support success with a commercial /office use. He added he doesn't foresee housing in the future. Mr. Takenoff acknowledged that in creating a vibrant West 77th Street their team needs to work with other partners in the area. He said West 776 Street would be a balancing act with the end goal creating, a more pedestrian friendly experience. Commissioner Potts pointed out that the Dockside Green and Centennial Lakes concepts indicate housing. Potts commented that he wonders if redevelopment without.housing would work. Continuing, Potts asked the team to look at the importance of spacing between structures and determining which is the "front" door and which is the "back" door. Concluding, Potts said in his opinion the concepts presented are good. Commissioner Platteter echoed the housing comments from Commissioners Fischer and Potts. Platteter said he would like the project to encourage returning nature back to this area. He also i�suggested= s-t- reet-liathe°area°Hepointed= out =itwnakes°no sense to have streets that go nowhere. Concluding, Platteter also echoed the Living Streets comments from Commissioner Carr, cautioning the team not to develop "teaser" lots. Chair Staunton commented that he was curious with timing ... what would be redeveloped first; the "tower" site or 77th Street. Mr. Takenoff responded in his opinion the south site (tower) would be redeveloped first with the project moving west to east. A discussion ensued with Commissioners expressing. their opinion that there are three important issues; stormwater, green streets and circulation. Commissioners stated their reaction hinges more on what the streets would look like and their interaction with the pedestrian. They also stressed the importance of softening West 77th Street. Another point of interest for,the Commission was the interaction of the site with Fred Richards Golf Course. Commissioners felt there needs to be a connection between the Pentagon site and Fred Richards. It was pointed out that the Minnehaha Creek concept creates a nice edge and link. Making a link is important. Commissioner Fischer presented a diagram prepared by Commissioner Schroeder (absent). Fischer pointed out the diagram represents how important the Pentagon area is to this part of Edina. It's an important piece. Page 3 of 19 Commissioner Forrest said.she has a concern with the strictly commercial /office concept of the project; pointing out if everything "shuts down ".at,the same time the area would "go dark ". Forrest suggested expanding -uses that provide more options. Forrest also stated the team should keep in mind future uses for these buildings.. Continuing, Forrest said she would also like to see a variety in building styles and creative uses integrating the public and' private parts ofthe project. Forrest also encouraged the use of art studios; galleries, public art displays to keep the site "lively" 24/7. Chair Staunton asked Planner Teague to briefly explain the present zoning of the site. Planner Teague.said the site is zoned MDD -6 and density caps; etc. were established at the time of rezoning. The previous rezoning included. housing, hotel, office, and commercial. Chair.. Staunton thanked Mr. Takenoff for his presentation.. VII.. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Variance. John Adams/Ted Warner. 5 Merilane, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission John Adams on behalf of Ted Warner is requesting front yard setback variances to.130 feet for each of the three lots within the Warner Estates Subdivision as approved by the City Council on October 1, 2013. One of the conditions of the subdivision approval was that the applicant make application for the front yard setback variances. The subject properties are located at 5 Merilane Teague pointed out the existing home is located in the middle of the property, and would remain as proposed. However, the variances requested would apply to that lot as well.' Once new homes are built in the north and south lots, the required setback for the middle lot would become 130 feet anyway. Driveways have been located to preserve as many existing trees as possible. Planner Teague concluded that.staff recommends approval of the proposed front yard setback variances to allow 130 foot setbacks for all three lots within the Warner Estates Subdivision. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The approved Preliminary Plat meets all required standards and ordinances for a subdivision. 2. If these lots were developed prior to 2010, the required front'yard setback would be 130 feet, as the required setback was determined by the average of the block. . 3. The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a. The practical difficulty is caused by the location of the existing homes on 5, 6 and 7 Merilane. All three of these homes are set far back on their lots; 5 Merilane is setback 190 feet; 6 Merilane has a front yard setback of 175 feet; and 7 Merilane is setback 191 Page 4 of 19 feet. These setbacks establish the requirements for the two new lots..The location of, these homes is not caused by the applicant. b. The requested variances are reasonable in the context of the immediate neighborhood. . There are many homes on Merilane with closer front yard setbacks including the homes directly across the street, which range from 25 -75 foot front yard setbacks. d. The variance results in.the increase separation between existing and proposed houses. e. A preservation easement would permanently maintain building separation. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: I . The City must approve the Final Plat within one year of preliminary plat 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 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. Establishment of the preservation easement as proposed in the plans presented date stamped November 7, 2013. Appearing for the Applicant John Adams, Charlie Carpenter, Mark Gronberg and Scott Ritter representing property owner Ted Warner. Discussion Chair Staunton commented that it's unusual for the Planning Commission to review variances without a specific site plan; however, he stated he understands the variances establish only the front yard setbacks for the three new lots. Planner Teague said that is correct, adding the City Council directed the applicant to apply for front yard setback variances for all three lots, consistent with the site plan presented at their`October I5C meeting: The site plan indicates 130 -foot front yard setbacks for all three lots to include a conservation easement along the outer side lots lines in the rear yard to ensure house separation and a preservation area. Applicant Presentation Mr. Carpenter told the Commission the City Council approved their plat on October I St with conditions. Mr. Carpenter explained these conditions established building zones, landscaping conditions and "buffer" zones. Continuing, Carpenter said the conditions include "set" front yard setbacks of 130 - feet for each house, landscaping requirements and irrigation system to preserve the landscaping. Page 5 of 19 Carpenter also noted that there will be no buildings placed in the no build zone and all conditions established by Resolution would be permanently binding. Chair Staunton asked if their.plan is to record the easement agreement. Mr. Carpenter responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Potts questioned if there really is a need to establish an irrigation system as mentioned by the applicant, adding usually a landscaping bond is submitted with a required growing season (2 yrs. is typical). Commissioner Platteter commented that he noticed an easement wasn't established along the front of Merilane and questioned if that should be considered. Chair Staunton,asked how the 130- foot.setback was established. Mr. Adams responded that the setback . was established by averaging the front yard setbacks of the houses along Merilane. Continuing, Staunton reiterated it is a bit unusual not to have house plans to approve. Commissioner Potts acknowledged the usefulness of the easement area; however, pointed out that trees and vegetation will'be removed to provide building pad placement and driveway location. Potts reiterated he believes the conservation easement is beneficial and good; however, in, the future the City may have to set aside time to- review implementing a tree ordinance. Planner Teague reminded Commissioners that the Commission placed further study on a "tree ordinance" on their bucket list, adding input on a�tree ordinance from other City Boards and Commissions would also be helpful; especially Energy,and Environment. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. The following residents and property representatives spoke to the variances: - �ames�anl 4704= Mer-alane -� oke =in-0 - osition t�o= the= variances�anle also = stated in-his -o inion - —_ ey= p ` PP Y P two-lot plat would work better than the three -lot plat that was approved by the City Council. Ganley said he sees no unusual hardship to support the approval of the variances. Tom Owens attorney, representing neighboring residents told the Commission he and his clients have been working very closely with Mr. Carpenter and Adams on their shared concerns and will continue to work closely wiihahem throughout this. process. Owens urged the Commission to approve the variances as presented,,and uphold all agreements between parties. Elizabeth O'Neill; 4913 Rolling Green Parkway addressed the Commission explaining that while her property isn't directly impacted by the proposal she would urge caution in'reviewing and approving the plans for water run -off and drainage: She noted the subject site sits`at`a higher elevation along Merilane and with the addition of new buildings and driveways runoff could be an issue if not handled correctly. 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 to close public hearing approved. Page 6 of 19 Discussion Chair Staunton asked Planner Teague to follow -up on Ms. O'Neill's concern on storm water. Planner Teague informed Ms. O'Neill and the Commission, that part of the preliminary and final plat includes Watershed District review and review and approval.of the drainage plan by a licensed Engineer. The project would continually be monitored throughout the redevelopment process. Commissioner Kilberg noted that the applicant may want to take another _look at driveway placement to ensure the driveways won't encroach into the preservation easement. Mr. Adams acknowledged that point. Further discussion ensued with Commissioners in. agreement that it is important that.all aspects of the preservation easement agreements are followed; including the applicants continually working with the neighbors in a proactive manner to finalize details before the meeting before the City Council. Commissioners also indicated that circumstances are unique to this property and acknowledged that the applicant has addressed all the practical difficulties on these three pie- shaped lots. Commissioners stated they also appreciated the negotiations between the applicant and immediate neighbors and want this communication to continue throughout the process. Commissioners also stated that they would support an additional condition to the approval that stipulates that no driveway construction can encroach into the preservation easement area. Commissioners. also noted that in this situation because of the Ordinance the two neighboring properties would face a hardship if the new houses were constructed per Ordinance. Approval of front yard setback variances provides relief by allowing more spacing between homes. Motion Commissioner Carr moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff. conditions encouraging that.all conditions and easements are finalized before the City - - C- ounc4l -- Mears =the r quest�at--finalT Iat��rr=�Llso= moved#o�add�additional= conditions; - - requiring that the preservation easements, be recorded and that no driveways will be constructed in the recorded preservation easement area. Commissioner Scherer' seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. B. Variance. Beth Malmberg. 2 Bridge Lane, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Aaker informed the Commission that a 47 foot front yard setback variance for an addition to match the same nonconforming front yard /side street setback as the existing home. The project consists of an addition to living space to the back of the home to include a new attached two car garage and a patio in the side yard. All improvements will match the existing nonconforming setback along Townes Road. Page 7 of 19 Planner Aaker explained that the subject property is a corner lot located in the North West corner of Bridge Lane and Townes Road consisting of a one and one half story home with an attached garage built in 1937. The lot is 14,676 square feet in area. The owners are hoping to add onto the back of the. home to include an expanded kitchen, family room mudroom and attached two car garage on the main floor and a master bedroom with bath on the second floor. The owners would also like to locate a patio in the side yard at the same setback as the existing house from Townes Road. The current home is located approximately 15 feet from the east lot line. The zoning ordinance requires that any improvement maintain the front yard setback of the home to the north of the subject property. The home to the north is located 62 feet from Townes Road right -of -way. The addition to the new home will be at the existing nonconforming front yard /side street setback. The home is proposed to continue to be a one and one half story home with a two car garage. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends approval of the requested variance based on the following findings: The proposal meets the required standards for a variance, because: a) The practical difficult is caused by the location of the home to the north that is actually located west of the subject property's side lot line. b) The encroachment into the setback continues an existing nonconforming setback that was established when the original home was built in 1937. Approval of the variance is also subject to the following condition: 1. The home must be construction per the proposed plans date stamped, October 25, 2013. Appearing for the Applicant Erin and Chris Newkirk and Beth Malmberg Vujovich Design. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. The following spoke to the variance request Tom Wilson, 4707 Townes Road, told the Commission he is concerned with lot coverage and the loss of green space. Mrs. Harry Johnson, 4708 Townes Road, told the Commission they feel the addition is wonderful; however, have some concerns with tree removal. Johnson said they would like to see some additional screening added along the driveway. Arlene Wilson, 4707 Townes Road, expressed concern over the teardowns occurring in her neighborhood and the increase in construction and regular traffic on Townes Road. Page 8 of 19 Chair Staunton asked if anyone would like to speak to the issues; being none, Commissioner Platteter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye;, motion carried to close the public hearing. Discussion Chair Staunton said to follow -up on some of the questions raised during the public hearing process he asked Planner Aaker what the lot coverage would be at "build out." Planner Aaker responded that the lot is large and the lot coverage would be under 21%; 25% is allowed. Chair Staunton questioned if they know how many trees would be removed. Ms. Malmberg responded that it is their•belief.that the five large Oak trees would be retained; adding she doesn't believe any trees would be removed. Commissioners expressed their support for the variances noting that it is delightful to see a home being preserved. Commissioners also applauded the applicant for minimal tree disruption to achieve their addition. Motion Commissioner Platteter moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. C. Variance. Brady Priest. 4401 Country. Club Road, Edina, MN Planner Presentation - anger- -a er ed h the- sutijec -prope s alocated south o�orirrifry CIub—Road consis ibng of a one and one half story home with an attached one and one half car garage built in 1939. The home was recently purchased with the new owner proposing to widen the garage to accommodate two cars and extend a second floor dormer above the garage to accommodate a new bathroom. All portions of the plans conform to the ordinance requirements with the exception of the garage extension. The zoning ordinance requires that additions to existing homes maintain the average front yard setback of the homes located on either side of a subject property. In this instance the average front yard setback. for the property is 34.1 feet. The exiting home is located 29.7 feet from the front lot line and is currently nonconforming regarding the average front yard setback. The front lot line is curved so an extension of the front wall of the garage towards the side yard, places the corner of the garage closer. to the street at 28.6 feet from the front lot line. The property was recently for sale with the new property owner intending to preserve the existing home and to add on in order to update spaces to. modern standards and expectations. The home was built in 1939 and is very nearly original in construction. The owner will be adding onto the east side of the home to include a garage extension and a second floor dormer. All portions of the expansion will conform to the setback, height and coverage requirements, with the exception of the garage front that is at Page 9 of 19 an angle to the front lot line and will get closer to the street. The addition to the garage will provide enough garage width to park two cars. Currently the garage is no wider than one and one half parking stalls. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum two car garage per single dwelling unit. The improvement will allow conformance with the minimum two car garage requirement. Planner Aaker concluded that staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the variance based on the following findings: ) With the exception of the variance requested, the proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for the R- 1, Single Dwelling Unit District. 2) The proposal would meet the required standards for a variance, because: The proposed use of the property is reasonable; as it alters conditions on the property only slightly and keeps the garage addition within a reasonable distance from the street. 3) The practical difficulty imposed by the setback and the nonconforming garage location limits design opportunity. The intent of the ordinance is to provide adequate spacing between garage openings and the street. Spacing to the street will be adequately maintained. Approval of the variance is also subject to the following conditions: I) Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions; survey date stamped October 28, 2013 and building plans and elevations date stamped October 28, 2013. Appearing for the Applicant rady°Priest; propertywvne .- _ Applicant Presentation Mr. Priest told the Commission he loves his house and asked them for their support. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing; being none; Commissioner Scherer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried to close the public hearing. Motion Commissioner Potts stated the request makes sense and moved variance approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Page 10 of 19 D. Preliminary Plat. Gretchen Shanight. 5612 Tracy Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Rodney Helm on behalf of Tom and Gretchen Shanight is proposing to subdivide the property at 5612 Tracy Avenue into two lots. The existing home would be torn down, and two new homes built on the new lots. To accommodate the request the following is required: A subdivision; and lot width variances from 80.7 feet to'80 feet for each lot; lot depth variances from 157 feet to 122 feet; and lot area variances from 17,651 square feet to 9,820 square feet. Teague reminded the Commission that this subdivision request was recommerided for' approval by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2013. The City Council reviewed the request on August 20th _ and September 3rd and refered the matter back to the Planning Commission to include an alternative driveway alignment. The City Council had concern that a shared:driveway arrangement was not consistent with this neighborhood. They also believed that the subdivision was not comparable to the approved Kiser Subdivision on the east side of Tracy Avenue, and in general believed that a single home on the lot was more consistent with the neighborhood. Teague explained that based on the direction of the City Council, theapplicant has revised the site plan proposed for the two lots to include one driveway off Tracy Avenue; and a new driveway off proposed Lot 2 to access off Hawkes Terrace. There are no changes proposed to the proposed lots. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the proposed two lot subdivision of 5612 Tracy Avenue; lot width variances from 80.7 feet to 80 feet for each lot; lot depth variances from 157 feet to 122 feet.for each lot; and lot area variances from 17,651 square feet to 9,820 square feet. 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 proposal is consistent with the lots on this block on the west side of Tracy Avenue north of Hawkes-Drive. 3. The 80 -foot wide lot is wider than the general standard required width of 75 feet. 4. The 9,820 square foot lots are larger than the general standard minimum lot area of 9,000 square feet. The proposal meets the required. standards for a variance, because: a. There is a unique hardship to the property caused by the existing size of the property which is roughly two times the size of every lot on the block. 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 every lot on the blocks north of Hawkes Drive and west of Tracy Avenue. C. The proposed subdivision would result in two lots more characteristic of the neighborhood. d. The variances would meet the intent of the ordinance because the proposed lots are of similar size to others in the neighborhood. Page 11 of 19 e. If the variances were denied, the applicant would be denied a use of his property, an 80- foot wide, 9,000+ square foot lot, which is common to the area. Approval is also subject to the following conditions: 1. The City must approve the final plat within one year of preliminary approval or receive a written application for a time extension or the preliminary approval will be void. 2. Park dedication fee of $5,000 must be paid prior to release of the final plat. 3. Vehicle access to these lots shall per the plans date stamped October 17, 2013. 4. Compliance with the conditions required by the director of engineering in his memo dated July 18, 2013. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items must be submitted: a. Submit evidence of a Nine Mile 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. A grading plan subject to review and approval of the city engineer. d. A construction management plan will be required for the construction of the new homes. e. Utility hook -ups are subject to review of the city engineer. Appearing for the Applicant Rory -H elm - and - Kurt- F-r- ethaini; fir:- and- Mr- s- Shanight pproper-"wners. - Discussion Commissioner Forrest asked if this lot initially was one lot. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Scherer asked if the lot at 5633 Tracy was included in the calculation as one lot or two. Mr. Helm responded the 5633 Tracy was calculated as two. Applicant Presentation Mr. Helm explained that at the direction of the City Council they revised their plat for the two lots to include one driveway off Tracy Avenue (existing) and a new driveway off Hawkes Terrace. Mr. Helm said the proposed driveway off Hawkes Terrace will be 120 -feet from the corner with Tracy Avenue. Continuing, Helm acknowledged concerns have been expressed about drainage, adding he will work with the City and the Watershed District and follow their directions. Concluding, Helm asked the Commission to approve the subdivision request as presented. Chair Staunton opened the public hearing. Page 12 of 19 Public Hearing The following residents spoke to the proposed subdivision: Kent Gravelle, 5609 Tracy Avenue said in his opinion the lots as proposed are too small. Sue Nelson, 5701 Hawkes Terrace, presented to the Commission a petition. Nelson explained she lives directly across the street from the subject site and ha s.a concern +with the proposed driveway, loss of green space, trees and traffic issues. Nelson further explained .that the "hill" on the subject property has been their buffer from Vernon/Tracy Avenue and with the change in site plan much of the hill would be ripped away to make room for the driveway. Concluding, Nelson said in her opinion parking would be an issue, adding she doesn't support the smaller lots. Robert Laughlin, 5828 Lyle Circle, speaking on behalf of his parents, 5708 Hawkes Terrace, indicated he and his parents are opposed to the requested subdivision. - Laughlin said he and his parents enjoy suburban living and he doesn't believe slicing and dicing. up the larger lots is right. Laughlin pointed out the proposed lots don't even come close to the mean lot area. Concluding, Laughlin asked the Commission to deny the requested subdivision as presented. Farkhod Salamov, 5708 Hawkes Drive, informed the Commission he opposes the requested subdivision. Renate Stone, 5721 Hawkes Drive, told -the Commission her concern is with the proposed driveway off Hawkes and the additional water run -off the two new. homes would dump into the lake. Chair Staunton asked if anyone else would like to speak to the issue; being none Commissioner Scherer moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Discussion Commissioner Carr commented that the subject request is also framed with variances and questioned if the variances are part of subdivision approval. Planner Teague responded in the affirmative. The proposed subdivision requires variances from Subdivision Ordinance No. 810. Subdivision Ordinance 810 establishes the mean lot area, lot depth and lot width for the 500 -foot neighborhood. The subdivision as proposed doesn't meet depth, area and width; therefore variances are required to subdivide the lot. Commissioner Carr acknowledged the dilemma because the 500 46ot neighborhood appears to encompass 'a number of plats and the Commission originally, supported the subdivision; albeit with a different plat. Chair Staunton commented that when the Commission originally looked at this request we were very firm if subdivided both lots must gain access off Tracy Avenue; not one curb cut on Tracy and one curb cut on Hawkes Terrace as depicted on the revised plat. Continuing, Staunton said in his opinion the Hawkes Terrace curb cut completely changes the dynamics of the plat, adding he doesn't believe he can support the revised plat. Commissioner Platteter stated he supported the one driveway concept off'Tracy Avenue servicing both lots; however, the proposed driveway off Hawkes Terrace completely changes the plat. Platteter said this change causes him some concern. Commissioner Fischer commented that to,him the proposed. curb cutoff Hawkes is a game changer. Page 13 of 19 Commissioner Halva commented that it's important to take the neighbors comments into consideration. She said if subdivided the smaller lots would create problems for the neighborhood. Motion Commissioner Carr moved preliminary plat approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. Ayes; Carr, Nays; Scherer, Potts, Fischer, Platteter, Forrest, Staunton. Motion to approve failed 6 -1. Commissioner Fischer moved denial of the preliminary plat. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. Ayes; Scherer, Potts, Fischer, Platteter, Forrest, Staunton. Nay Carr. Motion to deny approved 7 -1 Commissioner Carr said her vote reflects that the lot area, depth and width were impacted by the difference in lots sizes in the differing plats that fell within the 500 -foot neighborhood. E. Preliminary and Final Plat. Frank Holdings LLC. 3909 49 %z Street and 4936 France Avenue, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission Spalon Montage is requesting to divide their property at 4936 France Avenue and 3909 West 49 -1/2 Street into two lots for the purpose of dividing the Split Fashion Avenue store from the Spalon Montage store. No new building is proposed at this time. Continuing, Teague explained that the existing property and buildings would remain the same. The specific request is-for- a- Preliminary-a nd° Tinal -Plat- to-divide=th-e- prop'erty.- Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Subdivision for Spalon Montage to divide their property at 4936 France Avenue back into two lots. Approval is subject to the following findings: 1) the lots are generally consistent with existing lots on the block. 2) There are no immediate requests for changes in use of the property or existing buildings. Discussion and Motion Commissioner Platteter moved to recommend Preliminary and Final Plat approval based on staff findings and subject to staff conditions including building code compliance. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. F. Site Plat with Variances. HGT Architects /Think Mutual Bank. 46SS Hazelton Road, Edina, MN Planner Presentation Planner Teague informed the Commission HTG Architects on behalf of the Think Mutual Bank are proposing to tear down the existing vacant restaurant, build a two -story 8,441 square foot bank/office at Page 14 of 19 3655 Hazelton Road. The first level would be 5,108 square feet and consist of the banking space. The upper level would be 3,333 square feet and include a community /training room, storage, employee lounge and a rooftop patio. Teague explained that to accommodate' the proposed addition, the following is requested: Site Plan Review, Building setback Variances from 50 feet to 15 and 40 feet and Parking Stall Variance from 42 stalls to 30 stalls (proof of parking to 42 provided.) Continuing, Teague explained that based on the square footage of the building, 42 parking stalls are required. The site plan demonstrates 30 built parking stalls. (See page A19.) The applicant_ is agreeable to a proof -of- parking agreement for the 12 extra stalls. The applicant does not believe that these stalls, will, be needed, but have agreed to construct them if parking becomes a problem. A condition of any approval should be that if parking becomes a problem, the additional stalls must be provided. Planner Teague concluded that staff recommends that the City Council approve the Site Plan with Variances for the Think Mutual Bank at 3655 Hazeiton Road. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposal would meet the required standards and ordinances for a Site Plan with the exception of the setback and parking space variances. 2. WSB conducted a parking and traffic impact study. The study concluded that the existing roadway system would support the proposed project. 3. The variances are reasonable. The applicant could develop the site to meet all minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. In granting to the requested variances, the overall site plan would be improved and provide more green space. Traditionally, the City of Edina has not required parking stalls, when they are not needed. Additional parking spaces could be added if needed. Approval of the Site Plan is also subject to the following conditions: Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: • Site plan date stamped November 7, 2013. • Grading plan date stamped November 7, 2013. • Landscaping plan date stamped November 7, 2013. • Building elevations date stamped November 7, 2013. • Building materials board as presented at the Planning Commission and City Council. meeting. 2. A total of thirty -two (32) parking stalls shall initially be constructed on th,e site. 3. Prior the issuance of a building'permit, a final landscape plan must be submitted, subject to staff approval. Landscape plan must meet all minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. 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. Page 15 of 19 4. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies. 5. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district's requirements. 6. Compliance with the conditions required by the city engineer in his memo dated November 4, 2013. 7. Building plans are subject to review and approval of the fire marshal at the time of building permit. 8. The applicant must enter into a proof of parking agreement with the City to ensure the necessary parking space will be provided if needed. Should parking become a significant problem, staff will require the proof of parking stalls constructed by adding the addition to the parking ramp. 9. Bike racks must be provided to meet minimum Zoning Ordinance requirements. 10. Garbage collection areas must occur within the building. Appearing for the Applicant Jeff Philpsen Applicant Presentation Jeff Philpsen addressed the Commission and delivered a presentation highlighting Think Mutual Bank. Philpsen explained that Think Mutual is proposing to construct a new partial two -story facility. The building is proposed at 8,441 square feet; with 5,108 square feet on the mail level and 3,333 square feet on the upper level. Philpsen said it is also their intent to invite the public to "use" the upper level for meeting space, etc. hilp es n a d- ildm a eri9ls Wo ldin°clu ed prefinishe -c composite me panes blue —an silver EPDM Roofing, glass curtain wall and terra - cotta/clay title, steel checking on bar joists, concrete slab -on -grade and metal /steel stud framing with steel columns /beams. The project also includes a bike rack, down lite light poles and additional landscaping features. Continuing, Philpsen noted the project also needs a variance to allow the proposed building to be placed within the 50 -foot building setback from both the north and east property lines. Variances are also required to allow fewer parking stalls rather than provide the number required by Ordinance. This allows for more green space and flexibility in building placement to create a project more in harmony with the area. Concluding, Philpsen said the preliminary schedule is for construction to begin in April 2014. Philpsen asked the Commission for their support. Discussion Commissioner Kilberg asked Mr. Philpsen if a Think Mutual Bank was located a block away. Mr. Philpsen responded in the affirmative, adding the present bank would be relocated to this site. Commissioner Platteter thanked the applicant for listening to past Commission comments, adding the only potential issue he finds with this layout may be headlight wash from vehicles queuing in the drive - through. Platteter also commented when dealing with signage to be respectful of the Promenade. Page 16 of 19 Commissioner Potts said he agrees with Platteters comment, adding to prevent headlight wash onto the Promenade landscaping could be "bulked up" a bit in that area. Commissioner Scherer commented that in her opinion in every way their revisions improved the project. Commissioner Carr complemented the project for its community outreach. Mr. Philpsen thanked the Commission and said another idea they are working on is adding,a piece of public.art to the plaza area. Commissioner Fischer said this project reflects how the Sketch Plan Review process can work and improve a project. Reducing the hard surface in favor of a more creative approach to the Promenade made such a difference. Commissioner Forrest stated she agrees with all comments, adding that in her opinion the %2 roof option also softens the fagade. Commissioner Halva asked Mr. Philpsen what the second floor would be used for. Mr. Philpsen responded the2nd floor will be conference /meeting /training space. He reiterated it will also be available for the public.to use. He also.noted the employee lounge and mechanical rooms are located on the 2nd floor. Commissioner Forrest commented that she thinks it's wonderful for.them to invite the public to use their 2nd floor meeting space.. She also suggested that public art could also be displayed in their lobby. Chair Staunton asked if anyone would like to speak to the issue; being none, Commissioner Platteter moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Potts seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Motion Comm issioner-- P-- ott-s- moved= to=r- ecommend- site= plan=approval=based -on= stafffindings and subject to staff conditions noting a change to condition 2 to read a total of thirty (30) parking stalls not thirty-two. Commissioner Scherer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Commissioner Platteter also asked the applicant to note the concern expressed with possible headlight wash on to the Promenade. VIII. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Considerations — Residential Redevelopment Planner Presentation Planner Teague told the Commission there are some "housekeeping" issues that need to be taken care of before final adoption of the amended Zoning Ordinance 850. Teague explained the changes clarifies and cleans up language from the recent City Council approved Ordinance regarding residential redevelopment. Page 17 of 19 A clarification on page one indicates that attached garages are considered part of a principal dwelling unit. Attached garages are now required to maintain the same setback as the principle dwelling unit. Page 2 adds: language to help clarify that there are two options in-the required side yard setback for lots more than 60 feet in width, but less than 75 feet in width Page 3 adds #4. This provision was inadvertently not included in the approving Ordinance to regulate setbacks on lots less than 50 feet in width Page 4 -5 clarifies the front yard setbacks be the same for all buildings and structures. Teague asked the Commission for their comments. Discussion Commissioner Fischer commented that he likes the introduction of the word subordinate into the Ordinance (Accessory Building) and supports this addition. Commissioner Carr stated she finds; at least in her opinion; the words reasonably necessary and incidental are not needed inthe definition of Accessory Building. 'Commissioner's stated they agreed with that observation: Chair Staunton asked if anyone else had any issues with the proposed changes to the Ordinance. Being none; Chair Staunton asked if anyone would like to make a motion to forward to the City Council their support for the proposed Ordinance changes. Motion Commissioner Carr recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the —0 rd inanc_ e= t- of he = City= C-ounciPwith= the = langu age-read ing4or�Accessory=Structures :�4 separate and subordinate building which is located on the same lot.....eliminating wording and adding which relates to and is incidental to the conduct of the principal building. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Staunton acknowledged back of packet materials. X. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Commissioners Carr and Platteter reported that the Living Streets Committee was moving forward and brainstorming creative and branding concepts. Both Commissioners also expressed interest in moving forward with further study on a tree preservation ordinance. Commissioner.Fischer reported that the Grandview Community Advisory team will now be meeting twice monthly. He explained they have a lot of work to do outlining what needs to be done for the RFI. Commissioner Forrest reported she attended a work session on parking presented by ULI. Page 18 of 19 XI. STAFF COMMENTS None. XII ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Scherer moved meeting adjournment at.10:50. Commissioner Fischer seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion to adjourn carried. Jackie &oo Respectfully submitted Page 19 of 19 CITY OF EDINA INVESTMENT BALANCE BY FUND BY MONTH NINE MONTHS ENDED ENDED 9/30/2013 General Fund - Mostly short term investments maturing 1 to 6 months. Construction - Approximately two thirds of the investments are for the Construction Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund most of which will mature within a year. The other portion of investments are public works facility and improvement bonds proceeds and will be spent within the next year. This category also includes smaller investments for Golf Course Memorial fund, E911, and Public Safety Training Facility Edinborough - Investments for the operation of Edinborough and held in a longer -term managed fund. Centennial Lakes - Investments for the operation of Centennial Lakes are held in a longer -term managed fund., Utility Funds - Investments for the Utility funds (water, sewer, storm sewer and recycling) as well as the remaining bond proceeds from the last issue Debt Service funds - Debt service funds for various bond issues,reserve fund for gymnasium bonds, street reconstruction special assessment prepayments. Investments include a combination of short, intermediate and investments held in a longe -term managed fund. Arena - Funds held for construction all short term. HRA Fund - Funds held for HRA projects and debt service. Includes a combination of short, intermediate and investments held in a longer -term managed fund. Note: The gain and rate of return above are based on interest earned and are not adjusted for fluctuations in market values. Investments maturing in more than two years have seen an increase in interest rates over the past several months and a resulting decrease in the market value of the investment. This decrease will be reflected in the City's annual report reducing interest income. At this time the decrease in market value cannot be calculated as the market values are determined on December 31 for the annual report. It is expected that the investment income will be substantially reduced from the gain shown above. Prepared by John Wallin 12/10/2013 Page 1 GENERAL CONSTRCTN EDINBORGH CENT LAKES UTILITY DEBT ARENA HRA TOTAL JANUARY 13,636,324 10,379,084 1,389,651 1,227,436 9,927,678 931,536 145,135 11,826,013 49,462,857 FEBRUARY 11,201,170 11,179,289 1,390,922 1,228,559 9,674,012 931,677 145,136 11,892,876 47,643,641 MARCH 10,721,849 10,137,051 1,390,585 1,228,261 9,894,275 931,537 145,136 11,885,108 46,333,802 APRIL 8,343,921 10,205,539 1,395,304 1,232,430 10,394,217 933,503 145,138 11,888,851 44,538,903 MAY 5,746,335 10,262,772 1,398,351 1,235,121 10,095,217 934,771 0 11,742,093 41,414,660 JUNE 14,477,059 10,018,284 1,398,697 1,235,427 10,599,271 934,915 0 10,003,066 48,666,719 JULY 14,158,880 10,373,665 1,399,714 1,236,325 10,354,448 3,585,339 0 10,485,558 51,593,929 AUGUST 9,981,053 10,361,787 1,402,809 1,239,059 9,599,697 3,386,627 0 11,081,514 47,052,546 SEPTEMBER 9,283,060 8,973,315 1,402,717 1,238,977 8,838,606 3,322,467 0 10,470,484 43,529,626 OCTOBER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NOVEMBER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DECEMBER 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 9 MONTHS 97,549,651 91,890,786 12,568,750 11,101,595 89,377,421 15,892,372 580,545 101,275,563 420,236,683 AVG 9 MONTHS 10,838,850 10,210,087 1,396,528 1,233,511 9,930,825 1,765,819 64,505 11,252,840 46,692,965 9 MONTH GAIN 37,682 62,764 19,461 17,189 37,342 13,006 21 80,120 267,585 9 MONTH ROR (annualized) 0.46 0.82 1.86 1.86 0.50 0.98 0.04 0.95 0.76 Current yields Tireastuies Agencf��� Brokered As of September 30, 2013 Maturity Yield Maturity Yield Maturity Yield 3 months 0.01 3 months 0.01 3 months 0.15 6 months 0.02 6 months 0.02 6 months 020 1 year 0.08 1 year 0.08 1 year 0.30 2 years 0.30 2 years 0.33 2 years 0.50 5 years 1.35 5 years 1.58 5 years 2.00 10 years 2.57 10 years 3.14 General Fund - Mostly short term investments maturing 1 to 6 months. Construction - Approximately two thirds of the investments are for the Construction Fund, Equipment Replacement Fund most of which will mature within a year. The other portion of investments are public works facility and improvement bonds proceeds and will be spent within the next year. This category also includes smaller investments for Golf Course Memorial fund, E911, and Public Safety Training Facility Edinborough - Investments for the operation of Edinborough and held in a longer -term managed fund. Centennial Lakes - Investments for the operation of Centennial Lakes are held in a longer -term managed fund., Utility Funds - Investments for the Utility funds (water, sewer, storm sewer and recycling) as well as the remaining bond proceeds from the last issue Debt Service funds - Debt service funds for various bond issues,reserve fund for gymnasium bonds, street reconstruction special assessment prepayments. Investments include a combination of short, intermediate and investments held in a longe -term managed fund. Arena - Funds held for construction all short term. HRA Fund - Funds held for HRA projects and debt service. Includes a combination of short, intermediate and investments held in a longer -term managed fund. Note: The gain and rate of return above are based on interest earned and are not adjusted for fluctuations in market values. Investments maturing in more than two years have seen an increase in interest rates over the past several months and a resulting decrease in the market value of the investment. This decrease will be reflected in the City's annual report reducing interest income. At this time the decrease in market value cannot be calculated as the market values are determined on December 31 for the annual report. It is expected that the investment income will be substantially reduced from the gain shown above. Prepared by John Wallin 12/10/2013 Page 1 _ IlEco'nomic Development Phone 952- 826 -0407 • Fax .952- 826 -0390 • www.EdinaMN.gov Date: December 17, 2013 To: Ann Swenson & Joni Bennett cc: Jim Hovland, ,Mary Brindle, Josh Sprague, Scott Neal (w /o attachments) From: Bill Neuendorf Economic Development Manager .Re: Dave and Busters — introductory materials MEMO �91'3r Il-1 `)r o \ ���t11i1R,N�l::f• Simon Properties would like to bring a new destination tenant to Southdale Center. Dave and Busters has serious interest in leasing the vacant third level of the regional mall. Their business model would require a change in Edina City Code (Section 900.09m, Subd 5) to allow games /amusement devices in places that hold liquor licenses. If this prohibition is revised, Dave and Busters is prepared to move forward in 2014. Last week, Lisa Warren, Vice President of Development for Dave and Busters visited Edina to reintroduce their restaurant concept. Attached are handouts she prepared for the City of Edina. The "Destination of Fun" presentation includes several interesting points: • Map of 64 locations, including 10 at Simon -owned shopping malls (pg 2) • Examples of current architectural style (pg 4 and 12 -14) • Customer demographic profile (pg 6) • Concept layout for 3`d-floor of Southdale Center (pg 10 -11) • Alcohol service policy (pg 16 -17) The sample food and beverage menu is also included. Ms. Warren offered to return to meet with you at your convenience to answer any questions you may have. Please. let me know if you would like me to schedule a visit after the holidays. Attachments: "Destination of Fun" presentation and sample menu City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 12/17/13 MNVA's Guiding Principles I Minnesota VapersMinnesota Vapers MINNESOTA VAPERS WWW.MNVAPERS.COM HOME HEALTH STUDIES I MNVA SPONSORS MNVAPERS FACEBOOK MNVA's Guiding Principles The Minnesota Vapers Advocacy has a very strict set of guiding principles. We understand and support common sense regulations that don't result in far reaching bans of a product that has been proven safe in countless studies. We believe that these regulations are being made out of fear and rhetoric. We believe... t. That under no circumstances shall e- cigarettes, e- liquid, accessories, or components be sold to minors. We believe that each store should adopt a strict policy to I. D. any customers who appear younger than 35• 2. That business owners have the right to choose whether or not to regulate e- cigarettes and their use within their establishment based on their own beliefs and policies. 3. That the City and State Government need not unnecessarily use revenue to over regulate the use and sale of e- cigarettes. 4. That long -term studies must be done, but that the extensive short -term studies prove that e- cigarettes are substantially safer than traditional cigarettes and pose no risk to the user of a -cigarettes, nor bystanders (conclusions. http : / /www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov /pubmed /23033998) 5. That common sense regulation regarding the safe handling, distribution, and creation of e- liquids and nicotine is necessary. 6. That those who vote in favor of limiting adult access to, the unfair taxation of, or limiting the use of e- cigarettes, is a vote in support of smoking, COPD, cancer, stillbirths, SIDS, and death of Minnesota citizens. All members of the Minnesota Vapers Advocacy support these principles and advocate in favor of them. For any questions, please contact info @mnvapers.com MN VAPE SHOPS CONTACT ! r Minnesota Vapers Advocacy i J & You Ike this. You and 335 others Ice Minnesota Vapers Advocacy. Facebook social plupin SPONSORS KEEF ECT 6CIaLwic -16 PAGES Home twit&• ItIIIT� 1 9 12/10/13 Surprise opposition derails Emanuel's e- cigarette ban - Chicago Sun -Times COM11LI Subscnbo Tod,,,;'., papa, Tv i l9lth Us SOICCt n Publ—Eion or Sap Register for free; Login I . Surprise opposition derails Emanuel's e- cigarette ban BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter December 9, 2013 3:34PM Updclr&. Dec w' !0, 2013 ::!SAM Mayor Rahm Emanuel's plan to ban e- cigarettes wherever smoking is prohibited — and snuff out the sale to minors — ran into a dark cloud of opposition Monday, forcing the mayor to settle for the weaker of two ordinances designed to curb teen smoking. The City Council's Finance and Health committees agreed to ban the sale of menthol and flavored tobacco products within 500 feet of Chicago schools — five times the existing radius. But a surprise outpouring of opposition derailed the mayor's plan to regulate electronic cigarettes as "tobacco products" subject to Chicago's smoking ban. That would have moved them behind the counter of retail stores, banned the sale to minors, prohibited adults from smoking e- cigarettes in virtually all of Indoor Chicago and empowered the city to license e- cigarette dealers. Aldermen from across the city questioned whether the vapors from e- cigarettes are any more dangerous to bystanders than a humidifier, a cup of tea or a pot full of boiling water used to cook pasta. They further argued that the ban would discourage smokers from using e- cigarettes to kick the habit. "We're punishing a group of people for trying not to smoke. You can't have it both ways. You can't on one day say, 'We're going to tax the heck out of cigarettes,' then the next day [say], 'For those of you who can't afford it and decide you want to smoke vapor, we're going to decide you can't do that, either,'" said Aid. Leslie Hairston (5th). She added, "There is no proof that water vapor in the air does anything. If that is the case, humidifiers are gone. And boiling water is gone in restaurants." Downtown Aid. Brendan Reilly (42nd) took a puff of an e- cigarette during Monday's meeting, then acknowledged that he recently purchased e- cigarettes to try to kick the smoking habit. "Where this kind of crosses the line for me Is where we start talking about Including the device as if it is a tobacco product. Many smokers are actually using these devices or devices like them as part of their cessation program," he said. Aid. "Proco" Joe Moreno (1st) argued that there is "no evidence that nicotine being vaporized is damaging" to other people in the room. "We're trying to protect a set of people [who] don't need protection. I don't see why we need to protect people from something I can [create] when I make my tea in the morning. I have no problem with my 10- year -old daughter being in the kitchen when that happens," Moreno said. Aid. Ray Suarez (31st) pointed to the 50- cents -a -pack increase in Chicago's cigarette tax tied to Emanuel's 2014 budget. "We're raising peoples' cost of buying a pack of cigarettes, but they're trying to quit. They're going to go to vaping and we're going to limit that, too. At what point do we stop regulating peoples' lives and making the excuse of safety when we have no documentation to prove this is even a safety hazard and we have no way of enforcing it ?" Suarez said. Dr. Phillip Gardiner, a University of California expert on nicotine dependence, argued that e- cigarettes not only have the "potential to undo decades of de- normalization of smoking." They're a "new source of volatile organic compounds, nicotine and heavy metals" with "27 specific chemicals registered as harmful by the Food and Drug Administration." "Is there secondhand vaping? Yes, there's secondhand vaping. No, it's not just water vaper. It's all of these different chemicals. Yes, they're in lesser concentrations. But they're pollutants none the same," Gardiner said. Last month, Emanuel joined forces with Aldermen Will Burns (4th) and Edward Burke (14th) on a pair of ordinances designed to cut off www.suntimes.com/news/metro /24278866 -418 /e manuel -e- cigarette - regulations- getting - watered- down.html 1/2 12/10/13 Surprise opposition derails Emanuel's e- cigarette ban - Chicago Sun -Times access to gateway products used to entice teens into smoking. Like the cigarette tax hike, the ordinances were tailor -made to break, what Health Commissioner Dr. Bechara Choucair has called the "plateau" in the decline of adolescent smoking. It was Burns who proposed holding off on the e- cigarette ban that had generated the most controversy. Still. Burns said he remains a "strong supporter" of both ordinances, "given my own family's history with tobacco use. My father died of a massive coronary at the age of 59 as a consequence of being a lifelong smoker." Email: fspielman @suntimes.com Twitter: @fspielman O 7013 Sun -Times Medq LLC A/ rights reserved This material may not be copded or distributed without permission. For more information about reprints and permbsbnt visit www.suntirnesreprints.com. To order a reprint of this article, ckk here. AFFILIATES Chicago Reader High School Cuba News Cars for Sale - ToDrive.com SearchChicago - Homes I Want It - Directories . 0> www. sundmes.com/newslmctrol24278866- 418 /emanuel -e- cigarette - regulations - getting- watered- down.hoW 2/2 .. i OUR PUBLICATIONS DAILY PUBLICATIONS PIONEER PRESS - PIONEER LOCAL Chicago Sun -Times Pioneerlocal.com Evanston Review Morton Grove Champion The Beacon News Barrington Courier Review Forest Leaves Mundelein Review The Courier News Buffalo Grove Countryside Franklin Park Herald - Journal Was Herald- Spectator The Herald News The Doings Clarendon Hills Edition Glencoe News Nofridge- Harwood Heights News Lake County Nows -Sun The Doings Hinsdale Edition Glenview Announcements Northbrook Star The Naperville Sun The Doings La Grange Edition Highland Park News Oak Loaves Post- Tribune The Doings Oak Brook Edition Lake Forester Park Ridge Herald- Advocato The SouthtownStar The Doings Weekly Edition Lake Zurich Courier Skokie Review The Doings Western Springs edition LlbortyNlle Review Vernon Hills Review Deerfield Review Lincolnshire Review Wilmette Life Elm Leaves Lincolnwood Review Winnetkn Talk AFFILIATES Chicago Reader High School Cuba News Cars for Sale - ToDrive.com SearchChicago - Homes I Want It - Directories . 0> www. sundmes.com/newslmctrol24278866- 418 /emanuel -e- cigarette - regulations - getting- watered- down.hoW 2/2 COLD TURKEY Going "cold turkey " means giving 'P cigarettes without ti any assistance. Smokers simply stop smoking. Cheapest Steep success curve. Must 4 endure all effects of nicotine fastest withdrawal including anxiety, method. irritability, anger and restlessness. r 4 NICOTINE J INHALER Typically prescribed by ® c oUars Releases an aerosol nicotine P- t solution which is inhaled. AtMimics the j i�� Poor success c� action of smoking i rate. 6 NICOTINE PATC HA patch is applied to the skin and is eplaced once per day. Nicotine strength 0 is lowered gradually. -�� -� �1 Does not help with ornl fixation. Long period of use. Requires k easy I. use. I planning. Expensive. I v y' 3 .f^ 7NICOTINE GUM �"t♦ A small piece of um is chewed for ; V I -2 minuses and then held against . f 1 inside of the cheek. This is 1 � repeated levels l times each day. 1 �. Nicotine levels and frequency of t� use are gradually lowered. Helps with oral i II Requires good ^I planning. Ex ensive. fixation resultin ham smoking, gl May cause t root and .' stomach irritation. . NICOTINE � .; LOZENGE ''e. Very similar to nicotine gum. GPs. A lozenge is sucked on which releases nicotine into the bloodstream. Louses less j Expensive. irritation than Poor success rate. gum. Di ficulr to find. Chances of a New Dawn: Quitting Aid Success Rates The unfortunate reality most smokers face is that eliminating cigarettes from their lives is extremely difficult. Smoking becomes second nature and is relied on by millions. Luckily there are many methods available to help avoid the harm of cigarettes. These are the 6 month success rates of the options Sources smokers have to aid them quit tobacco Nic°Itn° Gum • 8.4%A - NrcoKrw P°IPh -0, 275 sl,•,- .r,s.Px,e,rw..d. s.I Go.r <r,em.+<.,y.ew. a..q. ed aa011 'P�.!'.rrld dPmrydpevNin °d -h n. �cao.,7a.,,..wfe,o.•,uys,;;�y Pr w>•s�e ��M '' HkWi r5 —on%•C 9 rS... rC t7rPrrl •., -5j.. dVe eur ur'0r Wj -Er; aFrraad�oludm6r�•h.n.prinohvn MrvbdkSoSVrondhMFdufivfSC�A- O.i'vdlui�dr 1M•a \ilvmPn�vd+a�rBD1 {ID. `.7 V`. �Nkwin•Lm ypVB shJRwns a.bew. !wi,j Gb„•SJ.. bpw DA 55rd. '1 -R00>I 'errdewr. 6.sgry m.urq ♦rdo.odrrra n.,d,vo nenl7v lAa. . Hdo. a x rsi,e1 nL+o na71-!.�2,.?.J. mn..h twrydl rlsl n Ch.ntia 14%-" -),. 69 r.�• N +P•,.GM. nv.�u,,,,, fMr Ir?_•.y d- o..ir.a 6upmp- 21 % -a+ •Knmx J.1 r �w ed �'"V ge1a1'°O" ""'D'�`^O rnsJ• r,.•vo-r arr.51•:mt dodo rm,aM rd ray- '`vx�Pw,n.nol P55 -�Py E•P rPe>t 71% 7.Aal' arm... d6o. Pa+ s. qr. br. l ,qur.aa,d,+q.nr.dwir.rr•Pr.drd rb.- ,,.eP7 f.eFIe5A0 -'_ w °r• ,.v11.vtrJ r3 nDln FS..>ai lg>tiv.vrr.°1p <ndnr rd r.Jr. Yenmrrd•ourr'r ru-t 4w!✓•ri 71lr 1. 110 /A Presented by Cod com v PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION e Pills are prescribed by your doctor, typically Chantix or • • Bupropion. Prescription is • • token for at least 12 weeks. • • �� Goad �!! �� success i � Many side effects including dry mouth, insomnia, • • i 1 l ate. I nausea, abnormal dreams, Easy o ° i I 1 depression, hostility, and 1 user suicidal thoughts and behavior. J prele fed models '- Z and flavor Call 7:- �a; f'bBdlffrP[U blJ Chances of a New Dawn: Quitting Aid Success Rates The unfortunate reality most smokers face is that eliminating cigarettes from their lives is extremely difficult. Smoking becomes second nature and is relied on by millions. Luckily there are many methods available to help avoid the harm of cigarettes. These are the 6 month success rates of the options Sources smokers have to aid them quit tobacco Nic°Itn° Gum • 8.4%A - NrcoKrw P°IPh -0, 275 sl,•,- .r,s.Px,e,rw..d. s.I Go.r <r,em.+<.,y.ew. a..q. ed aa011 'P�.!'.rrld dPmrydpevNin °d -h n. �cao.,7a.,,..wfe,o.•,uys,;;�y Pr w>•s�e ��M '' HkWi r5 —on%•C 9 rS... rC t7rPrrl •., -5j.. dVe eur ur'0r Wj -Er; aFrraad�oludm6r�•h.n.prinohvn MrvbdkSoSVrondhMFdufivfSC�A- O.i'vdlui�dr 1M•a \ilvmPn�vd+a�rBD1 {ID. `.7 V`. �Nkwin•Lm ypVB shJRwns a.bew. !wi,j Gb„•SJ.. bpw DA 55rd. '1 -R00>I 'errdewr. 6.sgry m.urq ♦rdo.odrrra n.,d,vo nenl7v lAa. . Hdo. a x rsi,e1 nL+o na71-!.�2,.?.J. mn..h twrydl rlsl n Ch.ntia 14%-" -),. 69 r.�• N +P•,.GM. nv.�u,,,,, fMr Ir?_•.y d- o..ir.a 6upmp- 21 % -a+ •Knmx J.1 r �w ed �'"V ge1a1'°O" ""'D'�`^O rnsJ• r,.•vo-r arr.51•:mt dodo rm,aM rd ray- '`vx�Pw,n.nol P55 -�Py E•P rPe>t 71% 7.Aal' arm... d6o. Pa+ s. qr. br. l ,qur.aa,d,+q.nr.dwir.rr•Pr.drd rb.- ,,.eP7 f.eFIe5A0 -'_ w °r• ,.v11.vtrJ r3 nDln FS..>ai lg>tiv.vrr.°1p <ndnr rd r.Jr. Yenmrrd•ourr'r ru-t 4w!✓•ri 71lr 1. 110 /A Presented by Cod com What is science? Some viewpoints from the perspective of the theory of science - John Hutchinson Disclaimer: This is a gross generalization of what science is about; science is actually much more complex than how it is. described here, but this will give you a basic background if you need it. 1) Science is a human endeavor; scientists are all human, with the typical faults and foibles that non - scientists have. Sociology, politics, psychology, and similar aspects of human nature all have a profound influence on how science is conducted. 2) Science follows certain rules and guidelines. Exactly what these rules and guidelines are depends on what area of science a specific scientific procedure falls within. The scientific method (i.e. hypotheses are formulated from observations, and theories develop from these hypotheses), sometimes cited as the one and only way that science is conducted, is not the paradigm that scientific inquiry must always follow, but it often is the best objective procedure. Science is not so monolithic and mechanical; it defies simple explanations, just like many other human endeavors. 3) Facts versus opinions. An important distinction to make clear when science is an issue is the difference between fact and opinion. "Fact" in a scientific context is a generally accepted reality (but still open to scientific inquiry, as opposed to an absolute truth, which is not, and hence not a part of science). Hypotheses and theories are generally based on objective inferences, unlike opinions, which are generally based on subjective influences. For example, "I am a humorous person" is certainly an opinion, whereas "if I drop this glass, it will break" could best be called a hypothesis, while "the Earth orbits the Sun ", or "evolution occurs over time ", or "gravity exists" are all today considered to be both facts and theories (and could possibly turn out to be wrong). Opinions are neither fact nor theory; they are not officially the domain of science (but don't go thinking that scientists don't have opinions -- they are only human, and opinions often help to guide their research). Thus, science cannot directly address such issues as whether God exists or whether people are good or bad. 4) Science generally uses the formulation of falsifiable hypotheses developed via systematic empiricism. Hypotheses that cannot ever be disproved are not real science. Hypotheses are generally formed by observing whatever it is you are studying, with the objective of understanding the nature of the subject (this is systematic empiricism). Many scientists hold the belief that a hypothesis. cannot ever be proven, only disproved. This especially holds in historical sciences like paleontology, where a time machine would be the only true way to prove a hypothesis. 5) Acceptance of scientific ideas is based on a process of publication and peer review. To become a legitimate theory (but still not established fact), a hypothesis must be subjected to the approval of a scientist's peers and published in an accredited scientific journal. This process keeps the charlatans out of science (well, it is supposed to, at least). Most significantly, this helps to maintain science as a process rather than a gradual accumulation of facts, ever creeping forward towards omniscience. Theories tend to persist until a better theory is proposed and gains broad acceptance, rather than new theories being proposed for every tiny fact that is deduced. 6) Replication is also vital to good science - for the scientific community to accept a finding, other investigators must be able to duplicate the original investigator's findings. Thus, you cannot t; make up your data; other scientists must be able to follow the same methods you used (whether experimentation, mathematical calculations, formulating major concepts, measuring data, or whatever) and come up with the same results. Even among paleontologists studying dinosaurs, these principles are sometimes violated. A prime example, pervasive throughout evolutionary thought, is the adaptive story. Adaptive stories take a mysterious feature whose origin is not well understood, and propose an un- falsifiable hypothesis to explain it. For example: We do not yet understand why feathers were evolved somewhere along the non- avian_tlicropocl to bird transition. An adaptive story to explain it would be that the feathers were evolved to catch insects with, and then were "co- opted" for flight. Sounds convincing (as many such stories do), but still just a story. The sad truth is that many such problems are essentially unsolvable; we will never know exactly how or why feathers evolved. "Why" questions are some of the most difficult questions to answer when referring to evolution; evolution does not ask why. That is the frustrating reality that makes paleontology hard work. Another brief example of non - science is the unpublished hypothesis. Wild, controversial hypotheses (often in the form of television "sound bites ") are hungrily accepted by the public (who cannot be blamed for not knowing better). For ideas to become accepted in the scientific community, ideas must be published (undergoing the process of peer review) to separate the good science from the bad science. Even still, some not -so -good science still leaks into publications, so scientists must think critically when reviewing other's work. Drawings of reconstructed dinosaurs and other depictions of them in the media are not pure science, but a blending of inference from scientific data with a dose of imagination and speculation. We don't know if some non -avian dinosaurs had feathers, but some artists do choose to illustrate them so. Science cannot say whether they did have feathers or not unless it has evidence. What is the "scientific method "? - http:// home. xnet.com /— blatura/skeptic.shtml #intro The scientific method is the best way yet discovered for winnowing the truth from lies and delusion. The simple version looks something like this: 1. Observe some aspect of the universe. 2. Invent a theory that is consistent with what you have observed. 3. Use the theory to make predictions. 4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations. 5. Modify the theory in the light of your results. 6. Go to step 3. This leaves out the co- operation between scientists in building theories, and the fact that it is impossible for every scientist to independently do every experiment to confirm every theory. Because life is short, scientists have to trust other scientists. So a scientist who claims to have done an experiment and obtained certain results will usually be believed, and most people will not bother to repeat the experiment. Experiments do get repeated as part of other experiments. Most scientific papers contain suggestions for other scientists to follow up. Usually the first step in doing this is to repeat the earlier work. So if a theory is the starting point for a significant amount of work then the initial experiments will get replicated a number of times. r = Some people talk about "Kuhnian paradigm shifts ". This refers to the observed pattern of the slow extension of scientific knowledge with occasional sudden revolutions. This does happen, but it still follows the steps above. Many philosophers of science would argue that there is no such thing as the scientific method. 1.2: What is the difference between a fact, a theory and a hypothesis? In popular usage, a theory is just a vague and fuzzy sort of fact. But to a scientist a theory is a conceptual framework that explains existing facts and predicts new ones. For instance, today I saw the Sun rise. This is a fact. This fact is explained by the theory that the earth is round and spins on its axis while orbiting the sun. This theory also explains other facts, such as the seasons and the phases of the moon, and allows me to make predictions about what will happen tomorrow. This means that in some ways the words fact and theory are interchangeable. The organization of the solar system, which I used as a simple example of a theory, is normally considered to be a fact that is explained by Newton's theory of gravity. And so on. A hypothesis is a tentative theory that has not yet been tested. Typically, a scientist devises a hypothesis and then sees if it "holds water" by testing it against available data. If the hypothesis does hold water, the scientist declares it to be a theory. An important characteristic of a scientific theory or hypotheis is that it be "falsifiable ". This means that there must be some experiment or possible discovery that could prove the theory untrue. For example, Einstein's theory of Relativity made predictions about the results of experiments. These experiments could have produced results that contradicted Einstein, so the theory was (and still is) falsifiable. On the other hand the theory that "there is an invisible snorg reading this over your shoulder" is not falsifiable. There is no experiment or'possible evidence that could prove that invisible / snorgs do not exist. So the Snorg Hypothesis is not scientific. On the other hand, the "Negative Snorg Hypothesis" (that they do not exist) is scientific. You can disprove it by catching one. Similar arguments apply to yetis, UFOs and the Loch Ness Monster. See also question 5.2 on the age of the Universe. 1.3: Can science ever really prove anything? Yes and no. It depends on what you mean by "prove ". For instance, there is little doubt that an object thrown into the air will come back down (ignoring spacecraft for the moment). One could make a scientific observation that "Things fall down ". I am about to throw a stone into the air. I use my observation of past events to predict that the stone will come back down. Wow - it did! But next time I throw a stone, it might not come down. It might hover, or go shooting off upwards. So not even this simple fact has been really proved. But you would have to be very perverse to claim that the next thrown stone will not come back down. So for ordinary everyday use, we can say that the theory is true. You can think of facts and theories (not just scientific ones, but ordinary everyday ones) as being on a scale of certainty. Up at the top end we have facts like "things fall down ". Down at the bottom we have "the Earth is flat ". In the middle we have "I will die of heart disease ". Some scientific theories are nearer the top than others, but none of them ever actually reach it. Skepticism is usually directed at claims that contradict facts and theories that are very near the top of the scale. If you want to discuss ideas nearer the middle of the scale (that is, things about which there is real debate in the scientific community) then you would be better off asking on the appropriate specialist group. 1.4: If scientific theories keep changing, where is the Truth? In 1666 Isaac Newton proposed his theory of gravitation. This was one of the greatest intellectual feats of all time. The theory explained all the observed facts, and made predictions that were later tested and found to be correct within the accuracy of the instruments being used. As far as anyone could see, Newton's theory was the Truth. During the nineteenth century, more accurate instruments were used to test Newton's theory, and found some slight discrepancies (for instance, the orbit of Mercury wasn't quite right). Albert Einstein proposed his theories of Relativity, which explained the newly observed facts and made more predictions. Those predictions have now been tested and found to be correct within the accuracy of the instruments being used. As far as anyone can see, Einstein's theory is the Truth. So how can the Truth change? Well the answer is that it hasn't. The Universe is still the same as it ever was, and Newton's theory is as true as it ever was. If you take a course in physics today, you will be taught Newton's Laws. They can be used to make predictions, and those predictions are still correct. Only if you are dealing with things that move close to the speed of light do you need to use Einstein's theories. If you are working at ordinary speeds outside of very strong gravitational fields and use Einstein, you will get (almost) exactly the same answer as you would with Newton. It just takes longer because using Einstein involves rather more math. One other note about truth: science does not make moral judgments. Anyone who tries to draw moral lessons from the laws of nature is on very dangerous ground. Evolution in particular seems to suffer from this. At one time or another it seems to have been used to justify Nazism, Communism, and every other -ism in between. These justifications are all completely bogus. Similarly, anyone who says "evolution theory is evil because it is used to support Communism" (or any other -ism) has also strayed from the path of Logic. 1.5: "Extraordinary evidence is needed for an extraordinary claim" An extraordinary claim is one that contradicts a fact that is close to the top of the certainty scale discussed above. So if you are trying to contradict such a fact, you had better have facts available that are even higher up the certainty scale. 1.6: What is Occam's Razor? Ockham's Razor ( "Occam" is a Latinised variant) is the principle proposed by William of Ockham in the fifteenth century that "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate ", which translates as "entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily ". Various other rephrasings have been incorrectly attributed to him. In more modern terms, if you have two theories which both explain the observed facts then you should use the simplest until more evidence comes along. See W.M. Thorburn, "The Myth of Occam's -Razor," Mind 27:345 -353 (1918) for a detailed study of what Ockham actually wrote and what others wrote after him. The reason behind the razor is that for any given set of facts there are an infinite number of theories that could explain them. For instance, if you have a graph with four points in a line then the simplest theory that explains them is a linear relationship, but you can draw an infinite number of different curves that all pass through the four points. There is no evidence that the straight line is the right one, but it is the simplest possible solution. So you might as well use it until someone comes along with a point off the straight line. Also, if you have a few thousand points on the line and someone suggests that there is a point that is off the line, it's a pretty fair bet that they are wrong. The following argument against Occam's Razor is sometime proposed: This simple hypothesis was shown to be false; the truth was more complicated. So Occam's Razor doesn't work. This is a strawman argument. The Razor doesn't tell us anything about the truth or otherwise of a hypothesis, but rather it tells us which one to test first. The simpler the hypothesis, the easier it is to shoot down. A related rule, which can be used to slice open conspiracy theories, is Hanlon's Razor: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity ". This definition comes from "The Jargon File" (edited by Eric Raymond), but one poster attributes it to Robert Heinlein, in a 1 941 story called "Logic of Empire ". 1.7: Galileo was persecuted, just like researchers of "X" today. People putting forward extraordinary claims often refer to Galileo as an example of a great genius being persecuted by the establishment for heretical theories. They claim that the scientific establishment is afraid of being proved wrong, and hence is trying to suppress the truth. This is a classic conspiracy theory. The Conspirators are all those scientists who have bothered to point out flaws in the claims put forward by the researchers. The usual rejoinder to someone who says "They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Galileo" is to say "But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown ". (From Carl Sagan, Broca's Brain, Coronet 1980, p79). Incidentally, stories about the persecution of Galileo Galilei and the ridicule Christopher Columbus had to endure should be taken with a grain of salt. During the early days of Galileo's theory church officials were interested and sometimes supportive, even though they had yet to find a way to incorporate it into theology. His main adversaries were established scientists - since he was unable to provide HARD proofs they didn't accept his model. Galileo became more agitated, declared them ignorant fools and publicly stated that his model was the correct one, thus coming in conflict with the church. When Columbus proposed to take the "Western Route" the spherical nature of the Earth was common knowledge, even though the diameter was still debatable. Columbus simply believed that the' Earth was a lot smaller, while his adversaries claimed that the Western Route would be too long. If America hadn't been in his way, he most likely would have failed. The myth that "he was laughed at for believing that the Earth was a globe" stems from an American author who intentionally adulterated history. 1.8: What is the "Experimenter effect "? It is unconscious bias introduced into an experiment by the experimenter. It can occur in one of two ways: Scientists doing experiments often have to look for small effects or differences between the things being experimented on. Experiments require many samples to be treated in exactly the same way in order to get consistent results. Note that neither of these sources of bias require f deliberate fraud. A classic example of the first kind of bias was the "N- ray ", discovered early this century. Detecting them required the investigator to look for very faint flashes of light on a scintillator. Many scientists reported detecting these rays. They were fooling themselves. For more details, see "The Mutations of Science" in Science Since Babylon by Derek Price (Yale Univ. Press). A classic example of the second kind of bias were the detailed investigations into the relationship between race and brain capacity in the last century. Skull capacity was measured by filling the empty skull with lead shot or mustard seed, and then measuring the volume of beans. A significant difference in the results could be obtained by ensuring that the filling in some skulls was better settled than others. For more details on this story, read Stephen Jay Gould's The Mismeasure of Man. For more detail see: T.X. Barber, Pitfalls of Human Research, 1976. Robert Rosenthal, Pygmalion in the Classroom. [These were recommended by a correspondent. Sorry I have no more information.]. 1.9: How much fraud is there in science? In its simplest form this question is unanswerable, since undetected fraud is by definition unmeasurable. Of course there are many known cases of fraud in science. Some use this to argue that all scientific findings (especially those they dislike) are worthless. This ignores the replication of results which is routinely undertaken by scientists. Any important result will be replicated many times by many different people. So an assertion that (for instance) scientists are lying about carbon -14 dating requires that a great many scientists are engaging in a conspiracy. See the previous question. In fact the existence of known and documented fraud is a good illustration of the self - correcting nature of science. It does not matter if a proportion of scientists are fraudsters because any important work they do will not be taken seriously without independent verification. Hence they must confine themselves to pedestrian work which no -one is much interested in, and obtain only the expected results. For anyone with the talent and ambition necessary to get a Ph.D this is not going to.be an enjoyable career. Also, most scientists are idealists. They perceive beauty in scientific truth and see its discovery as their vocation. Without this most would have gone into something more lucrative. These arguments suggest that undetected fraud in science. is both rare and unimportant. The above arguments are weaker in medical research, where companies frequently suppress or distort data in order to support their own products. Tobacco companies regularly produce reports "proving" that smoking is harmless, and drug companies have both faked and suppressed data related to the safety or effectiveness or major products. For more detail on more scientific frauds than you ever knew existed, see False Prophets by Alexander Koln. The standard textbook used in North America is Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in Science by William Broad and Nicholas Wade (Oxford 1982). There is a mailing list SCIFRAUD for the discussion of fraud and questionable behaviour in science. To subscribe, send "sub scifraud <Your Name >" to "listsery @uacsc2.albany.edu ". r; " =` 1.9.1: Did Mendel fudge his results? Gregor Mendel was a 19th Century monk who discovered the laws of inheritance (dominant and recessive genes etc.). More recent analysis of his results suggest that they are "too good to be true". Mendelian inheritance involves the random selection of possible traits from parents, with particular probabilities of particular traits. It seems from Mendel's raw data that chance played a smaller part in his experiments than it should. This does not imply fraud on the part of Mendel. First, the experiments were not "blind ". (see the questions about double blind experiments and the experimenter effect): Deciding whether a particular pea is wrinkled or not needs judgement; and this, could bias Mendel's results towards the expected. This is an example of the "experimenter effect '. Second, Mendel's Laws are only approximations. In fact it does turn out that in some cases inheritance is less random than,his Laws state. Third, Mendel might have neglected to publish the results of 'failed' experiments. It is interesting to note that all 7 of the characteristics measured in his published work are controlled by single genes. He did not report any experiments with more complicated characteristics. Mendel later started experiments with a more complex plant, hawkweed, could not interpret the results, got discouraged and abandoned plant science. See The Human Blueprint by Robert Shapiro (New York: St. Martin's, 1991) p. 17. 1.10: Are scientists wearing blinders? One of the commonest allegations against mainstream science is that its practitioners only see what they expect to see. Scientists often refuse to test fringe ideas because "science" tells them that this will be a waste of time and effort. Hence they miss ideas which could be very valuable. This is the "blinders" argument, by analogy with the leather shields placed over horses eyes so that they only see the road ahead. It is often put forward by proponents of new -age beliefs and alternative health. It is certainly true that ideas from outside the mainstream of science can have a hard time getting established. But on the other hand the opportunity to create a scientific revolution is a very tempting one: wealth, fame and Nobel prizes tend to follow from such work. So there will always be one or two scientists who are willing to look at anything new. If you have such an idea, remember that the burden of proof is on you. Posting an explanation of your idea to sci.skeptic is a good start. Many readers of this group are professional scientists. They will be willing to provide constructive criticism and pointers to relevant literature (along with the occasional raspberry). Listen to them. Then go away, read the articles, improve your theory in the light of your new knowledge, and then ask again. Starting a scientific revolution is a long, hard slog. Don't expect it to be easy. If it was, we would have them every week. Introduction to the Scientific Method The scientific method is the process by which scientists, collectively and over time, endeavor to construct an accurate (that is, reliable, consistent and non - arbitrary) representation of the world. Recognizing that personal and cultural beliefs influence both our perceptions and our interpretations of natural phenomena, we aim through the use of standard procedures and criteria to minimize those influences when developing a theory. As a famous scientist once said, "Smart people (like smart lawyers) can come up with very good explanations for mistaken p oints of view." In summary, the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of bias or prejudice in the experimenter when testing an hypothesis or a theory. I. The scientific method has six steps: 1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena. 2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation. 3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations. 4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments. 5. Modify theory in light of results. 6. Go back to number 3. If the experiments bear out the hypothesis it may come to be regarded as a theory or law of nature (more on the concepts of hypothesis, model, theory and law below). If the experiments do not bear out the hypothesis, it must be rejected or modified. What is key in the description of the scientific method just given is the predictive power (the ability to get more out of the theory than you Out in; see Barrow, 199 1) of the hypothesis or theory, as tested by experiment. It is often L' said in science that theories can never be proven, only disproved. There is always the possibility that a new observation or a new experiment will conflict with a long- standing theory. Il: Testing hypotheses As just stated, experimental tests may lead either to the confirmation of the hypothesis, or to the ruling out of the hypothesis. The scientific method requires that an hypothesis be ruled out or modified if its predictions are clearly and repeatedly incompatible with experimental tests. Further, no matter how elegant a theory is, its predictions must agree with experimental results if we are to believe that it is a valid description of nature. In physics, as in every experimental science, "experiment is supreme" and experimental verification of hypothetical predictions is absolutely necessary. Experiments may test the theory directly (for example, the observation of a new particle) or may test for consequences derived from the theory using mathematics and logic (the rate of a radioactive decay process requiring the existence of the new particle). Note that the necessity of experiment also implies that a theory must be testable. Theories which cannot be tested, because, for instance, they have no observable ramifications (such as, a particle whose characteristics make it unobservable), do not qualify as scientific theories. If the predictions of a long- standing theory are found to be in disagreement with new experimental results, the theory may be discarded as a description of reality, but it may continue to be applicable within a limited range of measurable parameters. For example, the laws of classical mechanics (Newton's Laws) are valid only when the velocities of interest are much smaller than the speed of light (that is, in algebraic form, when v/c « 1). Since this is the domain of a large portion of human experience, the laws of classical mechanics are widely, usefully and correctly applied in a large range of technological and scientific problems. Yet in nature we observe a domain in which v/c is not small. The motions of objects in this domain, as well as motion in the "classical" domain, are accurately described through the equations of Einstein's theory of relativity. We believe, due to experimental tests, that relativistic theory provides a more general, and therefore more accurate, description of the principles governing our universe, than the earlier "classical" theory. Further, we find that the relativistic equations reduce to the classical equations in the limit v/c « 1. Similarly, classical physics is valid only at distances much larger than atomic scales (x» 10 -8 m). A description which is valid at all length scales is given by the equations of quantum mechanics. We are all familiar with theories which had to be discarded in the face of experimental evidence: In the field of astronomy, the earth- centered .description of the planetary orbits was w overthron by the Copernican system, in which the sun was placed at the center of a series of concentric, circular planetary orbits. Later, this theory was modified, as measurements of the planets motions were found to be compatible with elliptical, not circular, orbits, and still later planetary motion was found to be derivable from Newton's laws. Errors in experiments have several sources. First, there is error intrinsic to instruments of measurement. Because this type of error has equal probability'of producing a measurement higher or lower numerically than the "true" value, it.is called random error. Second, there is non- random or systematic error, due to factors which bias the result in one direction. No measurement, and therefore no experiment, can be perfectly precise. At the same time, in science we have standard ways of estimating and in some cases reducing errors. Thus it is important to determine the accuracy of a particular measurement and, when stating quantitative results, to quote the measurement error. A measurement without a quoted error is meaningless. The comparison between experiment and theory is made within the context of experimental errors. Scientists ask, how many standard deviations are the results from the theoretical prediction? Have all sources of systematic and random errors been properly estimated? This is discussed in more detail in the appendix on Error Analysis and in Statistics Lab 1. III. Common Mistakes in Applying the Scientific Method As stated earlier, the scientific method attempts to minimize the influence of the scientist's bias on the outcome of an experiment. That is, when testing an hypothesis or a theory, the scientist may have a preference for one outcome or another, and it is important that this preference not bias the results or their interpretation. The most fundamental error is to mistake the hypothesis for an explanation of a phenomenon, without performing experimental tests. Sometimes "common sense" and "logic" tempt us into believing that no test is needed. There are numerous examples of this, dating from the Greek philosophers to the present day. Another common mistake is to ignore or rule out data which do not support the hypothesis. Ideally, the experimenter is open to the possibility that the hypothesis is correct or incorrect. Sometimes, however, a scientist may have a strong belief that the hypothesis is true (or false), or feels internal or external pressure to get a specific result. In that case,, there may be a psychological, tendency to find "something wrong ", such as systematic effects, with data which do not suppot the scientist's expectations, while data which do agree with those expectations may not be checked as carefully. The lesson is that all data must be handled in the same way. Another common mistake arises from the failure to estimate quantitatively systematic errors (and all errors). There are many examples•of discoveries which were missed by experimenters whose data contained a new phenomenon, but who explained it away as a systematic background. Conversely, there are many examples of alleged "new discoveries" which later proved to be due to systematic errors not accounted for by the "discoverers." In a field where there is active experimentation and open communication among members of the scientific community, the biases of individuals or groups may cancel out, because experimental tests are repeated by different scientists who may have different biases. In addition different types of experimental setups have different sources of systematic errors. Over a period 9 spanning a variety of experimental tests (usually at least several years), a consensus develops in the community as to which experimental results have stood the test of time. IV. Hypotheses, Models, Theories and Laws In physics and other science disciplines, the words "hypothesis," "model," , "theory" and "law" have different connotations in relation to the stage of acceptance or knowledge about a group of phenomena. An hypothesis is a limited statement regarding cause and effect in specific situations; it also refers to our state of knowledge before experimental work has been performed and perhaps even before new phenomena have been predicted. To take an example from daily life, suppose you discover that your car will not start. You may say, "My car does not start because the battery is low." This is your first hypothesis. You may then check whether the lights were left on, or. if the engine makes a particular sound when you turn the ignition key. You might actually check the voltage across the terminals of the battery. If you discover that the battery is not low, you might attempt another, hypothesis ( "The starter is broken''; "This is really not my car. ") The word model is reserved for situations when it is known that the hypothesis has at least limited validity. A often -cited example of this is the Bohr model of the atom, in which, in an analogy to the solar system, the electrons are described has moving in circular orbits around the nucleus. This is not an accurate depiction of what an atom "looks like," but the model succeeds in mathematically representing the energies (but not the correct angular momenta) of the quantum states of the electron in the simplest case, the hydrogen atom. Another example is Hook's Law (which should be called Hook's principle, or Hook's model), which states that the force exerted by a mass attached to a spring is proportional to the amount the spring is stretched. We know that this principle is only valid for small amounts of stretching. The "law" fails when the spring is stretched beyond its elastic limit (it can break). This principle, however, leads to the prediction of simple harmonic motion, and, as a model of the behavior of a spring, has been versatile in an extremely broad range of applications.. , A scientific theory or law represents an hypothesis, or a group of related hypotheses, which has been confirmed through repeated experimental tests. Theories in physics are.often formulated in terms of a few concepts and equations, which are identified with "laws of nature," suggesting their universal applicability. Accepted scientific theories and laws become part of our understanding of the universe and the basis for exploring less well- understood areas of knowledge. Theories are not easily discarded; new discoveries are first assumed to fit into the existing theoretical framework. It is only when, after repeated experimental tests, the new phenomenon cannot be accommodated that scientists seriously question the the and attempt to modify it. The validity that we attach to scientific theories as representing realities of the physical world is to be contrasted with the facile invalidation implied by the expression, "It's only a theory." For example, it is unlikely that a person will step off a tall building on the assumption that they will not fall, because "Gravity is only a theory." Changes in scientific thought and theories occur, of course, sometimes revolutionizing our view of the world (Kuhn, 1962). Again, the key force for change is the scientific method, and its emphasis on experiment. V. Are there circumstances in which the Scientific Method is not applicable? While the scientific method is necessary in developing scientific knowledge, it is also useful in everyday problem - solving. What do you do when your telephone doesn't work? Is the problem in the hand set, the cabling inside your house, the hookup outside, or in the workings of the phone company? The process you might go through to solve this problem could involve scientific thinking, and the results might contradict your initial expectations. 10 Like any good scientist, you may question the range of situations (outside of science) in which the scientific method may be applied. From what has been stated above, we determine that (;L the scientific method works best in situations where one can isolate the phenomenon of interest, by eliminating or accounting for extraneous factors, and where one can repeatedly test the system under study after making limited, controlled changes in it. There are, of course, circumstances when one cannot isolate the phenomena 'or when one cannot repeat the measurement over and over again. In such cases the results may depend in part on the history of a situation. This often occurs in social interactions between people. For example, when a lawyer makes arguments in front of a jury in court, she or he cannot try other approaches by repeating the trial over and over again in front of the same jury. In a new trial, the jury composition will be different. Even the same jury hearing a new set of arguments cannot be expected to forget what they heard before. VI. Conclusion The scientific method is intricately associated with science, the process of human inquiry that pervades the modern era on many levels. While the method appears simple and logical in description, there is perhaps no more complex question than that of knowing how we come to know things. In this introduction, we have emphasized that the scientific method distinguishes science from other forms of explanation because of its requirement of systematic experimentation. We have also tried to point out some of the criteria and practices developed by scientists to reduce the influence of individual or social bias on scientific findings. Further investigations of the scientific method and other aspects of scientific practice may be found in the references listed below. VII. References 1. Wilson, E. Bright. An Introduction to Scientific Research (McGraw -Hill, 1952). 2. Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1962). 3. Barrow, John. Theories of Everything (Oxford Univ. Press, 1991). Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories Lay people often misinterpret the language used by scientists. And for that reason, they sometimes draw the wrong conclusions as to what the scientific terms mean. Three such terms that are often used interchangeably are "scientific law," "hypothesis," and "theory." In layman's terms, if something is said to be "just a theory," it usually means that it is a mere guess, or is unproved. It might even lack credibility. But in scientific terms, a theory implies that something has been proven and is generally accepted as being true. Here is what each of these terms means to a scientist (taken from: http : / /wiIstar.net /theories.htm): Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and universal, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don't really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted. at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true. 12/9113 The American Association of Public Health Physi... - E Cigarette Reviewed - Quora 12� E Cigarette Reviewed The American Association of Public Health Physicians Supports E- Cigarettes Lindsay Fox Votes by David Rosen, Lisa Belle, Sandy Malnekoff Gertzfield, Ray Brown, and 6 more. The AAPHP has called on the FDA to investigate and support the electronic cigarette as a better alternative to nicotine intake for the general public. One of the most frustrating elements of the growing electronic cigarette industry is that it faces an uphill battle against the far- reaching tobacco empire. The pressure and sway that this industry holds is bolstered by their vast sums of money along with their historic ties with the government and major ecigarettereviewed .yuora.com / fhe- American- Association -of- Public - Health- Physicians- Supports -E- Cigarettes ?share = I 115 C' EuW13 The American Association of Public Health Physi... - E Cigarette Reviewed - Quora pharmaceutical companies. Much of the support for electronic cigarettes has come from the public who have advocated the use of these products through online sources such as blogs and internet forums. In fact, this word of mouth has done so well that some of the major E- cigarette companies have had commercials broadcast on prime time TV. One major organization that supports the use of electronic cigarettes is The American Association of Public Health Physicians. This organization is founded with the principle that it would represent the interests of physicians and those that represent physicians at a state level. The organization believes that electronic cigarettes offer a strongly positive alternative to traditional cigarettes and the FDA's stand on them should reflect that. The FDA's Stand The FDA essentially works to provide the most accurate information to the public regarding foods and drugs and how safe they may or may not be. Many consult the FDA every day for advice of this nature. However, the AAPHP believes that the FDA, for one reason or another, are being misleading with their statement to the public \✓ regarding electronic cigarettes. Currently, the FDA classifies them as a drug device combination - in other words, not a tobacco product. If the FDA were to follow the advice of studies ecigareticrevie %vcd.yuora.com / fhe- American- Associat ion -of- Public- Hcalth- Physicians- Supports -E- Cigarettes ?share = I 215 17/9/13 The American Association of Public Health Physi... - E Cigarette Reviewed - Quora that have already taken place that indicate electronic cigarettes being a safer option, they may be able to improve the health of many people. Similarly, the FDA are yet to conduct their own series of testing and show no immediate interest in doing so. According to the AAPHP, the risk of fatality from electronic cigarettes is roughly in line with cigarette replacement products such as patches - this alone seems to be in the public interest and could benefit many people looking for a way to come off traditional cigarette smoking. Confusion At best, this problem is related to a lot of confusion and misinformation regarding electronic cigarettes. Some may speculate that the FDA may feel pressured by outside sources not to rush into a decision to approve the safe use of electronic cigarettes as an alternative nicotine product. However, as of right now, it would seem that the FDA does not seem entirely convinced of the evidence that electronic cigarettes are a better option - whether this is due to a severe case of misinformation, or that the FDA simply chooses not to rely on studies that do not comply with their own testing standards. The question that the AAPHP would like answered is why the FDA is not showing a stronger interest in investigating the option of electronic cigarettes given that tobacco intake in its most conventional form is one of the biggest killers around. Potential ccigarettereviewcd .quora.com(rhe- American- Association -of- Public- Health- Physicians - Supports- E- Ggarettes ?share= I 3/5 12/9/13 The American Association of Public Health Physi... - ECigarette Reviewed - Quora The possibility of a regulated electronic cigarette market would make things a lot easier for both the FDA and the consumer. Many feel that part of the reason the FDA are so cautious is that the electronic cigarette is still a relatively new product. However, if the FDA were to promote the electronic cigarette as a safer alternative and began regulating the product so that all manufacturers had to comply with a certain safety standard, this would benefit the general public tenfold. While many electronic cigarette companies do offer high quality products, there is no pressure from the FDA to fully regulate the manufacturing process. If there was an emphasis on regulation, many might feel more comfortable using the product with the accompanying advocacy from the FDA. Resources • AAPHP E- cigarette Petitions to FDA — Actions Requested and justification • Electronic Cigarettes Hold Promise As Aid to Quitting • FDA - Electronic Cigarettes (e- Cigarettes) • CASAA - The Consumer Advocates for Smoke -free Alternatives Association 1 + comments Share (4) Promote 16 Oct 1789 Views ecigareucrevie- cd.quora.com/The- American- Association -of- Public - Health- Physicians - Supports -E- Cigarettes ?share = l q/j r ruyi is The American Association of Public Health Physi... - E Cigarette Reviewed - Quora Recommended Post From Other Blog E -cigs: Use of electronic cigarettes is associated with a significant reduction in cigarette consumption.... by Miles Dolphin About Privacy Terms eci gareticrevicwcd.quora.com/I'he- American- Association -of- Public - Health- Physicians - Supports -E- Cigarettes ?share= I 515 r s Technical Report July - August 2013 Peering through the mist: What does the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tell us about health risks? Igor Burstyn, PhD Department of Environmental and Occupational Health School of Public Health Drexel University 1505 Race St., Mail Stop #1034 Philadelphia, PA 19102 USA Tel: 215.762.2909 1 Fax: 215.762.8846 igor.burstyn @drexel.edu Abstract The aim of this paper is to review available data on chemistry of aerosols and liquids of electronic cigarettes and to make predictions about compliance with occupational exposure limits of personal exposures of vapers (e- cigarette users) to compounds found in the aerosol. Both peer- reviewed and "grey" literatures were accessed and more than 9000 observations of highly variable quality were extracted. Comparisons to the most universally recognized workplace exposure standards, Threshold Limit Values (TLVs), were conducted under worst case assumptions about both chemical content of aerosol and liquids as well as behavior of vapers. The calculations reveal that there was no evidence of potential for exposures of e- cigarette users to contaminants that are associated with risk to health at a level that would warrant attention if it were an involuntary workplace exposures by approaching half of TLV. The vast majority of predicted exposures are <<I of TLV. Predicted exposures to acrolein and formaldehyde are typically <5% TLV. Considering exposure to the aerosol. as a mixture of contaminants did not indicate that exceeding half of TLV for mixtures was plausible. Only exposures to the declared major ingredients -- propylene glycol and glycerin -- warrant attention because of precautionary nature of TLVs for exposures to hydrocarbons with no established toxicity. Comparing the exposure to nicotine to existing occupational exposure standards is not valid so long as nicotine - containing liquid is not mislabeled as nicotine -free. It must be noted that the quality of much of the data that was available for these assessment was poor, and so much can be done to improve certainty in this risk assessment. However, the existing research is of the quality that is comparable with most workplace assessments for novel technologies. In summary, an analysis of current state of knowledge about chemistry of liquids and aerosols associated with electronic cigarettes indicates that there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to contaminants of the aerosol that would warrant health concerns by the standards that are used to ensure safety of workplaces. However, the aerosol generated during vaping as a whole (contaminants plus declared ingredients), if it were an emission from industrial process, creates personal exposures that would justify surveillance of health among exposed persons in conjunction with investigation of means to keep health effects as low as reasonably achievable: Exposures of bystanders are likely to be orders of magnitude less, and thus pose no apparent concern. - Keywords: vaping, e- cigarettes, tobacco harm reduction, risk assessment, aerosol, occupational exposure limit 1 Technical Report July - August 2013 . t. Introduction Electronic cigarettes (also known as e- cigarettes) are generally recognized as a safer alternative to combusted tobacco products (reviewed in [1]), but there are conflicting claims about the degree to which these products warrant concern for the health of the vapers (e- cigarette users). A vaper inhales aerosol generated during heating of liquid contained in the e- cigarette. The technology and patterns of use are summarized by Etter [1], though there is doubt about how current, complete and accurate this information is. Rather conclusive evidence has been amassed to date on comparison of the chemistry of aerosol generated by electronic cigarettes to cigarette smoke [2 -8]. However, it is meaningful to consider the question of whether aerosol generated by electronic cigarettes would warrant health concerns on its own, in part because vapers will include persons who would not have been smokers and for whom the question of harm reduction from smoking is therefore not relevant, and perhaps more importantly, simply because there is value in minimizing the harm of those practicing harm reduction. One way of approaching risk evaluation in this setting is to rely on the practice, common in occupational hygiene, of relating the chemistry of industrial processes and the emissions they generate to the potential worst case of personal exposure and then drawing conclusions about whether there would be interventions in an occupational setting based on comparison to occupational exposure limits, which are designed to ensure safety of unintentionally exposed individuals. In that context, exposed individuals are assumed to be adults, and this assumption appears to be suitable for the intended consumers of electronic cigarettes. "Worst case" refers to the maximum personal exposure that can be achieved given what is known about the process that generates contaminated atmosphere (in the context of airborne exposure considered here) and the pattern of interaction with the contaminated atmosphere. It must be noted that harm reduction notions are embedded in this approach since it recognizes that while elimination of the exposure may be both impossible and undesirable, there nonetheless exists a level of exposure that is associated with negligible risks. To date, a comprehensive review of the chemistry of electronic cigarettes and the aerosols they generate has not been conducted, depriving the public of the important element of a risk - assessment process that is mandatory for environmental and occupational health policy making. The present work considers both the contaminants present in liquids and aerosols as well as the declared ingredients in the liquids. The distinction between exposure to declared ingredients and contaminants of a consumer product is important in the context of comparison to occupational or environmental exposure standards. Occupational exposure limits are developed for unintentional exposures that a person does not elect to experience. For example, being a bread baker is a choice that does not involve election to be exposed to substances that cause asthma that are part of the flour dust (most commonly, wheat antigens and fungal enzymes). Therefore, suitable occupational exposure limits are created to attempt to protect individuals from such risk on the job, with no presumption of "assumed risk" inherent in the occupation. Likewise, special regulations are in effect to protect persons from unintentional exposure to nicotine in workplaces (http: / /www.cdc.gov /niosh /docs /81- 123 /pdfs /0446.pdf; accessed July 12, 2013), because in environments where such exposures are possible, it is reasonable to protect individuals who do not wish to experience its effects. In other words, occupational exposure limits are based on protecting people from involuntary and unwanted exposures, and thus can be seen as appropriately more stringent than the standards that might be used for hazards that people intentionally choose to accept. By contrast, a person who elects to lawfully consume a substance is subject to different risk tolerance, as is demonstrated in the case of nicotine by the fact that legally sold cigarettes deliver doses of nicotine that exceed 4 occupational exposure limits[9]: daily intake of 20 mg of nicotine, assuming nearly 100% absorption in the lungs and Technical Report July - August 2013 inhalation of 4 m3 of air, corresponds to roughly 10 times the occupational exposure limit of 0.5 mg /m3 atmosphere over 8 hours[10]. Thus, whereas there is a clear case for applicability of occupational exposure limits to contaminants in a consumer product (e.g. aerosol of electronic cigarettes), there is no corresponding case for applying occupational exposure limits to declared ingredients desired by the consumer in a lawful product (e.g. nicotine in.the aerosol of an electron ic'cigarette). Clearly, some limits must be set for voluntary exposure to compounds that are known to be a danger at plausible doses (e.g. limits on blood alcohol level while driving), but the regulatory framework should reflect Whether the dosage is intentionally determined and whether the risk is assumed by the consumer. In the case of nicotine in electronic cigarettes, if the main reason the products are consumed is as an alternative source of nicotine compared to smoking, then the only relevant question is whether undesirable exposures that accompany nicotine present health risks, and the analogy with occupational exposures holds. In such cases it appears permissible to allow at least as much exposure to nicotine as from smoking before admitting to existence of new risk. It is expected that nicotine dosage will not increase in switching from smoking to electronic cigarettes because there is good evidence that consumers adjust consumption to obtain their desired or usual dose of nicotine[11]. The situation is different for the vapers who want to use electronic cigarettes without nicotine and who would otherwise not have consumed nicotine. For these individuals, it is defensible to consider total exposure, including that from any nicotine contamination, in comparison to occupational exposure limits. In consideration of vapers who would never have smoked or would have quit entirely, it must be remembered that the exposure is still voluntary and intentional, and comparison to occupational exposure limits is legitimate only for those compounds that the consumer does not elect to inhale. The specific aims of this review were to: 1. Synthesize evidence on the chemistry of liquids and aerosols of electronic cigarettes, with particular emphasis on the contaminants. 2. Evaluate the quality of research on the chemistry of liquids and aerosols produced by electronic cigarettes. 3. Estimate potential exposures from aerosols produced by electronic cigarettes and compare those potential exposures to occupational exposure standards. Methods Literature search Articles published in peer- reviewed journals were retrieved from PubMed ( http: / /www.ncbi.nim.nih.gov /pubmed /) using combinations of the following keywords: "electronic cigarettes ", "e- cigarettes ", "smoking alternatives ", "chemicals ", "risks ", "electronic cigarette vapor ", "aerosol ", "ingredients ", "e- cigarette liquid ", "e -cig composition ", "e- cig chemicals ", "e -cig chemical composition ", "e -juice electronic cigarette ", "electronic cigarette gas ", "electronic cigars ". In addition, references of the retrieved articles were examined to identify further relevant articles, with particular attention paid to non -peer reviewed reports and conference presentations. Unpublished results obtained through personal communications were also reviewed. The Consumer Advocates for Smoke -free Alternatives Association (CASAA) was asked to review the retrieved bibliography to identify any reports or articles that were missed. The papers and reports were retained for analysis if they reported on the chemistry of e- cigarette liquids or aerosols. No explicit quality control criteria were applied in selection of literature for examination, except that secondary reporting of analytical results was not used. Where substantial methodological problems that precluded interpretation of analytical results were noted, these are described below. For each article that contained relevant analytical results, r the compounds quantified, limits of detection, and analytical results were summarized in a spreadsheet. Wherever possible, individual analytical results (rather than averages) were recorded (see electronic Appendix A: 3 Technical Report July - August 2013 67) littps: ,'dl.ih•opboxuscrcontcnt coin; a /4285761 CASA!VeAppen(fixA xlsx). Data contained in Appendix A is not fully summarized in the current report but can be used to investigate a variety of specific questions that may interest the reader. Each entry in Appendix A is identified by a Reference Manage /D that is linked to source materials in a list in Appendix B (linked via Ref/D: htt ps:/! dl. dropboxusercont ent .com /tv4285761 /CASAAVAppendixB rt. and attached electronic copies of all original materials (Biobliography. zip: https:// dl. dropboxusercontent . con Vu /4285761;CASA A/bibliography zip). Comparison of observed concentrations in aerosol to occupational exposure limits For articles that reported mass or concentration of specific compounds in the aerosol (generated by smoking machines or from volunteer vapers), measurements of compounds were converted to concentrations in the "personal breathing zone",' which can be compared to occupational exposure limits (OELs). The 2013 Threshold Limit Values (TLVs)[10] were used as OELs because they are the most up to date and are, most widely recognized internationally when local jurisdictions do'not establish their own regulations (see http: / /wwlv.ilo.oi -u osliene /part- iv'occupitioiial- ilyLieiie /item /575; accessed July 3, 2013). Whenever there was an uncertainty in how to perform the calculation, a "worst case" scenario was used, as is the standard practice in occupational hygiene, where the initial aim is to recognize potential for hazardous exposures and to err on the side of caution. The following assumptions were made to enable the calculations that approximate the worst -case personal exposure of a vaper (Equation 1): 1. Air the vaper breathes consists of a small volume of aerosol. generated by e- cigarettes that contains a specific chemical plus pristine air; 2. The volume of aerosols inhaled from e- cigarettes is negligible compared to total volume of air inhaled; 3. The period of exposure to the aerosol considered was normalized to 8 hours, for comparability to the standard working shift for which TLVs were developed (this does not mean only 8 hours worth of vaping was considered (see point 4) but rather that amount of breathing used to dilute the day's worth of vaping exposure was 8 hours); 4. Consumption of 150 puffs in 8 hours (an upper estimate based on a rough estimate of 150'puffs by a typical vaper in a day[1]) was assumed to be conservative; 5. Breathing rate is 8 liters per minute [12,13]; 6. Each puff contains the same quantity of compounds studied. [mg /m3] = mg /puff x puffs /(8 hr day) x 1 /(m3 air inhaled in 8 hr) Eq. 1 The only exception to this methodology was when assessing a study of aerosol emitted by 5 vapers in a 60 m3 room over 5 hours that seemed to be a sufficient approximation of worst -case "bystander" exposure[6]. All calculated concentrations were expressed as the most stringent (lowest) TLV for a specific compound (i.e. assuming the most toxic form if analytical report is ambiguous) and expressed as "percent of TLV ". Considering that all the above calculations are approximate and reflecting that exposures in occupational and general environment can easily vary by a factor of 10 around the mean, we added a 10 -fold safety factor to the "percent of TLV" calculation. Details of all calculations are provided in an Excel spreadsheet (see electronic Appendix C: https:'idLdrupboxusercontent comiui {?4i7G1 /CASAI\'et \ppendixC xlsx)., No systematic attempt was made to convert the content of the studied liquids into potential exposures because sufficient information was available on the chemistry of aerosols to use those studies rather than making the necessary a Atmosphere that contains air inhaled by a person 4 Technical Report July - August 2013 ( simplifying assumptions to do the conversion. However, where such calculations were performed in the original research, the following approach as used: under the (probably false — see the literature on formation of carbonyl compounds below) assumption of no chemical reaction to generate novel ingredients, composition of liquids can be used to estimate potential for exposure if it can be established how much volume of liquid is consumed in given 8 hours, following an algorithm analogous to the one described above for the aerosols (Equation 2): [mg 1m3] = mg/(mL liquid) x (mL liquid) /puff x puffs /(8 hr day) x 1 /(m3 air inhaled in 8 hr) Eq. 2 Comparison to cigarette smoke was not performed here because the fact that e- cigarette aerosol is at least orders of magnitude less contaminated by toxic compounds is uncontroversial [2 -8]. Results and discussion General comments on methods In excess of 9,000 determinations of single chemicals (and rarely, mixtures) were reported in reviewed articles and reports, typically with multiple compounds per electronic cigarette tested [2- 8,14 -42]. Although the quality of reports is highly variable, if one assumes that each report contains some information, this asserts that quite a bit is known about composition of e- cigarette liquids and aerosols. The only report that was excluded from consideration was work of McAuley et al.[23] because of clear evidence of cross - contamination — admitted to by the authors — with cigarette smoke and, possibly, reagents. The results pertaining to non - detection of tobacco - specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) are potentially trustworthy, but those related to PAH are not since it is incredible that cigarette smoke would contain fewer polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH; arising in incomplete combustion of organic matter) than aerosol of e- cigarettes that do not burn organic matter [23]. In fairness to the authors of that study, similar problems may have occurred in other studies but were simply not reported, but it is impossible to include a paper in a review once it is known for certain that its quantitative results are not trustworthy. When in doubt, we erred on the side of trusting that proper quality controls were in place, a practice that is likely to increase appearance of atypical or erroneous results in this review. From this perspective, assessment of concordance among independent reports gains higher importance than usual since it is unlikely that two experiments would be flawed in the same exact manner (though of course this cannot be assured). It was judged that the simplest form of publication bias — disappearance of an entire formal study from the available literature — was unlikely given the exhaustive search strategy and the contested nature of the research question. It is clearly the case that only a portion of all industry technical reports were available for public access; so it is possible that those with more problematic results were systematically suppressed, though there is no evidence to support this speculation. No formal attempt was made to ascertain publication bias in situ though it is apparent that anomalous results do gain prominence in typical reviews of the literature: diethylene glycol[43,44] detected at non - dangerous levels (see details below) in one test of 18 of early - technology products by FDA[22] and one outlier in measurement of formaldehyde content of exhaled air [4] and aldehydes in aerosol generated from one e- cigarette in Japan [37]. It must be emphasized that the alarmist report of aldehydes in experiments presented in [37] is based on the concentration in generated aerosol rather than air inhaled by the vaper over prolonged period of time (since vapers do not inhale only aerosol). Thus, results reported in [37] cannot be the basis of any claims about health risk, a fallacy committed both by the authors themselves and commentators on this work [44]. 5 Technical Report July - August 2013 4 It was also unclear from 37 what the volume of aerosol sampled was — a critical item for extrapolating to personal exposure and a common point of ambiguity in the published reports. However, in a personal exchange with the authors / of [37][July 11, 2013], it was clarified that the sampling pump drew air at 500 mL/min through e- cigarette for 10 min, allowing more appropriate calculations for estimation of health risk that are presented below. Such misleading reporting is common in the field that confuses concentration in the aerosol (typically measured directly) with concentration in the air inhaled by the vaper (never determined directly and currently requiring additional assumptions and modeling). This is important because the volume of aerosol inhaled (maximum —8 L /day) is negligible compared to the volume of air inhaled daily (8L /min); this point is illustrated in the Figure. A similar but more extreme consideration applies to the exposure of bystanders which is almost certainly several orders of magnitude lower than the exposure of vapers. In part this is due to the absorption, rather than exhalation, of a portion of the aerosol by the vapers: there is no equivalent to the "side- stream" component of exposure to conventional cigarettes, so all of the exposure to bystanders results from exhalation. Furthermore, any environmental contamination that results from exhalation of aerosol by vaper will be diluted into the air prior to entering a bystander's personal breathing zone. Lastly, the number of puffs that affects exposure to bystander is likely to be much smaller than that of a vaper unless we are to assume that vaper and bystander are inseparable. It is unhelpful to report results in cigarette - equivalents, as in [42], because this does not enable one to estimate exposures of vapers . Moreover, there is no value in comparison of the content of e- cigarette aerosol to cigarette smoke when the two products produce emissions that are orders of magnitude apart. To be useful for risk assessment, the results on the chemistry of the aerosols and liquids must be reported in a form that enables the calculations in Equations 1 and 2. It must be also be noted that typical investigations consisted of qualitative and quantitative phases such that quantitative data is available mostly on compounds that passed the qualitative screen. This biased all reports on concentration of compounds towards both higher levels and chemicals which a particular lab was most adept at analyzing. Declared Ingredients: comparison to occupational exposure limits Propylene glycol and glycerin have default or precautionary TLV of 10 mg/m3 over 8 hours set for all.organic mists with no specific exposure limits or identified toxicity ( http:// www .osha.eov /dts /chemicalsampling /data /CH 243600 html; accessed July 5, 2013). These interim TLVs tend to err on the side of being too high and are typically lowered if evidence of harm to health accumulates. For example, in a study that related exposure of theatrical fogs (containing propylene glycol) to respiratory symptoms [45], "mean personal inhalable aerosol concentrations were 0.70 mg /m3 (range 0.02 to 4.1)" [46]. The only available estimate of propylene concentration of propylene glycol in the aerosol indicates personal exposure on the order of 3 -4 mg /m3 in the personal breathing zone over 8 hours (under the assumptions we made for all other comparisons to TLVs) [2]. The latest (2006) review of risks of occupational exposure to propylene glycol performed by the Health Council of the Netherlands (known for OELs that are the most protective that evidence supports and based exclusively on scientific considerations rather than also accounting for feasibility as is the case for the TLVs) recommended exposure limit of 50 mg /m3 over 8 hours; concern over short -term respiratory effects was noted [http: / /www.gezondheidsraad nl /sites /default /files /200702OSH pdf; accessed July 29, 20131. Assuming extreme consumption of the liquid per day via vaping (5 to 25 ml /day and 50 -95% propylene glycol in the liquid )b, levels of propylene glycol in inhaled air can reach 1 -6 mg /m3. It has been suggested that propylene glycol is b This estimate of consumption was derived from informal reports from vaping community; 5 ml /day was identified as a high but not -are quantity of consumption and 25 ml /day was the high end of claimed use, though some skepticism was expressed about 6 Technical Report July - August 2013 very rapidly absorbed during inhalation [4,6] making the calculation under worst case scenario of all propylene glycol becoming available for inhalation credible. It must also be noted that when consuming low- nicotine or nicotine -free liquids, the chance to consume larger volumes of liquid increases (large volumes are needed to reach the target dose or there is no nicotine feedback), leading to the upper end of propylene glycol and glycerin exposure. Thus, estimated levels of exposure to propylene glycol and glycerin are close enough to TLV to warrant concern. Nicotine is present in most liquids and has TLV of 0.5 mg/m3 for average exposure intensity over 8 hours. If approximately 4 m3 of air is inhaled in 8 hours, the consumption of 2 mg nicotine from e- cigarettes in 8 hours would place the vaper at the occupational exposure limit. For a liquid that contains 18 mg nicotine /ml, TLV would be reached upon vaping — 0.1 -0.2 ml of liquid in a day, and so is achieved for most anyone vaping nicotine - containing e- cigarettes[1]. Results presented in [24] on 16 e- cigarettes also argue in favor of exceedance of TLV from most any nicotine - containing e- cigarette, as they predict >2mg of nicotine released to aerosol in 150 puffs (daily consumption figure adopted in this report). But as noted above, since delivery of nicotine is the purpose of nicotine- containing e- cigarettes, the comparison to limits on unintended, unwanted exposures does not suggest a problem and serves merely. to offer complete context. If nicotine is present but the liquid is labeled as zero- nicotine [24,43], it could be treated as a contaminant, with the vaper not intending to consume nicotine and the TLV, which would be most likely exceeded, is relevant. However, when nicotine content is disclosed, even if inaccurately, then comparison to TLV is not valid. Accuracy in nicotine content is a concern with respect to truth in advertising rather than unintentional exposure, due to self - regulation of consumption by persons who use e- cigarettes as a source of nicotine. Overall, the declared ingredients in the liquid would warrant a concern by standards used in occupational hygiene, provided that comparison to occupational exposure limits is valid, as discussed in the introduction. However, this is not to say that the exposure is affirmatively believed to be harmful;.as noted, the TLVs for propylene glycol.and glycerin mists is based on uncertainty rather than knowledge. These TLVs are not derived from knowledge of toxicity of propylene glycol and glycerin mists, but merely apply to any compound of no known toxicity present in workplace atmosphere. This aspect of the exposure from e- cigarettes simply has little precedent (but see study of theatrical fogs below). Therefore, the exposure will provide the first substantial collection evidence about the effects, which calls for monitoring of both exposure levels and outcomes, even though there are currently no grounds to be concerned about the immediate or chronic health effects of the exposure. The argument about nicotine is presented here for the sake of completeness and consistency of comparison to TLVs, but in itself does not affect the conclusions of this analysis because it should not be modeled as if it were a contaminant when declared as an ingredient in the liquid. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) were quantified in several reports in aerosols [5,6,42] and liquids [7,18,41]. These compounds include well -known carcinogens, the levels of which are not subject to TLV but are instead to be kept "as low as reasonably achievable" (the so called ALARA principle)[10]. For PAH, only non - carcinogenic pyrene that is abundant in the general environment was detected at 36 ng /cartridge in 5 samples of liquid [7]; PAHs were not detected in most of the analyses of aerosols, except for chrysene in the analysis of the aerosol of one e- cigarette[42]. Tobacco - Specific Nitrosamines nwhether the latter quantity was truly possible. High - quality formal studies to verify these figures do not yet exist but they are -)nsistent with report of Etter (2012). 7 Technical Report July - August 2013 "3� The same risk assessment considerations that exist for PAH also hold for carcinogenic tobacco - specific nitrosamines (TSNAs)[47] for which no occupational exposure limits exist because (a) these exposures do not appear to occur in occupational settings often enough to warrant development of TLVs, and (b) it is currently accepted in establishing TLVs that carcinogens do not have minimal thresholds of toxicity. As expected because the TSNAs are contaminants of nicotine from tobacco leaf, there is also evidence of association between nicotine content of the liquid and TSNA concentrations, with reported concentrations <5 ng /cartridge tested [7]. Smaller studies of TSNA content in liquids are variable, with some not reporting any detectable levels [17,32,34] and others clearly identifying these compounds in the liquids when controlling for background contamination (n= 9)[22]. Analyses of aerosols indicate that TSNAs are present in amounts that can results in doses of <ng/day[5,32] to Vg /day [8] (assuming 150 puffs /day) (see also [42]). The most comprehensive survey of TSNA content of 105 samples of liquids from 11 manufactures indicates that almost all tested liquids ( >90 %) contained TSNAs in Vg /L quantities [35]. This is roughly equivalent to 1 /1000 of the concentration of TSNAs in modern smokeless tobacco products (like snus), which are in the ppm range [47]. The TSNA concentration of the liquids is orders of magnitude less than smokeless tobacco products, though the actual dosage from e- cigarettes vs. smokeless tobacco remains to be clearly understood. For example, 10 Vg /L (0.01 ppm) of total TSNA in liquid[35] can translate to a daily dose of 0.000025 - 0.00005 µg from vaping (worst case assumption of 5 ml /day); if 15 g of snus is consumed a day [48] with 1 ppm of TSNAs [47] and half of it were absorbed, then the daily dose is estimated to be 0.008 µg, which is 160 -320 times that due to the worst case of exposure from vaping. Various assumptions about absorption of TSNAs alter the result of this calculation by a factor that is dwarfed in magnitude compared to that arising from differences considered above. This is reassuring because smokeless tobacco products, such as snus, pose negligible cancer risk[49], certainly orders of magnitude smaller than smoking (if one considers the chemistry of the products alone). In general, it appears that the cautious approach in face of variability and paucity of data is to seek better understanding of predictors of presence of TSNA in liquids and aerosols so that measures for minimizing exposure to TSNAs from aerosols can be devised. This can include considering better control by manufactures of the nicotine. Volatile Organic Compounds Total volatile organic compounds (VOC) were determined in aerosol to be non- detectable[3] except in one sample that appeared to barely exceed the background concentration of 1 mg /m3 by 0.73 mg /m3[6]. These results are corroborated by analyses of liquids[18] and most likely testify to insensitivity of employed analytic methods for total VOC for characterizing aerosol generated by e- cigarettes, because there is ample evidence that specific VOC are present in the liquids and aerosols.` Information on specific commonly detected VOC in the aerosol is given in Table la. It must be observed that these reported concentrations are for analyses that first observed qualitative evidence of the presence of a given VOC and thus represent worst case scenarios of exposure when VOC is present (i.e. zero exposures are missing from the overall summary of worst case exposures presented here). For most VOC and aldehydes, one can predict the concentration in air inhaled by a vaper to be «1% of TLV. The only exceptions to this generalization are: (a) acrolein: ~1% of TLV (average of 12 measurements) and measurements at a mean of 2% of TLV ( average of 150 measurements) [39,40] and (b) formaldehyde: between 0 and 3% of TLV based on 18 tests (average of 12 measurements at 2% of TLV, the most reliable test) and an average of 150 results at 4% of TLV [39,40]. The term "VOC" loosely groups together all organic compounds present in aerosol and because the declared ingredients of aerosol are organic compounds, it follows that "VOC are present" 8 Technical Report July - August 2013 0") Levels of acrolein in exhaled aerosol reported in [6] were below 0.0016 mg/m3 and correspond to predicted exposure of <1% of TLV (Table 2). It must re- emphasized that all calculations based on one electronic cigarette analyzed in [37] are best treated as qualitative in nature (i.e. indicating presence of a compound without any particular meaning attached to the reported level with respect to typical levels) due to great uncertainty about whether the manner in which the e- cigarette was operated could have resulted in overheating that led to generation of acrolein in the aerosol. In fact, a presentation made by the author of [37] clearly stated that the "atomizer, generating high concentration carbonyls, had been burned black" [39,40]. In unpublished work,[39] there are individual values of formaldehyde, acrolein and glyoxal that approach TLV, but it is uncertain how typical these are because there is reason to believe the liquid was overheated; considerable variability among brands of electronic, cigarettes was also noted. Formaldehyde and other aldehydes, but not acrolein, were detected in the analysis one e- cigarette [42]. The overwhelming majority of the exposure to specific VOC that are predicted to result from inhalation of the aerosols lie far below action level of 50% of TLV at which exposure has to be mitigated'according to current code of best practice in occupational hygiene[50]. Finding of an unusually high level of formaldehyde by Schripp et al. [4] — 0.5 ppm predicted vs. 15- minute TLV of 0.3 ppm (not given in Table 2) - is clearly attributable to endogenous production of formaldehyde by the volunteer smoker who was consuming e- cigarettes in the experimental chamber, since there was evidence of build -up of formaldehyde prior to vaping and liquids used in the experiments did not generate aerosol with detectable formaldehyde. This places generalizability of other findings from [4] in doubt, especially given that the only other study of exhaled air by vapers who were not current smokers reports much lower concentrations for the same compounds [6] (Table 2). It should be noted that the report by Romagna et al. [6] employed more robust methodology, using 5 volunteer vapers (no smokers) over an extended period of time. Except for benzene, acetic acid and isoprene, all calculated concentrations for detected VOC were much below 1% of TLV in exhaled air [6]. In summary, these results do not indicate that VOC 4 ~J1 g enerated by vaping are of concern by standards used in occupational hygiene. Diethylene glycol and ethylene glycol became a concern following the report of their detection by FDA[43], but these compounds are not detected in the majority of tests performed to date [3,14,16,18,22]. Ten batches of the liquid tested by their manufacture did not report any diethylene glycol above 0.05% of the liquid [41]. Methods used to detect diethylene glycol appear to be adequate to be informative and capable of detecting the compound in quantities «1% of TLV[14,16,22]. Comparison to TLV is based on a worst case calculation analogous to the one performed for propylene glycol. For diethylene glycol, TLV of 10 mg /m3 is applicable (as in the case of all aerosols with no know toxicity by inhalation), and there is a recent review of regulations of this compound conducted for the Dutch government by the Health Council of the Netherlands (jurisdiction with some of the most strict occupational exposure limits) that recommended OEL of 70 mg /m3 and noted lack of evidence for toxicity following inhalation [http: / /www.gezondheidsraad.nl /sites /default /files /2007030SH odf; accessed July 29; 2013]. In conclusion, even the quantities detected in the single FDA result were of little concern, amounting to less than 1% of TLV. Inorganic compounds Special attention has to be paid to the chemical form of compounds when there is detection of metals and other elements by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP- MS)[8,25]. Because the parent molecule that occurs in the aerosol is destroyed in such analysis, the results can be alarmist and not interpretable for risk assessment. For example, the presence of sodium (4.18 µg /10 puffs)[25] does not mean that highly reactive and toxic sodium metal is in the aerosol, which would be impossible given its reactivity, but most likely means the presence of the ubiquitous compound that contains sodium, dissolved table salt (NaCI). If so, the corresponding daily dose of NaCl that arises from 9 Technical Report July - August 2013 0161'4 these concentrations from 150 puffs is about 10,000 times lower than allowable daily intake according to CDC (http: / /www.cdc.gov /features /dssadium /; accessed July 4, 2013). Likewise, a result for presence of silica is meaningless for health assessment unless the crystalline form of SiO2 is known to be present. When such ambiguity exists, a TLV equivalence calculation was not performed. We compared concentrations to TLVs when it was even remotely plausible that parent molecules were present in the aqueous solution. However, even these are to be given credence only in an extremely pessimistic analyst, and further investigation by more appropriate analytical methods could clarify exactly what compounds are present, but is not a priority for risk assessment. It should also be noted that one study that attempted to quantify metals in the liquid found none above 0.1 -0.2 ppm levels [7] or above unspecified threshold [18]. Table 1b indicates that most metals that were detected were present at <1% of TLV even if we assume that the analytical results imply the presence of the most hazardous molecules containing these elements that can occur in aqueous solution. For example, when elemental chromium was measured, it is compared to TLV for.insoluble chromium IV that has the lowest TLV of all chromium compounds. Analyses of metals given in [42] are not summarized here because of difficulty with translating reported units into meaningful terms for comparison with the TLV, but only mercury (again with no informationon parent organic compound) was detected in trace quantities, but arsenic, beryllium, chromium, cadmium, lead and nickel were not. Taken as the whole, it can be inferred that there is no evidence of contamination of the aerosol with metals that warrants a health concern. Consideration of exposure to a mixture of contaminants All calculations conducted so far assumed only one contaminant present in clean air at a time. What are the implications of small quantities of various compounds with different toxicities entering the personal breathing zone at the same time? For evaluation of compliance with exposure limits for mixtures, Equation 3 is used: OELmixture ! 1(Ci1TLVi), Eq. 3 where Ci is the concentration of the i {h compound (i= 1,...,n, where n >1 is the number of ingredients present in a mixture) in the contaminated air and TLV, is the TLV for the eh compound in the contaminated air; if OELmixture > 1, then there is evidence of the mixture exceeding TLV. Irg The examined reports detected no more than 5 -10 compounds in the. aerosol, and the above calculation does not place any of them out of compliance with TLV for mixture. Let us imagine that 50 compounds with TI-Vs were detected. Given that the aerosol tends to contain various compounds at levels, on average, of no more than 0.5% of TLV (Table, I), such a mixture with 50 ingredients would be at 25% of TLV, a level that is below that which warrants a concern, since the "action level" for implementation of controls is traditionally set at 50% of TLV to ensure that the majority of persons exposed have personal exposure below mandated limit [50]. Pellerino et al.[2] reached conclusions similar to this review based on their single experiment: contaminants in the liquids that warrant health concerns were present in concentrations that were less than 0.1% of that allowed by law in the European Union. Of course, if the levels of the declared ingredients (propylene glycol, glycerin, and nicotine) are considered, the action level would be met, since those ingredients are present in the concentrations that are near the action level. There are no known synergistic actions of the examined mixtures, so Equation 3 is therefore applicable. - Moreover, there is currently no reason to suspect that the trace amounts of the contaminants will react to create compounds that would be of concern. 10 Technical Report Conclusions July - August 2013 By the standards of occupational hygiene, current data do not indicate that exposures to vapers from contaminants in electronic cigarettes warrant a concern. There are no known toxicological synergies among compounds in the aerosol, and mixture of the contaminants does not pose a risk to health. However, exposure of vapers to propylene glycol and glycerin reaches the levels at which, if one were considering the exposure in connection with a workplace setting, it would be prudent to scrutinize the health of exposed individuals and examine how exposures could be reduced. This is the basis for the recommendation to monitor levels and effects of prolonged exposure to propylene glycol and glycerin that comprise the bulk of emissions from electronic cigarettes other than nicotine and water vapor. From this perspective, and taking the analogy of work on theatrical fogs [45,46], it can be speculated that respiratory functions and symptoms (but not cancer of respiratory tract or non - malignant respiratory disease) of the vaper, is of primary interest. Monitoring upper airway irritation of vapers and experiences of unpleasant smell would also provide early warning of exposure to compounds like acrolein because of known immediate effects of elevated exposures (http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofil6s/t6l24-c3.pdf accessed July 11, 2013). However, it is questionable how much concern should be associated with observed concentrations of acrolein and formaldehyde in the aerosol. Given highly variable assessments, closer scrutiny is'probably warranted to understand sources of this variability, although there is no need at present to be alarmed about exceeding even the occupational exposure limits, since occurrence of occasional high values is accounted for in established TLVs. An important clue towards a productive direction for such work is the results reported in [39,40] that convincingly demonstrate how heating the liquid to high temperatures generates compounds like acrolein and formaldehyde in the aerosol. A better understanding about the sources of TSNA in the aerosol may be of some interest as well, but all results to date consistently indicate quantities that are of no more concern than TSNA in smokeless tobacco products. Exposures to nicotine from electronic cigarettes is not expected to exceed that from smoking due toself- titration[11]; it is only a concern when a vaper does not intend to consume nicotine, a situation that can arise from incorrect labeling of liquids[24,43]. The cautions about propylene glycol and glycerin apply only to the exposure experienced by the vapers themselves. Exposure of bystanders to the listed ingredients, let alone the contaminants, does not warrant a concern as the exposure is likely to be orders of magnitude lower than exposure experienced by vapers. Further research employing realistic conditions could help quantify the quantity of exhaled aerosol and its behavior in the environment under realistic worst -case scenarios (i.e., not small sealed chambers), but this is not a priority since the exposure experienced by bystanders is clearly very low compared to the exposure of vapers, and thus there is no reason to expect it would have any health effects. The key to making the best possible effort to ensure that hazardous exposures from contaminants do not occur is ongoing monitoring of actual exposures and estimation of potential ones. Direct measurement of personal exposures is not possible in vaping due to the fact the aerosol is inhaled directly, unless, of course, suitable biomarkers of exposure can be developed. The current review did not identify any suitable biomarkers, though cotinine is a useful proxy for exposure to nicotine- containing liquids. Monitoring of potential composition of exposures is perhaps best achieved though analysis of aerosol generated in a manner that approximates vaping, for which better insights are needed on how to modify "smoking machines" to mimic vaping given that there are documented differences in inhalation patterns[51]. These smoking machines would have to be operated under a realistic mode of operation of the atomizer to ensure that the process for generation of contaminants is studied under realistic temperatures. To estimate dosage (or exposure in personal breathing zone), information on the chemistry of aerosol has to be combined with models of the inhalation pattern of vapers, mode of operation of e- cigarettes and quantities of liquid consumed. Assessment of 11 Technical Report July - August 2013 exhaled aerosol appears to be,of little use in evaluating risk to vapers due to evidence of qualitative differences in the chemistry of exhaled and inhaled aerosol. Monitoring of liquid chemistry is easier and cheaper than assessment of aerosols. This can be done systematically as a routine quality control measure; by the manufacturers to ensure uniform quality of all production batches. However, we do not know how this relates to aerosol chemistry because previous researchers have failed to appropriately pair analyses of chemistry of liquids and aerosols. It is standard practice in occupational hygiene to analyze the chemistry of materials generating an exposure, and it is advisable that future studies of the aerosols explicitly pair these analyses with examination of composition of the liquids used to generate the aerosols. Such an approach can lead to the development of predictive models that relate the composition of the aerosol to the chemistry of liquids, the e- cigarette hardware, and the behavior of the vaper, as these, if accurate, can anticipate hazardous exposures before they occur. The current attempt to use available data to develop such relationships was not'successful due to studies failing to collect appropriate data. Systematic monitoring of quality of the liquids would also help reassure consumers and is best done by independent laboratories rather than manufactures to remove concerns about impartiality (real or perceived). Future work in this area would greatly benefit from standardizing laboratory protocols (e.g. methods of extraction of compounds from aerosols and liquids, establishment of "core" compounds that have to be quantified in each analysis (as is done for PAH and metals), development of minimally informative detection limits that are needed for risk assessment, standardization of operation of "vaping machine ", etc.), quality control experiments (e.g. suitable positive and negative controls without comparison to conventional cigarettes, internal standards, estimation of %recovery, etc.), and reporting practices (e.g. in units that can be used to estimate personal exposure, use of uniform definitions of limits of detection and quantification, etc.), all of which would improve on the currently disjointed literature. Detailed recommendations on standardization of such protocols lie outside of scope of this report. All calculations conducted in this analysis are based on information about patterns of vaping and the content of aerosols and liquids that are highly uncertain in their applicability to "typical" vaping as it is currently practiced and says even less about future exposures due to vaping. However, this is similar to assessments that are routinely performed in occupational hygiene for novel technology as it relied on "worst case" calculations and safety margins that attempt to account for exposure variability. The approach adopted here and informed by some data is certainly superior to some currently accepted practices in the regulatory framework in occupational health that rely purely on description of emission processes to make claims about potential for exposure (e.g.[52]). Clearly, routine monitoring of potential and actual exposure is required if we were to apply the principles of occupational hygiene to vaping. Detailed suggestions on how to design such exposure surveillance are available in [53]. In summary, analysis of the current state of knowledge about the chemistry of contaminants in liquids and aerosols associated with electronic cigarettes indicates that there is no evidence that vaping produces inhalable exposures to these contaminants at a level that would prompt measures to reduce exposure by the standards that are used to ensure safety of workplaces. Indeed, there is sufficient evidence to be reassured that there are no such risks from the broad range of the studied products, though the lack of quality control standards means that this cannot be assured for all products on the market. However, aerosol generated during vaping on the whole, when considering the declared ingredients themselves, if it were treated in the same manner as an emission from industrial process, creates personal exposures that would justify surveillance of exposures and health among exposed persons. Due to the uncertainty about the effects of these quantities of propylene glycol and glycerin, this conclusion holds after setting aside concerns about health effects of nicotine. This conclusion holds notwithstanding the benefits of tobacco harm reduction, since 12 Technical Report July - August 2013 7 there is value in understanding and possibly mitigating risks even when they are known to be far lower than smoking. It must be noted that the proposal for such scrutiny of "total aerosol' is not based on specific health concerns suggested by compounds that resulted in exceedance of occupational exposure limits, but is instead a conservative posture in'the face of unknown consequences of inhalation of appreciable quantities of organic compounds that may or may not be harmful at doses that occur during vaping. Key Conclusions: • Even when compared to workplace standards for involuntary exposures, and using several conservative (erring on the side of caution) assumptions, the exposures from using e- cigarettes fall well below the threshold for concern for compounds with known toxicity. That is, even ignoring the benefits of e- cigarette use and the fact that the exposure is actively chosen, and even comparing to the levels that are considered unacceptable to people who are not benefiting from the exposure and do not want it, the exposures would not generate concern or call for remedial action. • Expressed concerns about nicotine only apply to vapers who do not wish to consume it; a voluntary (indeed, intentional) exposure is very different from a contaminant. • There is no serious concern about the contaminants such as volatile organic compounds (formaldehyde, acrolein, etc.) in the liquid or produced by heating. While these contaminants are present, they have been detected of problematic levels only in a few studies that apparently were based on unrealistic levels of heating. • The frequently stated concern about contamination of the liquid by a nontrivial quantity of ethylene glycol or diethylene glycol remains based on a single sample of an early technology product (and even this did not rise to the level of health concern) and has not been replicated. • Tobacco- specific nitrosamines (TSNA) are present in trace quantities and pose no more (likely much less) threat - to health than TSNAs from modern smokeless tobacco products, which cause no measurable risk for cancer. .F' • Contamination by metals is shown to be at similarly trivial levels that pose no health risk, and the alarmist claims about such contamination are based on unrealistic assumptions about the molecular form of these elements. • The existing literature tends to overestimate the exposures and exaggerate their implications. This is partially due to rhetoric, but also results from technical features. The most important is confusion of the concentration in aerosol, Which on its own tells us little about risk to heath, with the relevant and much smaller total exposure to compounds in the aerosol averaged across all air inhaled in the course of a day. There is also clear bias in previous reports in favor of isolated instances of highest level of chemical detected across multiple studies, such that average exposure that can be calculated are higher than true value because they are "missing" all true zeros. Routine monitoring of liquid chemistry is easier and cheaper than assessment of aerosols. Combined with an understanding of how the chemistry of the liquid affects the chemistry of the aerosol and insights into behavior of vapers, this can serve as a useful tool to ensure the safety of e- cigarettes. The only unintentional exposures (i.e., not the nicotine) that seem to rise to the level that they are worth further research are the carrier chemicals themselves, propylene glycol and glycerin. This exposure is not known to cause health problems, but the magnitude of the exposure is novel and thus is at the levels for concern based on the lack of reassuring data. 13 (: It Acknowledgements ri Technical Report July - August 2013 Funding for this work was provided by The Consumer Advocates for Smoke -free Alternatives Association (CASAA) Research Fund. CASAA is an all- volunteer, donation - funded, non - profit organization devoted to defending consumer access to and promoting tobacco harm reduction; for more information, see htto: / /casaa.org /. CASAA exercised no editorial control over the author's writing or analysis: the author, not the funder, had full control of the content. The author is thankful to Dr Carl V Phillips, the CASAA Scientific Director, for frank discussion of relevant scientific matters, as well as Drs. Uchiyama and laugesen for access to presently unpublished data. lastly, the contribution of Charity Curtis, Masters of Public Health student at Drexel University to the initial literature search was greatly appreciated. 14 Technical Report July - August 2013 t Figure: Illustrating the difference between concentrations in the aerosol generated by vaping and inhaled air in a day. Panel A shows black square that represents aerosol contaminated by some compound as it would be measured by a "smoking machine" and extrapolated to dosage from vaping in one day. This black square is located inside the white square that represents total uncontaminated air that is inhaled in a day by a vaper. The relative sizes of the two squares are exaggerated as the volume of aerosol generated in vaping relative to inhaled air is much smaller in the figure. Panel B shows how exposure from contaminated air (black dots) is diluted over a day for appropriate comparison to occupational exposure limits that are expressed in terms of "time- weighted average" or average contamination over time rather than as instantaneous exposures (with the exception of "ceiling limits" that do not affect the vast majority of comparisons in this report). Exposure during vaping occurs in a dynamic process where the atmosphere inhaled by the vaper alternates between the smaller black and larger white squares in Panel A. Thus, the concentration of contaminants that a vaper is exposed to over a day is much smaller than that which is measured in the aerosol (and routinely improperly cited as reason for concern about "high" exposures). 0 15 a Technical Report July - August 2013 Table la: Exposure predictions based on analysis of aerosols generated by smoking machines: Volatile Organic Compounds Compound Nv Estimated concentration in personal breathing zone Ratio of most stringent TLV ( %) Reference PPM mg/m Calculated directly . Safety factor 10 Acetaldehyde l 3 12 1 1 150 1 0.005 0.02 0.2, [5] 0.003 0.01 0.1 [4] 0.001 0.004 0.04 [8] 0.00004 0.0001 0:001 [3] 0.0002 0.001 0.008 [3] 0.001 0.004 0.04 [39,40] 0.008 0.03 3 [37) Acetone 1 0.002 0.0003 0.003 [37] 150 0.0004 0.0001 0.001 [39,40] Acrolein 12 0.001 1 13 [8] 150 0.002 2 20 [39,40] 1 0.006 6 60 [37] Butanal 150 0.0002 0.001 0.01 [39,40] Crotonaldehyde 150 0.0004 0.01 0.1 [39,40] Formaldehyde 1 0.002 0.6 6 [5] 3 0.008 3 30 [4] 12 0.006 2 20 [8] 1 <0.0003 <0.1 <1 [3] 1 0.0003 0.1 1 [3] 150 0.01 4 40 [39,40] 1 0.009 3 30 [37] Glyoxal .1 0.002 2 20 [37] 150 0.006 6 60 [39,40] o- Methylbenzaldehyde 12 0.001 0.05 0.5 [8] p,m- Xylene 12 0.00003 0.001 0.01 [8] Propanal 3 0.002 0.01 0.1 [4) 150 0.0006 0.002 0.02 [39,40] l 0.005 0.02 0.2 [37] Toluene 12 0.0001 0.003 0.03 [8] Valeraldehyde 150 0.0001 0.0001 0.001 [39,40) average is presented when N> I 16 Technical Report July - August 2013 F*N Table 1b: Exposure predictions based on analysis of aerosols generated by smoking machines: Inorganic Compounds' Element quantified Assumed compound containing the element for comparison with TLV N## Estimated concentration in personal breathing zone (m m) Ratio of most stringent TLV ( %) Reference Calculated directly Safety factor 10 Aluminum Respirable Al metal & insoluble compounds 1 0.002 0.2 1.5 [25] Barium Ba & insoluble compounds 1 0.00005 0.01 0.1 [25] Boron Boron oxide 1 0.02 0.1 1.5 [25] Cadmium Respirable Cd & compounds 12 0.00002 1 10 [8] Chromium Insoluble Cr (IV) compounds 1 3E -05 0.3 3 [25] Copper Cu fume 1 0.0008 0.4 4.0 [25] Iron Soluble iron salts, as Fe 1 0.002 0.02 0.2 [25] Lead Inorganic compounds as Pb 1 7E -05 0.1 1 [25] 12 0.000025 0.05 0.5 [8] Magnesium Inhalable magnesium oxide 1 0.00026 0.003 0.03 [25] Manganese Inorganic compounds, as Mn 1 8E -06 0.04 0.4 [25] Nickel Inhalable soluble inorganic compounds, as Ni 1 2E -05 0.02 0.2 [25] 12 0.00005 0.05 0.5 [8] Potassium KOH 1 0.001 0.1 1 [25] Tin Organic compounds, as Sn 1 0.0001 0.1 1 [25] Zinc Zinc chloride fume 1 0.0004 0.04 0.4 [25] Zirconium Zr and compounds 1 3E -05 0.001 0.01 [25] Sulfur SOZ 1 0.002 0.3 3 [25] # The actual molecular form in the aerosol unknown and so worst case assumption was made if it was physically possible (e.g. it is not possible for elemental lithium & sodium to be present in the aerosol); there is no evidence from the research that suggests the metals were in the particular highest risk form, and in most cases a general knowledge of chemistry strongly suggests that this is unlikely. Thus, the TLV ratios reported here probably do not represent the (much lower) levels that would result if we knew the molecular forms. ## average is presented when N >1 r� 17 Technical Report July - August 2013 Table 2: Exposure predictions for volatile organic compounds based on analysis of aerosols generated by volunteer vapers Compound NP Estimated concentration in personal breathing zone (ppm) Ratio of most stringent TLV ( %) Reference Calculated directly Safety factor 10 2- butanone (MEK) 3 0.04 0.02 0.2 [4] l 0.002 0.0007 0.007 [6] 2- furaldehyde 3 0.01 0.7 7 [4] Acetaldehyde 3 0.07 0.3 3 [4] Acetic acid 3 0.3 3 30 [4] Acetone 3 0.4 0.2 2 [4] Acrolein 1 <0.001 <0.7 <7 [6] Benzene 3 0.02 3 33 [4] Butyl hydroxyl toluene I 4E -05 0.0002 0.002 [6] Isoprene 3 0.1 7 70 [4] Limonene 3 0.009 0.03 0.3 [4] l 2E -05 0.000001 0.00001 [6] m,p- Xyelen 3 0.01 0.01 0.1 [4] Phenol 3 0.01 0.3 3 [4] Propanal 3 0.004 0.01 0.1 [4] Toluene 3 0.01 0.07 0.7 [4] # average is presented when N> 1 18 Technical Report July - August 2013 Reference List 1. Etter IF: The Electronic Cigarette : an Alternative to Tobacco? Jean - Francois Etter; 2012. 2. Pellegrino RM, Tinghino B, Mangiaracina G, Marani A, Vita Ii M, Protano C et al.: Electronic cigarettes: an evaluation of exposure to chemicals and fine particulate matter (PM). Ann Ig 2012, 24: 279 -288. 3. eSmoking Institute. Assessment of e- cigarette safety by comparing the chemical composition of e- cigarette aerosol and cigarette smoke from reference traditional cigarette. http : / /www.esmokinginstitute.com /en /node /31 .2013. Ref Type: Electronic Citationhttp ://www.esmokineinstitute.com /en /node /31 4. Schripp T, Markewitz D, Uhde E, Salthammer T: Does e- cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? Indoor Air 2013, 23: 25 -31. 5. Lauterbach JH, Laugesen M: Comparison of toxicant levels in mainstream aerosols generated by Ruyan® electronic nicotine delivery systems(ENDS) and conventional cigarette products. 14 March, 2012; 2012.http://www.healthnz.co.nz/News2Ol2SOTposterl861.pdf 6. Romagna G, Zabarini L, Barbiero L, Boccietto E, Todeschi S, Caravati E et al.. Characterization of chemicals released to the environment by electronic cigarettes use (ClearStream -AIR project): is passive vaping a reality? 9- 1 -2012. XIV Annual Meeting of the SRNT Europe 2012, Helsinki, Finland. Ref Type: Reporthttp : / /clearstream.flavourart.it/ site /wp- content /uploads /2012/09/CSA ltaEne pdf 7. Laugesen M. Safety report on the Ruyan® e- cigarette cartridge and inhaled aerosol . Edited by Health New Zealand Ltd. 2008. Ref Type: Report www.healthnz.co.nz 8. Goniewicz ML, Knysak J, Gawron M, Kosmider L, Sobczak A, Kurek J et al.: Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tob Control 2013. Benowitz NL, Jacob P, III: Daily intake of nicotine during cigarette smoking. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1984, 35: 499- 504. 10. The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists: 2013 threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical agents & biological exposure indices. Cincinnati, OH: ACGIH; 2013. 11. Scherer G: Smoking behaviour and compensation: a review of the literature. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1999, 145: 1 -20. 12. Ganong WF: Review of medical physiology, 15 edn. London: Prentice Hall; 1995. 13. Holmes JR. How Much Air Do We Breathe? Research Note 94-1.1. 1994. California Environmental Protection Agency. Ref Type: Reporthttp://www.arb.ca.gov/research/resnotes/notes/94-1l.htm 14. Alliance Technologies L. Chemical composition of "Instead" electronic cigarette smoke juice and vapor. 2009. Ref Type: Reportwww.alliancetechoroup.com 19 Technical Report July - August 2013 ' 15. Alliance Technologies L. Characterization of liquid "Smoke Juice" for electronic cigarettes. 2009. Ref Type: Reportwww.ailiancetechgroup.com 16. Alliance Technologies L. Characterization of Regal cartridges for electronic cigarettes. 2009. Ref Type: Reportwww.attiancetechgroup.com 17. Alliance Technologies L. Characterization of regal cartridges for electronic cigarettes - Phase 11. 2009. Ref Type: Reportwww.alliancetechQroup.com 18. eSmoking Institute. Identifying the concentration of chemical compounds and heavy metals in liquids. http : / /www.esmokinginstitute.com /en /node /32 . 2013. Ref Type: Electronic Citationhttp : / /www.esmokinginstitute.com /en /node /32 19. Evans Analytical Group. Gas chromatography mass spectroscopy(GC -MS) analysis report; JOB NUMBER C09Y8961. 2009. Ref Type: Reportwww.eaglabs.com 20. Coulson H. Analysis of components from Gamucci electronic cigarette cartridges, tobacco flavour regular smoking liquid; Report number: E98D. Edited by LPD Laboratory Services, Blackburn MicroTech Solutions Ltd. 2009. Ref Type: Reportwww.lpolabservices.co.uk 21. Ellicott M. Analysis of components from "e -Juice XX HIGH 36mg/ml rated Nicotine Solution" ref S 55434; Report Number: E249A. Edited by LPD Laboratory Services, Blackburn MicroTech Solutions Ltd. 2009. Ref Type: Reportwww.lpolabservices.co.uk 22. Westenberger B1. Evaluation of e- cigarettes; DPATR- FY- 09 -23. Edited by US Food and Drug Administration. . 2009. Ref Type: Reporthttp: / /www.fda.gov/ downloads / drugs /Scienceresearch /UCM173250 pdf 23. McAuley TR, Hopke PK, Zhao J, Babaian S: Comparison of the effects of e- cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality. Inhal Toxicol 2012, 24: 850 -857. 24. Goniewicz ML, Kuma T, Gawron M, Knysak J, Kosmider L: Nicotine levels in electronic cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res 2013, 15: 158 -166. 25. Williams M, Villarreal A, Bozhilov K, Lin S, Talbot P: Metal and' silicate particles including nanoparticles are present in electronic cigarette cartomizer fluid and aerosol. PLoS One 2013, 8: e57987. 26. Laugesen M. Ruyan® E- cigarette bench -top tests. Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, Dublin, April 30, 2009. 2009. Ref Type: Abstract 27. Tytgat J. "Super Smoker" expert report. Edited by CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY L. 2007. Ref Type: Report 28. Valance C, Ellicott M. Analysis of chemical components from high, med & low nicotine cartridges; Report Number: D318. Edited by LPD Laboratory Services, Blackburn MicroTech Solutions Ltd. 2008. f Ref Type: Reportwww.lpolabservices.co.uk 20 Technical Report July - August 2013 29. Kubica P, Kot -Wasik A, Wasik A, Namiesnik J: "Dilute & shoot" approach for rapid determination of trace amounts of nicotine in zero -level e- liquids by reversed phase liquid chromatography and hydrophilic interactions liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry- electrospray ionization. J ChromatogrA 2013,1289:13-18. 30. Trehy ML, Ye W, Hadwiger ME, Moore TW, Allgire JF, Woodruff JT et al.: Analysis of Electronic Cigarette Cartridges, Refill Solutions, and Smoke for Nicotine and Nicotine Related Impurities. Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies 2011, 34: 1442 -1458. 31. Graves I. Report no. 468304. 60 ml sample of mist from 11 mg nicotine e- cigarette cartridge. Thermal desorption tubes. 468304. 9 -5 -2008. Hamilton, New Zealand, Hill Laboratories. Ref Type: Report 32. Pattison J, Valenty SJ. Material characterization report. 0910.14. 10 -21 -2009. Analyze Inc. Ref Type: Reportanalyzeinc. comhttp: / /vapersclub.com /NJOYvaporstudv pdf 33. Sodoma A, Caggiano CM. Material characterization report. 0706.04. 6 -28 -2007. Analyze Inc. Ref Type: Reporthttp: / /truthaboutecigs.com /science /16 pdf 34. Anspach T. Determination of tobacco - specific nitrosamines (TSNA) in aroma fluid for e- cigarettes. 11- 57021. 9 -1- 2011. Eurofins Dr.Specht Laboratorien. Ref Type: Reporthttp : / /clearstream.flavourart it /site /wp- content/ uploads / DATI / vari /nitrosaminanalyse %20Vireinia %2018 pdf 35. Kim HJ, Shin HS: Determination of tobacco- specific nitrosamines in replacement liquids of electronic cigarettes by liquid chromatography- tandem mass spectrometry. J ChromatogrA 2013, 1291: 48 -55. 36. Hadwiger ME, Trehy ML, Ye W, Moore T, Allgire J, Westenberger B: Identification of amino - tadalafil and rimonabant in electronic cigarette products using high pressure liquid chromatography with diode array and tandem mass spectrometric detection. J ChromatogrA 2010, 1217: 7547 -7555. 37. Uchiyama S, Inaba Y, Kunugita N: Determination of acrolein and other carbonyls in cigarette smoke using coupled silica cartridges impregnated with hydroquinone and 2,4- dinitrophenylhydrazine. J ChromatogrA 2010, 1217: 4383 -4388. 38. Uchiyama S. Determination of acrolein and other carbonyls in cigarette smoke using coupled silica cartridges impregnated with hydroquinone and 2,4- dinitrophenylhydrazine. 2013. Ref Type: Personal Communication 39. Uchiyama S. <unpublished concentrations from experiments presented in https: / /www.ista�e.ist eo ip /article /bunsekikaeaku /60/10/60 10 791/ pdf through personal communications>. 2013. Ref Type: Unpublished WorkUchiyama _E- cigarette_rm1851.PDF 40. Ohta K, Uchiyama S, Inaba Y, Nakagome H, Kunugita N: Determination of Carbonyl Compounds Generated from the Electronic Cigarette Using Coupled Silica Cartridgeslmpregnated with Hydroquinone and 2,4- Dinitrophenylhydrazine. BUNSEKI KAGAKU 2011, 60: 791 -797. 41. eSmoke. Analytical reports on batches of e- liquids. http://www.esmoke.net/pages.php?pageid=20 .2009. 7-11 - 2013. l 21 Technical Report July - August 2013 Ref Type: Electronic Citationhttp://www.esmoke.net/paf:,Les-phP?Pageid=20 42. Murphy J, Wong E, Lawton M. Chemical and operational assessment of the Ruyan classic e- cigarette. Report P.474.2-8-2010. British American Tobacco. Ref Type: Report 43. Trtchounian A, Talbot P: Electronic nicotine delivery systems: is there a need for regulation? Tob Control 2011, 20: 47 -52. 44. Etter JF,,Bullen C, Flouris AD, Laugesen M, Eissenberg T: Electronic nicotine delivery systems: a research agenda. Tob Control 2011, 20: 243 -248. 45. Varughese S, Teschke K, Brauer M, Chow Y, van NC, Kennedy SM: Effects of theatrical smokes and fogs on respiratory health In the entertainment industry. Am J Ind Med 2005, 47: 411 -418. 46, K, Chow Y, van NC, Varughese S, Kennedy SM, Brauer M: Exposures to atmospheric effects in the entertainment industry. J Occup Environ Hyg 2005, 2: 277 -284. 47. Hecht SS, Hoffmann D: Tobacco- specific nitrosamines, an important group of carcinogens in tobacco and tobacco smoke. Carcinogenesis 1988, 9: 875 -884. 48. Digard H, Errington G, Richter A, McAdam K: Patterns and behaviors of snus consumption in Sweden. Nicotine Tob Res 2009, 11: 1175 -1181. 49. Phillips CV, Sargent C, Rabiu D, Rodu B. Calculating the comparative mortality risk from smokeless tobacco vs. `! smoking. American Journal of Epidemiology, 163 (11):5189, 2006. American Journal of Epidemiology 163[11), 5189. 2006. Ref Type: Abstract 50. Liedel NA, Busch KA, Crouse WE. Exposure measurement action level and occupational environmental variability. HEW Publication No. (NIOSH) 76 7131. 1975. Cincinnati, OH, US Departement of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Center for Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Laboatories and Criteria Development. Ref Type: Reporthitp: / /www.cdc -gov /niosh /docs /76- 131 /pdfs /76 -131 pdf 51. Trtchounian A, Williams M, Talbot P: Conventional and electronic cigarettes (e- cigarettes) have different smoking characteristics. Nicotine Tob Res 2010, 12: 905 -912. 52. Tischer M, Bredendiek - Kamper S, Poppek U, Packroff R: How safe is control banding? Integrated evaluation by comparing OELs with measurement data and using monte carlo simulation. Ann Occup Hyg 2009, 53: 449 -462. 53. British Occupational Hygiene Society, Nederlandse Vereniging voor Arbeidshygiene. Testing compliance with occupational exposure limits for airborne substances. 2011. Ref Type: Report 22 Published OnlineFirst July 20, 2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI -10 -0288 Research Article A Clinical Laboratory Model for Evaluating the Acute Effects of Electronic "Cigarettes ": Nicotine Delivery Profile and Cardiovascular and Subjective Effects Andrea R. Vansickel, Caroline O. Cobb, Michael F. Weaver, and Thomas E. Eissenberg Abstract Background: Electronic "cigarettes" are marketed to tobacco users as potential reduced exposure products (PREP), albeit with little information regarding electronic cigarette user toxicant exposure and effects. This information may be obtained by adapting clinical laboratory methods used to evaluate other PREPs for smokers. Methods: T"-two smokers participated in four independent Latin- square ordered conditions that dif- fered red by product: own brand cigarette, "NPRO" electronic cigarettes (NPRO EC; 18 mg cartridge), "Hydro" electronic cigarettes (Hydro EC; 16 mg cartridge), or sham (unlit cigarette). Participants took 10 puffs at two separate times during each session. Plasma nicotine and carbon monoxide (CO) concentration, heart rate, and subjective effects were assessed. Results: Own brand significantly increased plasma nicotine and CO concentration and heart rate within the first five minutes of administration whereas NPRO EC, Hydro EC, and sham smoking did not. Own brand, NPRO EC, and Hydro EC (but not sham) significantly decreased tobacco abstinence symptom ratings and increased product acceptability ratings. The magnitude of symptom suppression and increased accept- ability was greater for own brand than for NPRO EC and Hydro EC. Conclusions: Under these acute testing conditions, neither of the electronic cigarettes exposed users to measurable levels of nicotine or CO, although both suppressed nicotine/ tobacco abstinence symptom ratings. Impact: This study illustrates how clinical laboratory methods can be used to understand the acute effects of these and other PREPS for tobacco users. The results and methods reported here will likely be relevant to the evaluation and empirically based regulation of electronic cigarettes and similar products. Cancer Epidendol Biomarkers Prev, 19(8); 1945 -53. 02010 AACR. Introduction A variety of potential reduced exposure products (PREP) are /were marketed to cigarette smokers with ex- plicit or implied claims that their use is associated with less exposure to lethal smoke constituents (1 -3). These PREPs for smokers include products that involve burn- ing specially cured tobacco that contains lower levels of some toxicants, that primarily heat rather than burn to- bacco, or smokeless tobacco (4 -6).. As has been argued many times (1, 7, 8), objective empirical evaluation of these products is critical as a means of determining Authors' Affiliation: Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia Note: The results of this study were presented In poster form at the annual Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco meeting held in Baltimore, MD February 24 -27, 2010. Corresponding Author: Thomas E. Eissenberg, VCU, Box 980205, Richmond, VA. 23298. Phone: 804- 827 -4617; Fax: 804 - 828 -7862. E -mail: teissenb*vcu.edu dol: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI -10 -0288 02010 American Association for Cancer Research. www.aacriournals.org the extent to which PREP use is associated with reduced toxicant exposure, e.g.; to nicotine or carbon monoxide (CO), and suppression of tobacco/ nicotine abstinence symptoms. Clinical laboratory work has been very re- vealing, and sometimes shows reduced toxicant expo- sure and often shows a failure to suppress aversive abstinence symptoms fully (9, 10). In theory, toxicant ex- posure reduction may be associated with long -term de- creased health risk, but this theoretical decreased risk is very unlikely with a product that is not used because it fails to suppress abstinence symptoms and /or is other- wise unacceptable. So-called electronic "cigarettes" are one of the newest types of PREPS available, and anecdotal evidence sug- gests that, at least for some smokers, electronic cigarettes can completely replace tobacco cigarettes (11, 12). Many electronic cigarette brands are available in retail outlets and over the internet. Electronic cigarettes consist of a re- chargeable battery, heater, and a cartridge that contains a liquid made of propylene glycol, nicotine, and other che- micals (13). When the battery- powered heater is activat- ed, it heats the solution to produce a vapor that can then be inhaled by the user (14, 15). Electronic cigarettes are ACZAnurica nAssociationforCancer Recearch 1945 Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. N. i46 Published OnlineFirst July 20, 2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055 -9965. EPI -10 -0288 Vansickel et al. marketed as PREPS for smokers, with manufacturer claims such as "alternative to smoking that will satisfy your nicotine urges and cravings" (16), "helps smokers quit, cut down or smoke healthier" (17), and "gives smo- kers all the pleasure and satisfaction of traditional smok- ing without all the health, social and economic problems" (18). To date, however, there are few objective data to substantiate these claims. Indeed, there is little objective information describing electronic cigarette toxicant con- tent and yield or user toxicant exposure and effect. The little available data suggest that electronic cigarette cartridges and vapors may contain trace amounts of impu- rities and tobacco - specific nitrosamines (13,19). Electronic cigarette cartridge nicotine content may be less than the product labeling indicates, and the vapor produced from the cartridge may yield very little nicotine (13, 19). The scant data from human laboratory studies suggest that electronic cigarette use is likely to involve little nicotine exposure and tobacco abstinence symptom suppression that is far less than that produced by a tobacco cigarette (20, 21). Existing clinical models that have been used to evaluate combustible and noncombustible PREPS (10, 22, 23) might be adapted to quickly and efficiently provide necessary information regarding electronic cigarette toxicant exposure and effect. The purpose of this study was to describe clinical laboratory methods that could be used to characterize electronic cigarette users' nicotine and CO exposure, car- diovascular response, and ratings of tobacco /nicotine ab- stinence symptom suppression and product acceptability. Accordingly, this within - subject study used these out- comes to compare, in 32 tobacco cigarette smokers, the effect of two marketed electronic cigarette brands with own brand cigarettes and sham smoking (i.e., puffing on an unlit cigarette). Based on preliminary data pre- sented elsewhere (20, 21) we hypothesized that, com- pared with own brand, electronic cigarettes would deliver less nicotine and no CO and would be less effec- tive at reducing symptoms of tobacco abstinence while producing lower acceptability ratings. Materials and Methods Participants This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Virginia Commonwealth University and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Sixty -six men and women recruited from the Richmond, Virginia area provided written, informed consent. Prior to participation in any experimental sessions, 18 indivi- duals were disqualified based on health concerns (e.g., high blood pressure) or failure to meet other inclu- sion /exclusion criteria (see below). In addition, 2 partici- pants withdrew from the study and another 14 were withdrawn due to failure to comply with study procedures (n = 9), poor venous access (it = 3), or because study enroll- ment was completed (n = 2). The remaining 32 participants (13 women; 18 white) completed the study proper and Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(8) August 2010 were included in the analyses. Participants smoked at least 15 cigarettes per day (mean, 22 cigarettes per day; SD, 8.8), were between the ages of 18 to 55 years (mean, 33.6; SID, 12), provided an afternoon screening CO of at least 15 ppm (mean, 23.5; SD, 8.8), and had a urine cotinine result of at least 4 on a 7 -point scale (0-6; NicAlert, Nymox Corp.; mean, 5.9; SD, 0.2). Exclusion criteria included self- reported history of any chronic mental or physical health condition, pregnan- cy or breastfeeding, active menopause, self- reported use of electronic cigarettes, current smoking cessation attempt, current drug use (other than marijuana), and >20 days self- reported marijuana or alcohol use in the past 30 days. Study design and procedures This study was conducted on an outpatient basis at the Clinical Behavioral Pharmacology Laboratory at Virginia Commonwealth University. Participants com- pleted four laboratory sessions; each approximately 150 minutes in duration. One of four Latin- square or- dered conditions was presented each session (separated by at least 48 hours) that differed by product adminis- tered: own brand (i.e., a lit cigarette of the participant's preferred brand), sham (i.e., an unlit cigarette of the participant's preferred brand), "NPRO" electronic cigar- ettes (NPRO EC; 18 -mg cartridge; NJOY), and "Hydro" electronic cigarettes (Hydro EC; 16 -mg cartridge; Crown Seven). Participants were asked to refrain from cigarette smoking for at least 12 hours prior to their scheduled session. Smoking abstinence was verified upon arrival at the laboratory by an expired air CO level 510 ppm. At the start of a session, a heparinized catheter was in- serted into a forearm vein, physiologic monitoring equipment was attached, and continuous physiologic re- cording commenced. Thirty minutes after session onset, participants responded to the subjective effect question- naires, blood (7 mL) was sampled, and product was ad- ministered. Product administration consisted of 10 puffs with a 30- second interpuff interval (IPI; puff number and IPI were monitored by study staff): package in- structions state that electronic cigarettes should be used similarly to a tobacco cigarette, and 10 puffs with a 30- second IPI approximates ad libittuu cigarette smoking (24). Five, 15, 30, and 45 minutes after the first of 10 puffs of the initial product administration, participants responded to the subjective effect questionnaires and blood (7 mL) was sampled. Expired air CO was recorded at 15, 30, and 45 minutes. At 60 minutes, par- ticipants responded to the subjective effect question- naires, blood (7 mL) was sampled, and product was administered a second time (again, 10 puffs, 30- second IPI). Five, 15, 30, and 45 minutes after the second prod- uct administration, participants responded to the subjec- tive effects questionnaires and blood (7 mL) was sampled. Expired air CO was recorded at 15, 30, and 45 minutes. At session's end, the venous catheter was removed, participants were compensated for their time, and, if necessary, additional sessions were scheduled. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. @2010 American Association for Cancer Research. 0 Published OnlineFirst July 20, 2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EP1 -10 -0288 Materials NPRO EC was purchased from NJOY (25). The NPRO EC resembles a tobacco cigarette in length and diameter and consists of a disposable mouthpiece that houses a cartridge, a small heating element (vaporizer) that is ac- tivated.when the user draws air through the device, and a rechargeable lithium battery. Cartridges come in a va- riety of flavors with varying nicotine content (0 -18 mg). According to the NJOY website, cartridge ingredients in- clude nicotine, propylene glycol, water, ethanol, glycer- ol, acetylpyrazine, guaiacol, mysomine, cotinine, and vanillin. Hydro EC was purchased from Crown Seven (26). Hy- dro EC is similar in composition to NPRO EC and, ac- cording to the manufacturer's website, cartridges also come in a variety of flavors and contain nicotine (0 -16 mg), propylene glycol, water, and tobacco flavoring. For electronic cigarette conditions, a new 16 -mg (Hydro EC) or 18 -mg (NPRO EC) nicotine cartridge was used and batteries were fully charged before each session. The flavor of each electronic cigarette was matched to the participants' usual brand of cigarettes (regular or menthol). Consistent with product instruc- tions, participants were instructed to puff from the elec- tronic cigarette devices as they would a normal cigarette. Participants' usual brand of cigarette was used in the own brand and sham conditions. According to the Fed- eral Trade Commission (FTC, 2001), on average, usual brand yield was 1.06 mg nicotine (27), 14.7 mg tar, and 14.6 mg CO (based on available data for 26 participants). Outcome measures Physiologic measures. Heart rate was measured every 20 seconds (Model 506, Criticare Systems, fitted with a re- usable pulse oximeter sensor). Blood samples were centri- fuged and plasma was stored at —70 °C. Plasma samples were sent to the Bioanalytical Analysis Core Laboratories of Virginia Commonwealth University's Department of Pharmaceutics and were analyzed for nicotine content us- ing liquid chromatography/ tandem mass spectrometry (limit of quantitation (LOQ) = 2.0 ng /mL; see ref. 24 for details). Expired air CO was assessed using a BreathCO monitor (Vitalograph). Subjective effect questionnaires. Participants re- sponded to a computerized version of the Tiffany Drobes Questionnaire of Smoking Urges Brief (QSU Brief; ref. 28). The questionnaire consists of 10 items rated from 0 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Items from this scale are loaded onto two previously validated factors; factor 1 (intention to smoke) and factor 2 (anticipation of relief from withdrawal). Participants responded to three computerized ques- tionnaires containing visual analog scale (VAS) items. Each word or phrase was centered above a horizontal line that represented a scale from 0 to 100 points; the left anchor was "Not at all' and the right anchor was "Extremely ". A mouse - controlled cursor produced a vertical mark on the line that could be adjusted by the www.aacrjournals.org Acute Effects of Electronic "Cigarettes" participant. Scores on visual analog scale items were calculated as the distance between the vertical mark and the left anchor and were expressed as a percentage of line length. Eleven VAS items were used to assess nicotine /tobacco abstinence symptom suppression (29). The direct effects of nicotine were assessed using 10 VAS items sensitive to nicotine effects (30, 31). Participants also responded to 14 visual analog scale items that assessed the direct effects of tobacco. Data analyses Heart rate values were averaged for 5- minute peri- ods prior to each product administration or blood sampling. One heart rate measurement was missing for one participant in one session, and the missing value was replaced with an average of values before and after it. For plasma nicotine, values below the LOQ were replaced by the LOQ as in previous work (10, 32, 33). We had previously reported the interim findings of this study, in a letter that examined nicotine exposure, heart rate, and craving results (21). The first 16 participants were included in that analysis. Prior to analyzing the data from all 32 participants described here, we first compared re- sults of the first group of 16 participants with those of the second group of 16 participants using a repeated mea- sures ANOVA with two within - subjects factors: condition (4 levels) and time [10 levels for nicotine, subjective, and heart rate (HR) data; 7 for CO data], and one between -sub- jects factor: study group (first 16 or second 16). No signif- icant main effects or interactions involving the study group factor were observed on any measure. Given this failure to observe any differences across the two groups, all data were combined. Thus, the data from all 32 partici- pants for plasma nicotine, CO, heart rate, and subjective measures were analyzed using repeated measures ANO- VA with two factors: condition (4 levels) and time (10 levels for nicotine, HR data, and subjective data; 7 levels for CO). Huynh -Feldt corrections were used to account for violations of sphericity. Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test was used to examine differences between means (P < 0.05). Results Table 1 presents the main effects and interactions for all measures. The primary results of interest are those for which a significant condition by time interaction were observed, indicating that changes over time observed on that measure depended upon product used in that condition. Physiologic measures Plasma nicotine. A significant condition by time inter- action was observed for plasma nicotine (Fig. 1A). Mean (SD) plasma nicotine increased from a preadministration level of 2.1 (0.32) ng /mL to a peak of 18.8 (11.8) ng /mL Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(8) August 2010 1947 Downloaded from cebp aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. 948 Published OnlineFirst July 20,2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI -10 -0288 Vansickel et al. rive minutes after the first administration under the own - brand condition. No significant changes in plasma nico- tine were observed for the Hydro EC, NPRO EC, or sham conditions. cptuemwt momarKers vrev; 19(8) August 2010 Heart rate. A significant condition by time interaction was also observed for heart rate (Fig. 113). Heart rate in- creased from an average (SD) of 65.7 (10.4) bpm at base- line to a peak of 80.3 (10.9) bpm five minutes after the Cancer Epidemiology, Blomarkers & Prevention Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. Table 1. Results of statistical analyses for all outcome measures Measure Condition Time F(P) F (P) Condition x time F (P) Heart rate' 13.5 (>0.001) 62.0 ( >0.001) 16.1 ( >0.001) Plasma nicotine' Carbon monoxidet 112.2 ( >0.001) 53.0 ( >0.001) 45.2 (>0.001) Hughes and Hatsukami' 105.5 (>0.001) 107.0 ( >0.001) 205.5 ( >0.001) Anxious 4.8 (0.01) 5.7 ( >0.001) 1.8 (0.05) Craving a cigarette 37.7 (>0.001) 25.7 (>0.001) 10.6 ( >0.001) Depression/feeling blue 0.5 (ns) 1.5 (ns) 1.1 (ns) Difficulty concentrating 0.5 (ns) 3.4 (0.02) 0.8 (ns) Drowsy 0.6 (ns) 3.9 (0.007) 1.6 (ns) Hunger Impatient 2.6 (ns) 7.8 ( >0.001) 1.8 (ns) Irritability /frustration/anger 4.3 (0.009) 5.8 (0.004) 3.7 (0.006) 2.3 (ns) 2.5 (0.005) Restless 1.5 (ns) 2.5 (0.05) 3.3 (0.001) 1.9 (0.025) Desire for sweets 1.7 (ns) 1.7 (ns) 1.7 (ns) Urge to smoke QSu' 40.8 ( >0.001) 28.2 (>0.001) 9.7 ( >0.001) Factor 1 Factor 2 40.6 ( >0.001) 35.7 (>0.001) 16.9 ( >0.001) Direct effects of nicotine' 19.5 ( >0.001) 16.6 ( >0.001) 7.6 ( >0.001) Confused 1.0 (ns) 1.4 (ns) 1.4 (ns) Dizzy Headache 1.5 (ns) 5.2 (0.002) 4.1 (0.002) Heart pounding 0.7 (ns) 0.4 (ns) 0.9 (ns) 2.9 (0.05) 1.6 (ns) 1.9 (ns) Ughtheaded Nausea 1.2 (ns) 7.6 ( >0.001) 5.8 ( >0.001) Nervous 0.1 (ns) 0.8 (ns) 1.1 (ns) Salivation 1.0 ns ( ) 1.0 (ns) 1.2 (ns) Sweaty 0.5 (ns) 0.2 (ns) 1.0 (ns) Weak 0.8 (ns) 0.9 (ns) 1.3 (ns) Direct effects of tobacco' 0.1 (ns) 0.8 (ns) 1.1 (ns) Satisfying Pleasant 76.2 ( >0.001) 61.6 (>0.001) 17.2 ( >0.001) Taste good 66.5 ( >0.001) 68.5 (>0.001) 17.6 (>0.001) Dizzy 47.7 ( >0.001) 66.8 ( >0.001) 14.4 (>0.001) Calm 19.2 ( >0.001) 17.6 ( >0.001) 7.2 ( >0.001) Concentrate 42.0 (>0.001) 31.1 ( >0.001) 10.3 (>0.001) Awake 17.9 ( >0.001) 15.8 ( >0.001) 5.5 ( >0.001) Reduce hunger 27.0 (>0.001) 22.0 ( >0.001) 6.6 (>0.001) Sick 24.2 (>0.001) 19.4 ( >0.001) 5.6 (>0.001) Taste like own brand 3.6 (0.02) 115.5 ( >0.001) 3.6 (0.01) 60.0 (>0.001) 0.9 (ns) 26.9 ( >0.001) Feel like own brand 65.9 (>0.001) 67.0 (>0.001) 21.6 (>0.001) Harsh as own brand 64.9 (>0.001) 49.2 (>0.001) 21.3 (>0.001) Mild as own brand Smoke another cigarette RIGHT NOW 62.4 (>0.001) 6.5 ( >0.001) 54.0 (>0.001) 20.5 ( >0.001) 38.3 (>0.001) 4.8 (>0.001) Abbreviation: ns, nonsignificant. 'dfcondit on. 3,93; dfn, , 9,279; dfCondxume. 27,837. tdfcondiuon. 3,93; dfT,me. 6,186; dfcondxUme. 18,558. rive minutes after the first administration under the own - brand condition. No significant changes in plasma nico- tine were observed for the Hydro EC, NPRO EC, or sham conditions. cptuemwt momarKers vrev; 19(8) August 2010 Heart rate. A significant condition by time interaction was also observed for heart rate (Fig. 113). Heart rate in- creased from an average (SD) of 65.7 (10.4) bpm at base- line to a peak of 80.3 (10.9) bpm five minutes after the Cancer Epidemiology, Blomarkers & Prevention Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. Published OnlineFirst July 20, 2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI -10 -0288 first administration under the own -brand condition. No significant changes in heart rate were observed for the Hydro EC, NPRO EC, or sham conditions. Expired air CO. A significant condition by time inter- action was observed for expired air CO levels (Fig. 2). Mean (SD) CO increased from a preadministration level of 5.3 (2.1) ppm to a peak of 16.2 (4.5) ppm 15 minutes after the second administration under the own - brand condition. No significant changes in CO level were ob- served for the Hydro EC, NPRO EC, or sham conditions. Subjective effect questionnaires QSU brief. A significant condition by time interaction was observed for both factors of the ,QSU brief. Figure 3A shows data for factor 1 (intention to smoke; the QSU fac- Figure 1. Mean data for nicotine blood plasma (A) and heart rate (B) as a function of condition and time. X -axes, time In minutes relative to product administration; arrows, first and second product administrations. Y -axes, A, nicotine blood plasma concentration (ng/mL); B, heart rate (beats per minute); filled symbols, significant difference from baseline. An'a, "'b," or 'c" indicates that own brand was significantly'different from sham, Hydro EC, or NPRO EC at that time point. A' "d" indicates that Hydro EC was significantly different from sham at that time point. An 'e" Indicates that NPRO EC was significantly different from sham at that time point (rukey's HSD, P < 0.05). Unidirectional error bars, 1 SE. www.aacrjournals.org Acute Effects of Electronic "Cigarettes" for with the greater condition by time F value). Hydro EC and NPRO EC significantly decreased scores on both fac- tors (relative to sham and /or baseline) at several time points. In contrast, own brand significantly decreased scores (relative to baseline and sham) on both factors at nearly every time point. In addition, the scores observed for own brand after product administration were signifi- cantly lower than Hydro EC and NPRO EC at almost ev- ery time point. A nearly identical pattern of results was observed for factor 2, although ratings were generally lower than those observed on factor 1. Nicotine /tobacco abstinence symptom suppression. Significant condition by time interactions were observed on ratings of "anxious," "craving a cigarette/ nicotine," "impatient," "irritability/frustration /anger," "restless," A 25 Plasma nicotine a,bc a,bc 20 l5 a,b.c 011 b, c a,b,c C 10 a,b,c 5 0 6 } 5 16 30 45 6 6 15 30 45 B 85 Heart rate a.b c Hydro EC 0 NPRO EC s0 Own brand y a,b,c Sham 75 a, b.c a,b,c NCCC a,b,c UI 70 i a.c a,b,c a,b,c m 65 60 5 } 5 15 30 45 -5 } 5 15 30 45 Time (relative to product administration) Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(8) August 2010 1949 Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. 0 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. 950 Published OnlineFirst July 20, 2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI -10 -0288 Vansickel at al. 20 Carbon monoxide Hydro EC NPRO EC a.b.c a.b.c Own brand a.b.c E15 Sham O a,b.c .0 a.b.c a.b, °c 10 C a 5 U 0 . -5 15 30 45 f 15 30 45 Time (relative to product administration) and "urge to smoke a cigarette." Own brand generally de- creased ratings on all of these measures. NPRO EC and Hydro EC produced some abstinence symptom suppres- sion on two measures: "craving a cigarette" and "urge to smoke." Figure 3B depicts data for ratings of "craving a cigarette" (the measure with the largest F- value). Ratings of "urge to smoke" decreased significantly 5 minutes fol- lowing the first Hydro EC administration, and 5, 15, and 30 minutes following the first and second NPRO EC ad- ministrations relative to baseline. Ratings of "urge to smoke" decreased significantly at all time points following the first and second own -brand administrations relative to baseline, and own brand was significantly different from Hydro EC and NPRO EC at several time points. Similar effects of own brand, Hydro EC, and NPRO EC were ob- served on ratings of "craving a cigarette" (Fig. 3B). Direct effects of nicotine. Significant condition by time interactions were observed on VAS items assessing "dizzy" and "lightheaded." Own brand significantly increased ratings of "lightheaded" and "dizzy" within the first five minutes following the first administration. NPRO EC, Hydro EC, and sham did not alter ratings significantly on these measures. Direct effects of tobacco. Significant condition by time interactions were observed for ratings of "satisfying," "pleasant," "taste good," "dizzy," "calm," "concentrate," "awake," "reduce hunger," "taste like own brand," "feel like own brand," "harsh as own brand," "mild as own brand," and "smoke another cigarette right now." Rat- ings of "calm" and "satisfying" are shown in Fig. 3C and D. Ratings of "satisfying" and "pleasant" increased significantly at all time points under the Hydro EC, NPRO EC, and own -brand conditions (relative to base- k,dncer cpiaemioi tiiOmarkers Prev; 19(8) August 2010 Figure 2. Mean data for carbon monoxide (CO) as a function of condition and time. X -axis, time In minutes relative to product administration; arrows, first and second product administrations. Y -axis, CO In parts per million (ppm); filled symbols, significant difference from baseline. An 'a; "b; or V Indicates that own brand was significantly different from sham, Hydro EC, or NPRO EC at that time point. A W Indicates that Hydro EC was significantly different from sham at that time point. An "e' indicates that NPRO EC was significantly different from sham at that time point (rukey's HSD, P < 0.05). Unidirectional error bars, 1 SE. line). Own brand increased ratings of "satisfying" and "pleasant" to a significantly greater degree than Hydro EC or NPRO EC. Ratings of "taste good," "calm," "con- centrate," "awake," and "reduce hunger" increased sig- nificantly at all time points after own brand and at several time points after Hydro EC and NPRO EC (rela- tive to baseline). Ratings of "taste like own brand," "feel like own brand," "harsh as own brand," and "dizzy" increased significantly at all time points under the own -brand condition (relative to baseline and sham). Ratings of "mild as own brand" increased significantly at all time points under the own -brand condition (relative to baseline and sham) and at nearly all time points under the Hydro EC condition (relative to baseline). Ratings of "smoke another cigarette right now" increased signifi- cantly relative to baseline at all time points under the Hydro EC and NPRO EC conditions, and 30 and 45 min- utes postadministration 1 and 45 minutes postadminis- tration 2 under the own -brand condition. Discussion The purpose of this acute study was to describe clinical laboratory methods that could be used to understand electronic cigarettes better by examining users' toxicant exposure, cardiovascular response, and subjective re- ports. The results of this study show the usefulness of the clinical model and suggest that, unlike puffing from a tobacco cigarette, two 10 -puff bouts with the two elec- tronic cigarettes described here expose users to no measurable nicotine or CO and do not increase heart rate. Despite the failure to deliver nicotine, acute use of Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers A Prevention Downloaded from cebp.aacriournals.org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. Published OnlineFirst July 20, 2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI -10 -0288 the two products tested in this study produced some to- bacco abstinence symptom suppression and increased subjective ratings of acceptability. Relative to the effects produced by an own -brand tobacco cigarette, these sub- jective effects of electronic cigarettes were modest. With regard to nicotine exposure, the observation that 20 puffs from Hydro EC (16 -mg cartridge) and NPRO EC (18 -mg cartridges) did not increase plasma nicotine con- centration significantly is entirely consistent with our pre- liminary report regarding these products (21). The plasma nicotine results are also consistent with the heart rate data reported here. That is, heart rate increases are observed when nicotine is administered via pharmaceutical pro- ducts (34, 35) or tobacco products (32, 33, 36), and we ob- served increased heart rate when participants in this study smoked their own brand of cigarette (that also delivered nicotine). However, no heart rate increases were observed in either electronic cigarette condition (where no signifi- cant increases in plasma nicotine were observed). Finally, the mean peak changes from baseline in plasma nicotine concentration observed for NPRO EC (1.4 ng /mL) and Acute Effects of Electronic "Cigarettes" Hydro EC (0.5 ng /mL) during the first product adminis- tration were similar in magnitude to the maximum nico- tine concentration reported for a third electronic cigarette brand with a 16-mg cartridge (1.3 ng /mL, ref. 20). The con- sistency of results across participants, measures, and labo- ratories highlights the reliability of the clinical methods reported here (see also ref. 24), while also calling into ques- tion the ability of the three different electronic cigarettes that have been tested to date to approximate the nicotine delivery of a tobacco cigarette under acute conditions. In spite of delivering no measurable nicotine, both electronic cigarettes tested in this study reduced ratings of "craving a cigarette" and "urge to smoke" and increased subjective ratings of product acceptability (e.g., " satisfying," "taste good," "pleasant "). These results are consistent with anecdotal reports from long -term electronic cigarette users and support the notion that electronic cigarettes may provide an alternative, perhaps a substitute, to cigarette smoking in some cases (11, 12). Interestingly, denicotinized cigarettes have also been shown to suppress tobacco abstinence symptoms for as A B 30 CSU factor 1 Craving a cigarette/nicotine t 26 � � d• q• ' CID e0 20 ' •• •• °A •A �- Hydro ]EC • 60, °� 0 NPRO W 16 4 it Own B 0 rX ' a sham 10 ■,4c 40,t 4•,t •A 44t 44e • A 6 4 c 4ac 20- ■AA • x •AC • a 01 0 6 16 30 46 4 J 16 70 46 1 1 1 4 C D too DES Calm DES Satisfying 10 be Vic dat c 44t 44t • 9c ¢0 6 4 C Oat •.at •44be Hydro EC e 60 4b 6 0 NPRO EC b ■.at ■A.c 4b.t •.4t Own brand w° a Sham 40 a.0 a a.. a• d d.■ T d 26 2 1 0 tvi- 6 16 JO 16 JO 46 6 t6 30 45 _bf J i6 46 Time (relative to product administration) Time (relative to product administration) Figure 3. Mean data for OSU factor 1 ratings (A), ratings of "craving a cigarette" (B), ratings of "calm" (C), and ratings of "satisfying" (D) as a function of condition and time. X -axes, time in minutes relative to product administration; arrows, first and second product administrations. Y -axes, subjective ratings; filled symbols, significant difference from baseline. An "a," "b,' or "c" indicates that own brand was significantly different from sham, Hydro EC, or NPRO EC at that time point. A "d" Indicates that Hydro EC was significantly different from sham at that time point. An "e" Indicates that NPRO EC was significantly 1 = different from sham at that time point (Tukey's HSD, P < 0.05). Unidirectional error bars, 1 SE. DES, direct effects of smoking. www.aacrioumals.org Cancer Epidemiol Eliomarkers Prev; 19(8) August 2010 Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. 1951 a j52 Published OnlineFirst July 20,2010; DOI: 10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI -10 -0288 Vansickel et al. long as 96 hours (37). However, under the acute conditions reported here, the two electronic cigarettes did not sup- press nicotine/ tobacco abstinence symptoms fully, rela- tive to own - brand smoking. Other PREPS that failed to suppress abstinence symptoms fully have been shown to supplement rather than substitute for cigarette smoking (9, 24, 37, 38). Further controlled evaluation is needed to determine the extent to which the effects reported here are sufficient for electronic cigarettes to substitute for to- bacco cigarettes, and in what proportion of smokers and under what conditions this substitution effect might occur. Importantly, neither of the electronic cigarettes tested in this study was associated with any measurable CO expo- sure. Long -term CO exposure has been linked to cardio- vascular disease caused.by'tobacco cigarette smoking (39). In part for this reason, substituting noncombustible tobacco or nicotine products for cigarettes has been sug- gested as a potentially effective strategy for reducing the harm of tobacco smoking (40). Following this same logic, and taking into account the trace levels of tobacco - specific nitrosamines found in some electronic cigarette products (13), electronic cigarettes may also warrant careful empir- ical examination by those interested in harm reduction for smokers. Clinical laboratory methods have an important role to play in this empirical examination, and can reveal carcinogen exposure and abstinence symptoms suppres- sion over several days' PREP use (22, 24, 33, 41). These methods will likely be extremely important to any future regulation of electronic cigarettes either as tobacco products or drug delivery devices in the United States (i.e., by the Food and Drug Administration) and elsewhere. Methodologic considerations of the current study in- clude the brief electronic cigarette exposure period, rigor- ous control over some aspects of smoking behavior, use of two brands of electronic cigarette with similar cartridge nicotine content, and inclusion of electronic cigarette - naive participants who may be representative of cigarette smokers sampling an electronic cigarette for the first time, but not of a more experienced electronic cigarette user population. The results of some outcome measures might be influenced by longer -term use, different puffing profiles, other electronic cigarette models /cartridge strengths, and /or the user's previous experience with elec- tronic cigarettes. In future studies, control conditions other than own brand and sham smoking might be of interest. Indeed, a recently published study compared the subjec- tive and physiologic effects of another brand of electronic cigarette, the Ruyan electronic cigarette, to that of a phar- maceutical nicotine inhalator and found that the two products were associated with similar low levels of nico- References tine exposure, incomplete withdrawal suppression, and moderate acceptability (20). In addition, behavioral stud- ies that assess the reinforcing/ rewarding properties of electronic cigarettes could reveal the extent to which elec- tronic cigarettes might be used or abused (42). Finally, the adverse event profile associated with long -term use of electronic cigarettes is uncertain; and must be explored empirically. Many of these methodologic issues and re- search questions can be addressed parametrically and con- veniently in the clinical laboratory, highlighting the strength of these efficient and reliable evaluation methods (see also ref. 24). In sum, this study revealed that two electronic cigarette brands do not expose electronic cigarette -naive users to nic- otine or carbon monoxide under the acute testing proce- dures described here, but do produce some tobacco abstinence symptom suppression and positive ratings of product acceptability. Although these results are necessarily a function of the products tested and procedures used, they suggest that electronic cigarette - naive individuals may re- quire substantial motivation if they are to learn whatever product /procedure combination maximizes these outcomes for them. Future clinical laboratory evaluation can build on these methods and results to establish the extent to which electronic cigarettes might be expected to substitute for to- bacco cigarettes, and help to identify under what conditions this substitution might otter. Parallel studies addressing the abuse liability and long -term adverse event profile of elec- tronic cigarettes are also required to ensure safety and ap- propriate labeling and marketing of these products. Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed. Acknowledgments We acknowledge the expert technical and medical assistance provided by the staff of VCU's Behavioral Pharmacology Laboratory Qanet Austin, M.S. and Barbara Kilgalen, R.N.) as well as the staff at VCU's Bioanalytical Core Laboratory Service Center. Grant Support US NCL This research was supported by USPHS grants RO1CA103827, RO1CA120142, and T32DA007027 -34. The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Received 03/31/2010; revised 05/12/2010; accepted 05/17/2010; published IOnlineFirst 07/20/2010. 1. Stratton K, Shetty P, Wallace R. Bondurant S. Clearing the smoke: the science base for tobacco harm reduction— executive summary. Tob Control 2001;10:189 -95. 3 2 O'Connor RJ, Cummings KM, Rees VW, et al. Surveillance methods for identifying, characterizing, and monitoring tobacco products: Udncer cpiaemwl momarKers f'rev; 19(8) August 2010 Potential reduced exposure products as an example. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18:3334 -48. Pederson LL, Nelson DE. Literature review and summary of perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and marketing of potentially reduced exposure pro- ducts: communication Implications. Nicotine Tob Res 2007;9:525 -34. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. t Published OnlineFirst July 20, 2010; DOI: 10. 1 158/1055-9965.EPI-1 0-0288 4. O'Connor RJ, Hyland A, Giovino GA, Fong GT, Cummings KM. Smoker awareness of and beliefs about supposedly less - harmful to. bacco products. Am J Prev, Mad 2005;29:85 -90. 8. Caraballo RS, Pederson LL. Gupta N. New tobacco products: do smokers like them? Tob Control 2006;15:39-44. 8 Rogers JD, Biener L, Clark PI. Test marketing of new smokeless to- bacco products in four U S. cities. Nicotine Tob Res 2010;12:69 -72. 7. Eissenberg T. The time for tobacco Industry sponsored PREP eval- uation has arrived. Tob Control 200605:1 -2. 8. Hanson K. O'Connor R. Hatsukaml D. Measures for assessing the subjective effects of potential reduced - exposure products. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18:3209 -24. 9. Buchhalter AR, Schrine L, Elssenberg T. Withdrawal- suppressing ef- fects of a novel smoking system: comparison with own brand, not own brand, and de- nicotinized cigarettes. Nicotine Tob Res 2001; 3:111 -8. 10. Cobb CO, Weaver MF, Eissenberg T. _LINK1_UNK2Evaluating the acute effects of oral, non - combustible potential reduced exposure products marketed to smokers. Tob Control. Epub 2010 Apr 2. do!: 10.1136/tc.2008.028993. 11. Heavner K, Dunworth J, Bergen P, Nissen C, Phillips CV. Electronic cigarettes (e- cigarettes) as potential tobacco harm reduction pro- ducts: results of an online survey of e- cigarette users. Tob Harm Re- ductlon [intemet]. 2009 (cited 2010 Feb 91; working paper 011: (about 15 pp]. Available from: http: / /www.tobaccoharmraduction.org/ wpapers/011.htm. 12. Zezima K. Cigarettes without smoke, or regulation. The New York Times. 2009 [cited 2009 Dec 231. Available from: httpJ /nytimes. com/2009/06/02/us/02cigarette.html?-r=l. 13. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Evaluation of e- cigarettes. FDA. 2009 May 4 (Cited 2009 Dec 10). Available from: httpYAvww.fda.gov/ downloads /Drugs/ScienceResearch/UCM 173250.pdf. 14. Wollsheid KA, Kremzner ME. Electronic cigarettes: safety concerns and regulatory Issues. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2009 ;66:1740 -2. 15. Laugesen M. Second safety report on the Ruyan e- cigarette. Health New Zealand. 2008 Apr [cited 2009 Dec 101; version 8: [about 28 pp]. Available from: http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2ndSafe- tyReport_9Apr08.pdf. 18. Crown Seven Hydro [cited 2010 Jan 261. Available from: httpJ /www. crown7.com/. 17. E- puffer® International Inc.: Extending Smoker's LifelTm c 2007 - 2010[cited 2010 Jan 27). Available from: httpJ /www.epuffer.com/. 18. Njoy Electronic Cigarettes- Electronic Cigarettes and Accessories [cited 2010 Jan 26]. Available from: http: / /www.njoycigarettestore. com/faq. 19. Laugessen M. Ruyan e- cigarette bench -top tests. Poster presented to the joint conference of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco and Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco - Europe. 2009. 20. Bullen C, McRobie H, Thomley S, Glover M, Laugesen M. Effect of an electronic cigarette on desire to smoke and withdrawal, user prefer- ences and nicotine delivery: randomized cross -over trial. Tob Control 2010;19:98 -103. 21. Eissenberg T. Electronic nicotine delivery devices: ineffective nico- tine delivery and craving suppression after acute administration. Tob Control 2010;19:87 --8. 22. Gray JN, Breland AB, Weaver M. Eissenberg T. Potential reduced exposure products (PREPs) for smokeless tobacco users: clinical evaluation methodology. Nicotine Tob Res 2008 ;10:1441 -8. 23. Breland AB, Buchhalter AR, Evans SE, Eissenberg T. Evaluating acute effects of potential reduced- exposure products for smokers: www.aacrjournals.org clinical laboratory methodology. Nicotine Tob Res 2002;4 Suppl 2: S131-40. 24. Breland AB, Meykamp BA, Elssenberg T. Clinical laboratory evalua- tion of potential reduced exposure products for smokers. Nicotine Tob Res 2006;8:727 -38. 25. NJOY [Internet]. Scottsdale, AZ: NJOY ®; c 2010 [cited 2010 Jan 261. Available from: httpJ/ www .njoythefreedom.comfindex.php. 28, Crown Seven ( Internet]. Scottsdale, AZ: Crown Seven; c 2010 [cited 2010 Jan 26]. Available from: httpJ /crown7.coWndex.shtmi. 27. Federal Trade Commission. Tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide of the smoke of 1294 varieties of domestic cigarettes for the year 1998. [Cited 2010, Jan 261. Available from: http: / /www.ftc.gov/ reports / tobacco /1998tar&nicotinereport.pdf %22. 28. Cox LS, Tiffany ST, Christen AG. Evaluation of the brief questionnaire of smoking urges (OSU- brief) in laboratory and clinical settings. Nicotine Tob Res 2001;3:7 -16. 29. Eissenberg T, Griffiths RR, Stitzer ML. Mecamylamine does not pre- cipitate withdrawal in cigarette smokers. Psychopharmacelogy 1996; 127:328-36. 30. Gouriay SG, Forbes A, Marriner T, Pethlca D, McNeil JJ. Double blind trial of repeated treatment with transdermal nicotine for relapsed smokers. BMJ 1995 :311:363 -8. 31. Kleykamp BA, Jennings JM, Sams C, Weaver MF, Eissenberg T. The Influence of transdermal nicotine on tobacco/nicotine abstinence and the effects of a concurrently administered cigarette In women and men. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2008;16:99 -112. 32. Eissenberg T. Shihadeh A. Waterpipe tobacco and cigarette smok- ing: direct comparison of toxicant exposure. Am J Prev Mad 2009; 37:518 -23. 33. Blank MD, Sams C. Weaver MF, Elssenberg T. Nicotine delivery, car- diovascular profile, and subjective effects of an oral tobacco product for smokers. Nicotine Tob Res 2008;10:417 -21. 34. Perkins KA, Epstein LH, Stiller RL, Marks BL, Jacob FIG. Acute of- facts of nicotine on resting metabolic rate In cigarette smokers. Am J Clin Nutr 1989;50:545 -50. 35. Evans SE, Blank MD, Sams C, Weaver MF, Elssenberg T. Transder- mal nicotine - induced tobacco abstinence symptom suppression: nicotine dose and smokers' gender. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 2006;14:121 -35. 36. Fant RV, Henningfield JE, Nelson RA, Pickworth WB. Phannacokl- netics and pharmacodynamics of moist snuff in humans. Tab Control 1999;8:387 -92. 37. Buchhalter AR, Acosta MC, Evans SE, Breland AB, Eissenberg T. To- bacco abstinence symptom suppression: the role played by the smoking- related stimuli that are delivered by denlcotinized cigar- ettes. Addiction 2005;100:550 -9. 38. Hughes JR, Keely JP. The effect of a novel smoking system- Accord -on ongoing smoking and toxin exposure. Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6:1021 -7. 39. Lakler JB. Smoking and cardiovascular disease. Am J Med 1992;93 Suppl 1:S8 -12. 40. Hatsukami DK, Henningfield JE, Kotlyar M. Harm reduction ap- proaches to reducing tobacco - related mortality. Annu Rev Public Health 2004;25:377 -95. 41. Blank MD, Eissenberg T. Evaluating oral noncombustible potential reduced exposure products for smokers. Nicotine Tob Res 2010; 12:336 -43. 42. Carter LP, Stitzer ML, Henningfield JE, O'Connor RJ, Cummings KM, Hatsukami DK. Abuse liability assessment of tobacco products in- cluding potential reduced exposure products. Cancer Epidemiol Bio- markers Prev 2009;18:3241 -62. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(8) August 2010 1953 Downloaded from cebp.aacrjournals.org on December 9, 2013. © 2010 American Association for Cancer Research. huhmr Air 1013: 23: 25 -31 n iki- onlinelibrarr.com /joanml /irna Prnuerl in Shigapore..411 rights resereeel Does e- cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? Abstract Electronic cigarette consumption ('vaping') is marketed as an alterna- tive to conventional tobacco smoking. Technically, a mixture of chemicals containing carrier liquids, flavors, and optionally nicotine is vaporized and in- haled. The present study aims at the determination of the release of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and (ultra)fine particles (FP /UFP) from an a -ciga- rette under near -to- real -use conditions in an 8 -m' emission test chamber. Fur- thermore, the inhaled mixture is analyzed in small chambers. An increase in FP/ UFP and VOC could be determined after the use of the e- cigarette. Prominent components in the gas -phase are 1,2- propanediol, 1,2,3 - propanetriol, diacetin, flavorings, and traces of nicotine. As a consequence, 'passive vaping' must be expected from the consumption of e- cigarettes. Furthermore, the inhaled aerosol undergoes changes in the human lung that is assumed to be attributed to deposition and evaporation. © 1011 Jahn Wiley & Sans AIS INDOOR AIR rloi: 10.1 / 1 / /j. lbl10- 11ti6.4.1l11 Z.OI1792..t' T. Schripp, D. Markewitz, E. Uhde, T. Salthammer Department Material Analysis and Indoor Chemistry, Fraunhofer Wilhelm - Klauditz - Institut IWKII. Braunschweig, Germany Key words: Electronic cigarette; Indoor air quality Formaldehyde; Ultrafine particles; Propylene glycol Third -hand smoke. T. Schripp Department Material Analysis and Indoor Chemistry. Fraunhofer Wilhelm - Klauditz- Institut IWKII Bienroder Weg 54E 0-38108 Braunschweig Germany Tel.: +49 -531- 2155 -249 Fax: +49.531- 2155 -905 e -mail: tobias .schripp (Mwki.fraunhofer.de Received far review 20 February 2012. Accepted for publication 28 May 2012. Practical Implications The consumption of e- cigarettes marks a new source for chemical and aerosol exposure in the indoor environment. To evaluate the impact of c- cigarettes on indoor air quality and to estimate the possible effect of passive vaping, infor- mation about the chemical characteristics of the released vapor is needed. Introduction Electronic cigarettes show it rapidly growing market share and are advertised as a healthier alternative to conventional smoking. These 'e- cigarettes' contain a small battery- driven heating unit that vaporizesa mixture ofchemicals, the so- called `liquids'. They usually contain flavors and carrier substances and maybe purchased with and without nicotine. The nicotine content roughly differs between 0 and 20 mg /ml depending on the brand (Trehy et al., 2011). A common carrier of the'liquids' is 1,2- propanediol (propylene glycol, PG) that leads to a visible fume during exhalation. This compound is also frequently used as a solvent in dosage formulations of aerosolized drug delivery systems such as pressurized metered -dose inhalers and nebulizers for the clinical practicc(Montharuct a1.,2010).Howcver,thefrcqucncy ofuse iscxpccted to be higher in caseofe- cigarette vaping, leading to a different exposure pattern. Propylene glycol is also a common humectant for tobacco cigarettes (Paschke et al., 2002). In contrast to conventional ciga- rettes, the released compounds are not generated from a combustion process (as it smoke) but by direct evapora- tion (as a vapor). For this reason, the term 'vaping' has been established among e- cigarette users as an analog to the conventional cigarette'smoking' (Etter, 2010). A recent study reports adverse physiological effects after the short -term use of e- cigarettes (Vardavas et al., 2011). This effect may be attributed to propylene glycol that is known to cause upper airway irritations (Wieslander et al., 2001). However, it comprehensive exposure assessment that compares the nicotine intake from e- cigarettes and conventional cigarettes — which also considers the impact of the carrier substances — is not available at the present state. Furthermore, the release of the organic compounds from the 'liquids'and 25 111-; Schripp et al. the release of particles into the indoor environment are still mostly unknown. In contrast, the impact of environmental tobacco smoke from conventional smoking on the indoor air quality has been intensively researched in the past decade. Numerous studies report the release of particulate matter (Nazaroff and Klepeis, 2003) and organic compounds such as formaldehyde, from the combustion of tobacco products (Baek and Jenkins, 2004; Baker, 2006; Paschke et al., 2002). These scientific findings led to a ban on smoking in public buildings and restaurants in many countries. This ban had a positive influence on the indoor air quality in these buildings (Bohac et al., 2010; Gleich et al., 2011). Beyond indoor climate, airflow conditions, room size, and number of e- cigarette users, many other parameters have the potential to affect `passive vaping'. The concentrations of the exhaled compounds during e- cigarette consumption can be expected to differ with the composition of the applied 'liquids', the type of e- cigarette in use, the age of the e- cigarette (e.g., owing to remains of previous `liquids'), length of the puff, and interval between the puffs. Moreover, the composition of the exhaled air will be affected by age, sex, activity, health status, and diet of the user (Riess et al., 2010). Another important aspect in the future discussion about e- cigarettes will be the effect of 'third -hand smoke' that mainly describes human exposure against residues of smoking on clothes, furniture, and other indoor surfaces (Matt et al., 2011). In case of c- cigarettes, the solvent of the 'liquids' may remain on available surfaces and be a source for the contam- ination of residents. Even more important might be the accidental spilling of 'liquids' that can lead to unin- tended Uptake of nicotine by skin permeation — an effect that is intentionally used for nicotine patches (Hammer et al., 2011). It can be assumed that the health impact of e- cigarette use is mainly influenced by the safety and quality of the applied 'liquids'. The present study provides first indications about the entry of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and ultrafine particles into the indoor environment con- nected with the, use of electronic cigarettes. One measurement was performed in it full -scale emission test chamber with one e- cigarette and different 'liquids'. Additional small -scale chamber measurements were performed to identify the effect of aerosol aging and the impact of different e- cigarette types. The experi- ments aim at the identification of the released com- pounds under near -to- real -use conditions to estimate the effect of 'passive vaping'. Material and methods Large -scale vaping /smoking experiment fhe experiment was performed in an 8 -m3 stainless - steel emission test chamber. This chamber was oper- 26 ated at 23 °C and 50% relative humidity at an air exchange .rate of 0.3 /h. The formaldehyde concentra- tion in the chamber was continuously recorded every 30 s by an AL4021 formaldehyde auto analyzer (AeroLaser). A fast mobility particle sizer (FMPS; TSI Inc., Shoreview, MN, USA) recorded the particle number concentration of fine and ultrafine particles (FP /UFP) in the size range between 5.6 and 560 nm at I Hz in 32 channels. Before the experiment and after each smoking event, 3 1 of chamber air was pumped (200 ml /min) through stainless -steel tubes filled with 300 mg Tenax TA. The tubes were analyzed via thermal desorption (Ultra/ Unity 2; Markes Int., Llantrisant, UK) and gas chromatography (6890 Series GC System; Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA; HPSMS 60 m x 250 jim x 0.3 Eim column) coupled with mass spectrometry (5973N MSD; Agilent) according to ISO 16000 -6. In parallel, lower aldehydes (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, etc.) were collected using silica gel cartridges contain- ing 2,4- dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH). The car- tridges were analyzed according to ISO 16000 -3 using high - performance liquid chromatography coupled with a variable wavelength detector (HPLC 1200 Infinity; Agilent). A volunteering smoker took a seat in the chamber, and the chamber blank was measured after 20 min of conditioning. The e- cigarette was then filled with an apple- flavored nicotine -free 'liquid' (Liquid 1) outside of the chamber and given to the test person through a sampling port. The person took six deep -lung puffs (puff length - 3 s) with a delay of 60 s between each puff. The air sampling on Tenax TA tubes started at puff 4 and lasted 15 min. This procedure was per- formed for another two 'liquids', Liquid 2 and Liquid 3 (see Table 1). After the e- cigarette was removed from the chamber, a conventional tobacco cigarette was lit outside the chamber and given to the test person. The sampling procedure was identical to the e- cigarette measure- ment. For the determination of the feasible puff length, the mouthpiece and the wick (see Figure 1) were removed from the e- cigarette and the temperature of the heating coil was measured via thermography (ThermaCAM B20; FLIR Systems, Wilsonville, OR, USA) during Table 1 Characteristics of the 'liquids' Main aroma Nicotine Sample Flavor compound content' Liquid 1 Apple 3- Methylbutyl- 3- methylbutanoate 0 mg/ml Liquid 2 Apple 3-Methylbutyl -3- methylbutanoate 18 mg /ml Liquid 3 Tobacco Ethyl maltol 18 mg /ml Conventional — — 0.8 mg /cigarette cigarette 'As stated by the manufacturer. [Correction added on 6 August 2012, after first online publication: Nicotine content for Liquid 2 and liquid 3 changed from 1.8 mg /ml to 18 mg /ml.] Heating coil Fig. 1 Scheme of the tested e- cigarette A. The thermographic image shows the temperature distribution of the heating unit without 'liquid' (> 350 °C in the center) heat -up. The time - resolved analysis showed an interval of 3 s between start of the cigarette and reaching stable temperature conditions. The puff length was equally increased for e- cigarette and tobacco cigarette, even though the length of the puff was approximately l s longer than specified in ISO 3308 (2000). The puff interval (60 s) was selected according to ISO 3308. The number of puffs (10 in ISO 3308) had to be adapted to the new smoking conditions because the tobacco cigarette was depleted after six puffs. Vapor analysis An aerosol aging experiment was performed in a 10 -1 glass emission test chamber. The chamber is double walled and is temperature controlled by water. The air in the chamber is mixed by it small fan. The e- cigarette was connected to the inlet, and a pump was used to produce a slight underpressure that transfers the aerosol directly into the chamber. The e- cigarette was operated for 3 s. The aerosol was aged in the chamber for 1, 3, 5, 7, and 10 min at 37°C. Additionally, the aerosol was aged 5 min at 23, 37, and 50 °C. Then, the FMPS (sample flow rate of 8 l /min) was connected to the chamber, and the chamber inlet was equipped with a HEPA filter. Analysis of VOCs in exhaled breath After measuring the VOC chamber blank, an e- cigarette consumer was asked to exhale one e- cigarette Table 2 Characteristics of the tested e- cigarettes Sample Casing Delivery system Comparative price e- Cigarette A Stainless steel /rubber Tank High (A5 Euro) e- Cigarette B Stainless steel Cotton Medium e- Cigarette C Stainless steel Tank Low (Q5 Euro) Does e- cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? puff into the 10 -1 glass chamber. The VOCs within the chamber were then determined by GC /MS after sampling on Tenax TA tubes (61L, 150 ml /min). Measurement with three different e- cigarettes Three different types of e- cigarettes (see Table 2) were filled with `liquid' from the same stock (Liquid 1). The cigarette was operated for 3 s. The vapor from the e- cigarettes was transferred into the 10 -1 glass chamber using a pump. The chamber was set to 37 °C and an air exchange rate of 3 /h. Directly after injection of the vapor, sampling on Tcnax TA was performed for 60 min (100 ml /min) and sampling on DNPH was performed for 200 min (120 ml /min). Between each measurement, the chamber was heated to 60 °C for 24 h at maximum air exchange rate (6 /h). The measured concentration cS (Erg/ m3) is converted into the released mass per puff M PP (Itg/ puff) according to Equation 1 using the sample volume Vs (m3), the number of puffs it (puff), and the ratio between sample flow As (m3 /h) and chamber exhaust flow I�C (M3 /h). Additionally, the value is corrected for the expected exponential decay of the concentration because of the air exchange rate k ( /h). f e-k'd! MPP =` -S VS•v�•° = �s. VS. V�. 1 (1) it Vs fe_k.ld1 n Vs I —e -k -r 0 Descriptions of the performed experiments as well as the measured climatic conditions during measurement are summarized in Table 3. Results and discussion Emission of volatile organic compounds Electronic cigarettes use a completely different principle of operation compared to tobacco cigarettes. The `liquid' is vaporized and because of the thermodynamic prop- erties of 1,2- propancdiol (Kr, = 188 °C, AH,, = 64.5 kJ/ mol at 298.15 K) (Verevkin, 2004), the heat from the coil (see Figure I) is led off, which avoids pyrolysis. In contrast, conventional cigarettes release numerous compounds into the indoor environment. Paschke et al. (2002) listed hundreds of ingredients in tobacco cigarettes that form volatile combustion products. In Table 4, the 20 compounds with the highest concentra- tions in the 8 -m3 chamber air are summarized. During operation of the e- cigarette, the carrier substance of the `liquids', 1,2- propanediol, was detected in the chamber atmosphere but the concentration was below the limit of determination. In contrast, a high concentration of- I,2- propanediol was observed for smoking of the conven- tional cigarette. The compound is known to be pyro- 27 Schripp et al. Table 3 Description of the performed experiments Experiment Chamber T ( °CI° BH (%)a a -Cig. 'Liquid' Smoker Analytics Large -scale experiment 8 -m3 stainless steel 24.1 ± 1.1 44.5 ± 8.2 A 1 -3 Yes Fast mobility particle sizer (FMPSI, AeroLaser, Tenax, DNPH Vapor analysis /aging 10.1 glass 22.7 ± 0.1 36.9 ± 0.5 A 1 No FMPS 37.1 ± 0.2 18.9 ± 0.6 49.9 ± 0.1 11.0 t 0.6 Exhaled breath 10 -1 glass 37.0 ± 0.2 27.2 t 4.3 A 1 Yes Tenax Three e- cigarettes 10 -1 glass 36.8 ± 0.2 20.2 ± 0.6 A 1 No Tenax, DNPH 37.1±0.2 18.2±0.6 8 37.1 ±0.2 17.7x0.6 C 'These values provide the measured mean climatic conditions (measuring interval: 1 min) and the standard deviations during performing the experiments. Table 4 Concentrations (jug/m3) of selected compounds during the B -m) emission test chamber measurement of e- cigarette A and conventional cigarette using Tenax TA and DNPH E- cigarette Conventional cigarette Compounds CAS Participant blank Liquid 1 Liquid 2 Liquid 3 1,1- Propanediol 57 -55.6 <1 <1 <1 <1 '112 1- Hydroxy -2- propanone 116 -09 -6 <1 <1 <1 <1 62 2,3- Butanedione 431 -03 -8 <1 <1 <1 <1 21 2,5- Dimethylfuran 625 -86 -5 <1 <1 <1 <1 5 2- Butanone (MEK) 78 -93 -3 <1 2 2 2 19 2- Furaldehyde 9"1.1 <1 <1 <1 <1 21 2- Methylfurane 534 -22 -5 <1 <1 <1 <1 19 3- Ethenyl- pyridine' 1121 -55.7 <1 <1 <1 <1 24 Acetic acid 64 -19 -7 <1 11 13 14 68 Acetone 61.64 -1 <1 17 18 25 64 Benzene 71 -43 -2 <1 <1 <1 <1 22 Isoprene 78 -79 -5 8 6 7 10 135 Limonene 5989 -27 -5 <1 <1 <1 <1 21 m,p- Xylene 1330.20.7 <1 <1 <1 <1 18 Phenol 108 -95-2 <1 <1 <1 <1 15 Pyrrole 109 -97 -7 <1 <1 <1 <1 61 Toluene 108.88.3 <t <1 <1 <1 44 Formaldehyde° 50 -00 -0 <1 B 11 16 86 Acetaldehyde 75 -07 -0 <1 2 2 3 119 Propanalb 123 -38.6 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 12 30uantified on the basis of toluene response bDNPH method. lyzed to acetaldehyde and acetone during smoking (Paschke, 2002). Ohta et al. (2011) proposed the formation of form- aldehyde, acetaldehyde, and methylglyoxal in the e- cigarette because of the oxidation of propylene glycol during contact with the active heating coil. However, continuous monitoring only showed it slight increase in the formaldehyde concentration in the 8 -m3 emission test chamber before and during the consumption of the three `liquids' (see Table 4 and Figure 2). This might be caused by the person in the chamber itself, because people are known to exhale formaldehyde in low amounts (Riess et al., 2010) and the increase was already observed during the conditioning phase (Fig- ure 2). Furthermore, the release of formaldehyde was also below the limit of detection in the small -scale experiments. The expected rise of the formaldehyde 28 concentration in the chamber from smoking a conven- tional cigarette with it peak value of 114 ppb is shown in Figure 2. Other indoor pollutants of special interest, such as benzene, were only detected during the tobacco smoking experiment. The rising concentrations of acetic acid and acetone during c- cigarette operation may also be attributed to the metabolism of the consumer. Although 1,2- propancdiol was detected in traces only in the 8 -m3 chamber during the consumption of c- cigarettes, this compound must be released owing to the visible Fume in the exhaled breath. To determine the VOC composition in the breath gas directly, an e- cigarette smoker exhaled into it 10 -1 glass chamber. The identified chemical species are shown in Figure 3. The experiment revealed a high amount of 1,2- propanc- diol in the exhaled air. Other main components were the 120 i n 10 0 a 0 0 .a 6o E i� 60 40 a o 20 LL 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Time (h) Fig. 2 Formaldehyde concentration in the 8 -m3 test chamber during consumption of e- cigarettes (Liquids 1 -3) and one con- ventional cigarette carrier substance 1,2,3 - propanetriol, the flavoring source diacetin as well as traces of apple oil (3- methylbutyl- 3- methylbutanoate) and nicotine. The fact that these compounds were not detectable during the 8 -m3 emission test chamber measurement is assumed to be caused by the short usage (6 min per `liquid') and sink effects of the chamber for the very polar 1,2- propancdiol. Regarding the variability of e- cigarettes, the VOC emission strength seems to differ with different types of e- cigarettes (Table 5). While the e- cigarettes A and C have similar emission patterns, the emission from e- cigarette B is significantly higher. Formaldehyde was not detected during any measurement. With e- cigarette C, almost three times more propylene glycol is released per puff. This deviation is assumed to be Abundance 2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 600,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 Does e- cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? caused by the `liquid' supply technique. In case of e- cigarettes A and C, the `liquid' is stored in a tank, while e- cigarette B features a cotton unit that is drenched with the `liquid'. However, a general corre- lation between emission strength and `liquid' supply technique (tank or cotton) is not possible from this limited data set. The effect of other systems, such as underpressure - activated e- cigarettes, was not deter- mined in this study and is an important topic for further research. Aerosol release from the e- cigarette The airborne particles being related to the e- cigarette experiment are assumed to be formed from supersat- urated 1,2- propanediol vapor. In contrast to the conventional cigarette, which continuously emits par- ticles from the combustion process itself, the e- cigarette aerosol is solely released during exhalation. The e- cigarette aerosol measured in the 8 -m3 chamber is bimodal: one maximum is found in the range of 30 nm and one in the range of 100 nm (see Figure 4a). During the ongoing experiment, the ultrafine particle mode increased. The particles in the higher mode are assumed to be evaporated or deposited in the human lung. Because of the high vapor pressure of 1,2- propanediol (ps = 17.36 Pa at 298.15 K) (Verevkin, 2004), the dynamics of the aerosol is expected to be fast. For comparison, the particle size distribution of the conventional cigarette provides a single mode with a maximum at 100 nm and a higher total number concentration (see Figure 4b). For characterization of the e- cigarette aerosol, it was passed directly from the mouthpiece into a 10 -1 glass emission test chamber. Then, it was aged for 5 min at 23, 37, and 50 °C, respectively. From Figure 5a, it is obvious 1,2- Propanediol (PG) v N d C N �o aaEi m N N fC 'C CU v 0 n c m N C, N V a Q y Cr C, a is a, d a C m c 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Time (h) Fig. 2 Formaldehyde concentration in the 8 -m3 test chamber during consumption of e- cigarettes (Liquids 1 -3) and one con- ventional cigarette carrier substance 1,2,3 - propanetriol, the flavoring source diacetin as well as traces of apple oil (3- methylbutyl- 3- methylbutanoate) and nicotine. The fact that these compounds were not detectable during the 8 -m3 emission test chamber measurement is assumed to be caused by the short usage (6 min per `liquid') and sink effects of the chamber for the very polar 1,2- propancdiol. Regarding the variability of e- cigarettes, the VOC emission strength seems to differ with different types of e- cigarettes (Table 5). While the e- cigarettes A and C have similar emission patterns, the emission from e- cigarette B is significantly higher. Formaldehyde was not detected during any measurement. With e- cigarette C, almost three times more propylene glycol is released per puff. This deviation is assumed to be Abundance 2,000,000 1,800,000 1,600,000 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 600,000 600,000 400,000 200,000 Does e- cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? caused by the `liquid' supply technique. In case of e- cigarettes A and C, the `liquid' is stored in a tank, while e- cigarette B features a cotton unit that is drenched with the `liquid'. However, a general corre- lation between emission strength and `liquid' supply technique (tank or cotton) is not possible from this limited data set. The effect of other systems, such as underpressure - activated e- cigarettes, was not deter- mined in this study and is an important topic for further research. Aerosol release from the e- cigarette The airborne particles being related to the e- cigarette experiment are assumed to be formed from supersat- urated 1,2- propanediol vapor. In contrast to the conventional cigarette, which continuously emits par- ticles from the combustion process itself, the e- cigarette aerosol is solely released during exhalation. The e- cigarette aerosol measured in the 8 -m3 chamber is bimodal: one maximum is found in the range of 30 nm and one in the range of 100 nm (see Figure 4a). During the ongoing experiment, the ultrafine particle mode increased. The particles in the higher mode are assumed to be evaporated or deposited in the human lung. Because of the high vapor pressure of 1,2- propanediol (ps = 17.36 Pa at 298.15 K) (Verevkin, 2004), the dynamics of the aerosol is expected to be fast. For comparison, the particle size distribution of the conventional cigarette provides a single mode with a maximum at 100 nm and a higher total number concentration (see Figure 4b). For characterization of the e- cigarette aerosol, it was passed directly from the mouthpiece into a 10 -1 glass emission test chamber. Then, it was aged for 5 min at 23, 37, and 50 °C, respectively. From Figure 5a, it is obvious 1,2- Propanediol (PG) v N d C N �o aaEi m N N fC 'C CU v 0 n 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 Time - -> (min) Fig. 3 Gas chromatogram of one exhaled e- cigarette pulT (Liquid 2) in a 10 -1 glass chamber (sampled on Tenax TA, 3 1 sampling volume) (MMB = 3- methylbutyl -3- methylbutanoate; PG = propylene glycol) 29 c U MMB v C m c S N c H E CL a` Q CU `- Ci x $ o z �. ►/ I I I CO 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 Time - -> (min) Fig. 3 Gas chromatogram of one exhaled e- cigarette pulT (Liquid 2) in a 10 -1 glass chamber (sampled on Tenax TA, 3 1 sampling volume) (MMB = 3- methylbutyl -3- methylbutanoate; PG = propylene glycol) 29 Schripp et al. Table 5 Comparison of the release of volatile organic compound for a number of selected compounds from three types of e- cigarettes A -C lone puff, 3 sl in a 10-1 glass chamber using f Tenax TA and DNPH Concentration (jig/M3) Estimated mass per puff (Erg/puffr GA Compound A B C q g C 1,2- Propanediol 53 000 175 000 64 000 1673 5515 1,2.3 - Propanetriol 316 477 161 2021 3- Methylbutyl -3- methylbutanoate 3 35 10 15 5 Oiacetin 2 1 10 0.1 1.1 0.3 Triacetin <t 1 0.06 0.03 0.03 Nicotine 7 <t <1 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Formaldehyde 1 4 0.2 0.1 Acetaldehyde° <2 <2 <2 <0.25 <0.25 <0.15 Propanal° <1 <1 <1 <0•13 <0.13 <0.13 <1 <1 <1 <0.13 <0.13 <0.13 'The conversion factors based on the sample volume, the sample flow, and the exponential decay of the concentration (see Equation 1). °DNPH method. (a) 3x10' C 0 ca m 2 x 101 C m U C 3 tb E 103 a c m U a o (b) 5 x 10' 4x10' 3 x 10^ 2 x 104 10° 0 ' . —^^^_ uimiliilitil t�l(�Illlilll(Illln� I 10 100 10 100 Particle diameter (nm) Particle diameter (nm) Fig. 4 (a) Aerosol size distribution during consumption of an e- cigarette in the 8 -m' chamber. (b) Aerosol size distribution during consumption of a conventional cigarette in the 8 -m; chamber. The arrows in the insets of (a) and (b) indicate the actual time in concentration development (a) (b) 3.0 x 105 3.0- 105 23 °C FN min " v— 37 °C 3 min U 2.5 x 105 a— 50 °C 2.5 x 105 5 min C 7 min 10 min S 2.0 x 105 2.0 x 105 C 1.5 x 105 1.5 x 105 105 105 C S2 U a 5.0 x 104 5.0. 104 0 0 10 100 10 100 Particle diameter (nm) Particle diameter (nm) Fig. 5 Aerosol size distributions of aged e- cigarette aerosols in a 10 -I glass chamber. The aerosol was aged for 5 min at different temperatures (a) and for different times at 37 °C (b) �hat beca use of increasing temperat tire, theaerosolshifts at 45 mt1. Figure 5b demonstrates the effect ofa in at i om a bimodal size distribution with maxima at 60 and 37 °C. Between I and 3 min, the higher mode at 100 nm 100 nm into it single -mode distribution with a maximum disappeared and a single -mode aerosol with a maximum 30 at 45 rim is left. This 'shrinking: of the particles can be {' attributed to the evaporation of the particles under ideal conditions. However, in the real indoor environment, the present airborne particles might affect aging, for example, owing to coagulation. The inlet air of the large - chamber experiment was free of particles, and thus, the experimental results in both chambers are conclusive. In total, these findings prove that the influence of the e- cigarette on the indoor air particle concentration cannot be determined solely from direct aerosol sampling at the source. The dynamics and changes of the aerosol size . distribution resulting from the dwell time in the human lung must be considered. Conclusions The consumption of e- cigarettes causes emissions of aerosols and VOCs, such as 1,2- propanediol, flavoring substances, and nicotine, into indoor air. During inhalation of e- cigarette vapor, the aerosol size distribution alters in the human lung and leads to an exhalation of smaller particles. This effect is caused References Baek, S.O. and Jenkins, R.A. (2004) Char- acterization of trace organic compounds associated with aged and diluted side - stream tobacco smoke in a controlled atmosphere - volatile organic compounds and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, Annos. Environ., 38, 6583 -6599. Baker, R.R. (2006) The generation of form- aldehyde in cigarettes - overview and re- cent experiments, Food Client. To.vicoL. 41, 1799 -1822. Bohac, D.L., Hewett, M.J., Kapphahn, K.I., Grimsrud, D.T., Apte, M.G. and Gundel, L.A. (2010) Change in indoor particle levels after a smoking ban in Minnesota Bars and restaurants, Ant. J. Prev. tiled., 39, S3 -S9. Etter, J.F. (2010) Electronic cigarettes: a survey of users, BiVEC Puhlic Health, 10, 231. Gleich, F., Mons, U. and P61schke- Langer, M. (2011) Air contamination due to smoking in German restaurants, bars, and other venues - before and after the imple- mentation of a partial smoking ban, Nicotine Toh. Res., 13, 1155 -1160. Hammer, T.R., Fischer, K., Mueller, M. and Hoefer, D. (2011) Ellects of cigarette smoke residues from textiles on fibro- blasts, neurocytes and zebrafish embryos and nicotine permeation through human skin, hu. J. Hvg. Environ. Health, 214, 384 -391. ISO 3308 (2000) Routine Anal)-ti(-al Ciga- reLte- Smoking Machine - Dc finiiiorrs and Does e- cigarette consumption cause passive vaping? by the evaporation of the liquid particles in the lung and also in the environment after exhalation. The quantity of the inhaled vapor could be observed to depend on the `liquid' delivery system of the e- cigarette in use. Overall, the e- cigarette is a new source of VOCs and ultrafine /fine particles in the. indoor environment. Therefore, the question of `passive vaping' can be answered in the affirmative. However, with regard to a health - related evaluation of e- cigarette consumption, the impact of vapor inhalation into the human lung should be of primary concern. Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to Manuela Lingnau for preparing the e- cigarette scheme and Friedrich Schluter for providing the thermographic image. The authors especially like to thank Frank Fuhrmann for stimulat- ing the interest in the e- cigarette topic. This work was financially supported by internal Fraunhofer WKI research funds. Standard Conditions, Berlin, Beuth Ver- lag. Matt, G.E., Quintana, P.J.E., Destaillats, H., Gundel, L.A., Sleiman, M., Singer, B.C., Jacob, P., Benowitz, N., Winickoff, J.P., Rehan, V., Talbot, P., Schick, S., Samet, J., Wang, Y.S., Hang, B., Martins- Green, M., Pankow, J.F. and Hovell, M.F. (2011) Thirdhand tobacco smoke: emerging evidence and arguments for a multidisciplinary research agenda, Envi- ron. Health Perspect., 119, 1218 -1226. Montharu, J., Le Guellec, S., Kittel, B., Rab- cmampianina, Y., Guillcmain, J., Gauthi- er, F., Diot, P. and de Monte, M. (20 10) Evaluation of lung tolerance of ethanol, propylene glycol, and sorbitan monooleate as solvents in medical aerosols, J. Aerosol Bled. Puhrt. Drug. Delir., 23,41-46. Nazaroff, W.W. and Klcpcis, N. (2003) Environmental tobacco smoke particles. In: Morawska, L. and Salthammer, T. (eds) Indoor Environment - Airborne Par- ticles and Settled Dust, Weinheim, Wiley - VCH, 245 -274. Ohta, K., Uchiyama, S., Inaba, Y., Nakag- ome, H. and Kunugita, N. (2011) Deter- mination of carbonyl compounds generated from the electronic cigarette using coupled silica cartridges impreg- nated with hydroquinone and 2,4 -dini- tropheny1hydrazine, Bunseki Kagaku, 60, 791 -797. Paschke, T., Scherer, G. and Heller, W.D. (2002) Effects of ingredients on cigarette smoke composition and biological activity: a literature overview, Beitrlige rur Ta- bakforscluang international, 20, 107 -247. Riess, U., Tegtbur, U., Fauck, C., Fuhrmann, F., Markewitz, D. and Salthammer, T. (2010) Experimental setup and analytical methods for the non - invasive determina- tion of volatile organic compounds, form- aldehyde and NOx in exhaled human breath, Anal. Chim. Acta, 669, 53-62. Trchy, M.L., Ye, W., Hadwiger, M.E., Moore, T.W., Allgire; J.F., Woodruff, J.T., Ahadi, S.S., Black, J.C. and We- stenberger, B.J. (2011) Analysis of c1cc- tronic cigarette cartridges, refill solutions, and smoke for nicotine and nicotine related impurities, J. Liq. Chromatogr. Relit. Technol., 34, 1442 -1458. Vardavas, C.L. Anagnostopoulos, N., Kougias, M., Evangelopoulou, V., Connolly, G.N. and Behrakis, P.K. (2011) Acute pulmonary effects of using an e- cigarette: impact on respiratory flow resistance, impedance and exhaled nitric oxide, Chest, 141, 1400 -1406. Verevkin, S.P. (2004) Determination of vapor pressures and enthalpies of vaporization of 1 2- alkanediols, Fluid Phase Equilib., 224, 23 -29. Wieslander, G., Norback, D. and Lindgren, T. (2001) Experimental cxposure'to propylene glycol mist in aviation emer- gency training: acute ocular and respira- tory effects, Occap. Environ. t1ed., 58, 649 -655. 31 Polosa et a/. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 http://www.blomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 C c Public Health _ r'Jj rK¢r�ul� it RESEARCH ARTICLEAN-4�- ;:52t§ .�.;: Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e- Cigarette) on smoking reduction and cessation: a prospective 6 -month pilot study Riccardo Polosa1.2' , Pasquale Caponnetto1.2 , Jaymin B Morjaria3, Gabriella Papale1,2 , Davide Campagna' Z and Cristina RU5501.2 Abstract Background: Cigarette smoking is a tough addiction to break. Therefore, improved approaches to smoking cessation are necessary. The electronic- cigarette (e- Cigarette), a battery- powered electronic nicotine delivery device (ENDD) resembling a cigarette, may help smokers to remain abstinent during their quit attempt or to reduce cigarette consumption. Efficacy and safety of these devices in long -term smoking cessation and /or smoking reduction studies have never been investigated. Methods: In this prospective proof -of- concept study we monitored possible modifications in smoking habits of 40 regular smokers (unwilling to quit) experimenting the 'Categoria' e- Cigarette with a focus on smoking reduction and smoking abstinence. Study participants were invited to attend a total of five study visits: at baseline, week -4, week -8, week -12 and week -24. Product use, number of cigarettes smoked, and exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO) levels were measured at each visit. Smoking reduction and abstinence rates were calculated. Adverse events and product preferences were also reviewed. Results: Sustained 50°x6 reduction in the number of cig /day at week -24 was shown in 13/40(32.5 %) participants; their median of 25 cigs /day decreasing to 6 cigs /day (p < 0.001). Sustained 80% reduction was shown in 5/40 (12.5 %) participants; their median of 30 cigs /day decreasing to 3 cigs /day (p = 0.043). Sustained smoking abstinence at week -24 was observed in 9/40(22.5 %) participants, with 6/9 still using the e- Cigarette by the end of the study. Combined sustained 50% reduction and smoking abstinence was shown in 22140 (55 %) participants, with an overall 88% fall in cigs /day. Mouth (20.6 %) and throat (32.4 %) irritation, and dry cough (32.4 %) were common, but diminished substantially by week -24. Overall, 2 to 3 cartridges /day were used throughout the study. Participants' perception and acceptance of the product was good. Conclusion: The use of e- Cigarette substantially decreased cigarette consumption without causing significant side effects in smokers not intending to quit (httpJ /ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT01195597). Background With well over one billion smokers' worldwide, cigarette smoking is a global epidemic that poses a substantial health burden and costs [1]. This is because cigarette smoke harms several organ systems of the human body, thus causing a broad range of diseases, many of which are fatal [2,31. The risk of serious disease diminishes Correspondence: polosa@unict it 'Centro per la Prevenzione e Cura del Tabagismo (CPCT), Azienda Ospedaliero- Universitada 'Policlinico- Vittorio Emanuele', University di Catania, Catania, Italy Full list of author information is available at the end of the article rapidly after quitting and life -long abstinence is known to reduce the risk of lung cancer, heart disease, strokes, chronic lung disease and other cancers [4,51. Although evidence -based recommendations indicate that smoking cessation programs are useful in helping smokers to quit [61, smoking is a very difficult addiction to break. It has been shown that approximately 80% of smokers who attempt to quit on their own, relapse within the first month of abstinence and only about 3- 5% remain abstinent at 6 months [7]. Although there is little doubt that currently- marketed smoking cessation (z- 77 v 111011 Polosa et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons 21oriled Central Attribution License ( http// Creativecomn)ons.org /licenses)by /2,01, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. rte"' v Polosa et at BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 httpJ /www.biomedcentral.com /1471- 2458/11/786 products increase the chance of committed smokers to stop smoking, they reportedly lack high levels of effi- cacy, especially in the real life setting [8]. Although this is known to reflect the chronic relapsing nature of tobacco dependence, the need for novel and effective approaches to smoking cessation interventions is beyond doubt. The electronic- cigarette (e- Cigarette) is a battery-pow- ered electronic nicotine delivery device (ENDD) resem- bling a cigarette designed for the purpose of nicotine delivery,where no tobacco or combustion is necessary for its operation [9] (Figure 0. Consequently, this pro- duct may be considered as a lower risk substitute for factory-made cigarettes. In addition, people report buy- ing them to help quit smoking, to reduce cigarette con- sumption and to relieve tobacco withdrawal symptoms due to workplace smoking restrictions [10]. Besides deli- vering nicotine, e- Cigarettes may also provide a coping mechanism for conditioned smoking cues by replacing some of the rituals associated with smoking gestures (e. g. hand -to -mouth action of smoking). For this reason, e- Cigarettes may help smokers to remain abstinent during their quit attempt or to reduce cigarette consumption. A recent internet survey on the satisfaction of e- Cigar- ette use has reported that the device helped in smoking abstinence and improved smoking- related symptoms [11]. Under acute experimental conditions, two mar- keted electronic cigarette brands suppressed tobacco abstinence symptom ratings without leading to measur- able levels of nicotine or CO in the exhaled breath [12]. The e- Cigarette is a very hot topic that has generated considerable global debate with authorities wanting to ban it or at least regulate it. Consequently, a formal BATTERY COMPONENTS LINDICATOR LIGHT W Page 2 of 12 demonstration supporting the efficacy and safety of these devices in smoking cessation and /or smoking reduction studies would be of utmost importance. With this in mind, we designed a prospective proof - of- concept study to monitor possible modifications in the smoking habits of a group of well characterized reg- ular smokers experimenting the most popular marketed e- Cigarette in Italy ('Categoria'; Arbi Group Srl, Milano, Italy) focusing on smoking reduction and smoking absti- nence. We also monitored adverse events and measured participants' perception and acceptance of the product. Methods Participants Healthy smokers 18 -60 years old, smoking > 15 factory- made cigarettes per day (cig /day) for at least the past 10 years and not currently attempting to quit smoking or wishing to do so in the next 30 days were recruited from the local Hospital staff in Catania, Italy. None of the participants reported a history of alcohol and illicit drug use, major depression or other psychiatric condi- tions. We also excluded subjects who reported recent myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, high blood pres- sure (BP > 140 mmHg systolic and /or 90 mmHg diasto- lic), diabetes mellitus, severe allergies, poorly controlled asthma or other airways diseases. The study protocol was discussed with the Chair of the local institutional ERB (Comitato Etico Azienda Vittorio Emanuele) in February 2010. in consideration of the fact that e- cigar- ette use is a widespread phenomenon in Italy, that many e- cigarette users are enjoying them as consumer goods, that this type of product is not regulated as a drug or a drug device in Italy (end users can buy a -cig almost ATOMIZING DEVICE INHALER LIQUID CONTAINER Figure 1 Structure of the 'Categoria' electronic - cigarette (e- Cigarette). the e- Cigarette is a battery- powered electronic nicotine delivery device (ENDD) resembling a cigarette designed for the purpose of providing inhaled doses of nicotine by way of a vaporized solution to the respiratory system. This device provides a flavor and physical sensation similar to that of inhaled tobacco smoke, while no smoke or combustion is actually involved in its operation. It is composed of the following key components: (1) the inhaler - also known as 'cartridge' (a disposable non - refillable plastic mouthpiece - resembling a tobacco cigarette's filter - which contains an absorbent material that is saturated with a liquid solution containing nicotine); (2) the atomizing device (the heating element that vaporizes the liquid in the mouthpiece and generates the mist with each puff); (3) the battery component (the body of the device - resembling a tobacco cigarette - which houses a lithium -ion re- chargeable battery to power the atomizer). The body of the device also houses an electronic airflow sensor to automatically activate the heating element upon inhalation and to light up a red LED indicator to signal activation of the device with each puff. Each pre - filled 'Original' cartridges used in this study contains nicotine (7.25 mg/cartridge) dissolved in propylene glycol (233.7 mg /cartridge) and vegetable glycerin (64.0 mg /cartridge) [details can be found at: httpJ/ www. liaf- onlus. org/ public/allegati /categorialb.pdf]. Polosa et at 8MC Public Health 2011, 11:786 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 anywhere - internet, tobacconists, pharmacies, restau- rants, and shops), and that only healthy smokers not willing to quit smoking would participate, it was felt that the study fulfilled the criteria of an observational naturalistic investigation and was exempt from the requirement from ethical approval. Participants gave written informed consent prior to participation in the study. ,Study Design and Baseline Measures Eligible participants were invited to use an ENDD ('Categoric' e- Cigarette, Arbi Group Srl, Milano, Italy) and were followed up prospectively. for 6 months. They attended a total of five study visits at our smoking cessa- tion clinic (Centro per la Prevenzione a Cura del Taba- gismo (CPCT), University di Catania, Italy): a baseline visit and four follow-up visits, (at week -4, week -8, week - 12 and week -24) (Figure 2). At baseline (study visit 1), basic demographic and a detailed smoking history were taken and individual pack -years (pack /yrs) calculated together with scoring of their level of nicotine dependence by means of Fager- strom Test of Nicotine Dependence (FTND) question- naire [13). Subjective ratings of depression were assessed with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) [141. Addi- tionally, levels of carbon monoxide in exhaled breath (eCO) were measured using a portable device (Micro CO, Micro Medical Ltd, UK). Participants were given a free e- Cigarette kit containing two rechargeable bat- teries, a charger, and two atomizers and instructed on how to charge, activate and use the e- Cigarette. Key troubleshooting were addressed and phone numbers were supplied for both technical and medical assistance. A full 4 -weeks supply of 7.4 mg nicotine cartridges ( "Original" cartridges; Arbi Group Sri, Milano, Italy) was also provided and participants were trained on how to load them onto the e- Cigarette's atomizer. Random checks confirmed that the nicotine content per cartridge was 7,25 mg. Detailed toxicology and nicotine content analyses of "Original" cartridges had been carried in a laboratory certified, by the Italian Institute of Health and can be found at: http: / /i"vw.liaf- onlus.org /public /alle- gati /catego ria 1 b.pd f Partici pa nts 'were permitted to use the study product ad libitum throughout the day (up to a maximum of 4 cartridges per day, as recommended by the manufac- turer) in the anticipation of reducing the number of cig/ day smoked, and to fill a 4- weeks' study diary recording product use, number of any tobacco cigarettes smoked, and adverse events. Participants were invited to came back at week -4 (study visit 2), week -8 (study visit 3), and week -12 (visit 4), a) to receive further free supply of nicotine cartridges together with the study diaries for the residual study Page 3 of 12 periods, b) to record their eCO levels, and c) to give back completed study diaries and unused study products. Study participants attended a final follow -up visit at week -24 (study visit 5) to report product use (car- tridges /day) and the number of any tobacco cigarettes smoked (from which smoking reduction and smoking abstinence could be calculated), to re -check eCO levels and to rate the degree of usefulness of the study product. In particular, participants were asked to rate their level of satisfaction with the products compared to their usual cigarettes using a visual ana- logue scale (VAS) from 0 to 10 points (0 = being 'completely unsatisfied', 10 being = 'fully satisfied'); on the same scale, they also rated helpfulness (in keeping them from smoking) and whether they would recommend it to a friend who wanted to stop /reduce smoking. Adverse events were obtained from their study diaries. Given the observational nature of this study, no emphasis on encouragement, motivation and reward for the smoking cessation effort were provided since this study was intended to monitor the case of a smoker (unwilling to quit) trying out an unconventional nicotine delivery device in a real world setting. Although partici- pants were allowed to smoke their own brand of cigar- ette as they wished, smoking cessation services were provided to those who would spontaneously ask for assistance with quitting. These subjects were excluded from the study protocol. Study outcome measures The primary efficacy measure was sustained 50% reduc- tion in the number of cig /day at week -24 from baseline (reducers) [151; defined as sustained self- reported 50% reduction in the number of cig /day compared to base- line for the 30 days period prior to week -24 study visit (eCO levels were measured to verify smoking status and confirm a reduction compared to baseline). A secondary efficacy measure of the study was sus- tained 80% reduction in the number of cig /day at week - 24 from baseline (heavy reducers); defined as sustained self- reported 80% reduction in the number of cig /day compared to baseline for the 30 days period prior to week -24 study visit (eCO levels were measured to verify smoking status and confirm a reduction compared to baseline). An additional secondary efficacy measure of the study was sustained smoking abstinence at week -24 (quitters); defined as complete self- reported abstinence from tobacco smoking (not even a puff) for the 30 days per- iod prior to week -24 study visit (eCO levels were mea- sured to objectively verify smoking status with an eCO concentration of 510 ppm). Polosa et al. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 http://www.blomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 <00 66 subjects (38M; 28F) responded to the study advert Yl4 sub�ects'i(9M, 5F)`inellgible due to` their requestao be.' assisted with quoting 52 subjects (29 M; 23 F) consented to participate 1,2 subjects (3M 9F)lneliglble,iiue to exclusion criteria (6 hypertension, 2 age > 60.yrs; 2 Hx of majordepression, L Hx of recent myocardial in farction, I 41x of asthma) p - jc y. 40 subjects (26 M; 14F) eligible for inclusion in the study and assigned to use the e- Cigarette Baseline Visit 1 6 slib�iccts ^' - lost to follow ua -' 34 subjects (23M; I I F) eligible for week -4 analyses Visit 2 2. subjects`(IM, IF)' ,, ? lost to follow up 32 subjects (22M; [OF) eligible for week -8 analyses Visit 3 16st to: follitkw up 30 subjects (21 M;9F) eligible for week -12 analyses VISIt 4 f 3'sti6Jects,(3M) lost to follow 27 subjects (18M;9F) eligible for week -24 analyses .I Final Visit 5 Page 4 of 12 Figure 2 Number of patients recruited and flow of patients within the study. A total of 66 subjects'with specifically predefined smoking criteria (smoking z 15 cig /day for at least the past 10 years) responded to the advert; of these, 14 subjects were not included in the study because they spontaneously seek assistance with quitting (these were then invited to attend the local smoking cessation clinic, which offers standard support with cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy for nicotine dependence). The remaining 52 subjects consented to participate into the study: of these, 12 were not considered eligible because of the exclusion. criteria (6 had a high blood pressure, 2 were older than 60; 2 had a diagnosis of major 'depression; I suffered from recent myocardial infarction; 1 had uncontrolled allergic asthma). In the end, 40 volunteers were included in the study and were issued with e- Cigarette kits loaded with nicotine cartridges. By the end of the study, a total of 13 subjects were lost to follow -up due to failure of attending their control. visits. Overall 27 participants were available for analyses at the 24 -week follow -up visit. Polosa et al. 8MC Public Health 2011, 11:786 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 Those smokers who failed to meet the above criteria at the final week -24 follow -up visit (study visit 5) were categorized as reduction /cessation failures (failures). Statistical Analyses This was a proof -of- concept pilot study, the first of its kind, hence no previous data could be used for power calculation. However, using our previous experience in smoking cessation studies, we estimated that a sample of 40 subjects would have been adequate to acquire quit /reduction rates from 70 -75% of the subjects enrolled [161. Primary and secondary outcome measures were computed by including all enrolled participants - assuming that all those individuals who were lost to fol- low-up are classified as failures (intention -to -treat analy- sis). The changes from baseline (study visit 1) in number of cig /day and in eCO levels were compared with data recorded at subsequent follow -up visits using Wilcoxon Signed rank test as these data were non -para- metric. Parametric and non - parametric data were expressed as mean (t SD) and median (interquartile range (IQR)) respectively. Correlations were calculated using Spearman's Rho Correlation. Statistical methods were 2- tailed, and P'values of < 0.05 were considered significant. Results Participant characteristics After excluding for the study exclusion criteria, a total of 40 (M 26; F 14; mean (± SD) age of 42.9 (± 8.8) years) regular smokers (mean (t SD) pack /yrs of 34.9 Page 5 of 12 (t 14.7)) consented to participate and were included in the study (Table 1;'Figure 2). Twenty-seven (67.5 %) completed all study visits and returned for their final follow -up visit at week -24. Baseline characteristics of those who were lost to follow -up were not signifi- cantly different from participants who completed the study. Outcome measures Participants' smoking status at baseline and at 24 -week is shown on Table 2. Taking the whole cohort of partici- pants (n = 40), an overall 80% reduction in median cig/ day use from 25 to 5 was observed by the end of the study (p < 0.001). Sustained 50% reduction in the num- ber of cig /day at week -24 was shown in 13/40 (32.5 %) participants, with a median of 25• cig /day (IQR 20, 30) decreasing significantly to 6 cig /day (lQR 5, 6)(p < 0.001). Of these tobacco smoke reducers, five (12.5 %) , could be classified as sustained heavy reducers (at least 80% reduction in the number of cig /day) at week -24. They had a median consumption of 30 cig /day (1QR 25, 35) at baseline, decreasing significantly to 3 cig /day (IQR 3, 6) (p = 0.043). There were 9/40 (22.5 %) quitters, with 6/9 still using the e- Cigarette by the end of the study. Overall, combined sustained, 50% reduction and smoking abstinence was shown in 22/40 (55 %) partici- pants, with a median of 25 cig /day (IQR 20, 30) decreas- ing significantly to 3 cig /day (IQR 0, 6)(p < 0.001), which is equivalent to an overall 88% reduction. Details of mean cigarette use and• eCO levels throughout the study is shown in Figure 3 and 4. Table 1 Patient Demographics Parameter Mean (t SD)* Subjects eligible for inclusion(n = 40) Age 42.9 (t 8.8) Sex 26M; 14F Smoking Years 26.9 (t 8.8) FTND 6.0 (6, 8)' Beck Depression Inventory 9 (5, 12.3)' Cigarettes /day 25 (20, 30)' eCO 23.5 (15.8,36)* t5ubjects available for week -24 analyses(n = 27) Age 42.6 (t 8.4) Sex IBM; 9F Smoking Years 27,2 (± 8.9) FIND 7 (6. 7)' Beck Depression Inventory 9 (5, 12.5)' Cigarettes/day 25 (20, 30)' eCO 24 (15.5. 37)' 'Non- parametric data expressed as median (IQR). i` t Subjects excluding those lost -to- follow -up. .. Abbreviations: 5D - Standard Deviation; M - Male; F - Female; FTND - ` Fagerstrom Test of Nicotine Dependence; eCO - exhaled carbon monoxide; IQR - interquartile range. 13 Olk Polosa et al. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 Page 6 of 12 http://www.blomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 Table 2 Subject Parameter Outcomes Following 24 Weeks of Electronic Cigarette Use Parameter AT BASELINE AT 24 -Weeks p value# Post E- Cigarette Sustained 50% (excluding quitters) reduction in cigarette smoking (n = 13) Age 40.1 (t 7.7)t 6 (5, 6Y < 0.001 Sex 8M; 5F 8 (6, 11)' 0.001 Smoking Years 24.5 (t 8.7)t Cigarettes/day 25 (20, 30)' eCO 18 (14, 33)' Sustained 80% (excluding quitters) reduction in cigarette smoking (n = 5) Age 40.6 (t 10.4)t 3 (3, 6)' 0.043 Sex 4M; IF 6 (4, 10)' 0.042 Smoking Years 25.4 (t 11.8)t Cigarettes/day 30(25, 35)' eCO 15 (14,44)- Sustained 100% (quitters) reduction in cigarette smoking (n = 9) Age 44.7 (t 9.3)t 0 (0, 0)' 0.008 Sex 8M; IF 3 (2, 3)' 0.008 Smoking Years 29 (t 9.6)t Cigarettes/day 25 (23, 30)' eCO 31 (23,41)- Sustained > 50% (including quitters) reduction in cigarette smoking (n = 22) Age 42 (t 8.5)t 3 (0, 6)' < 0.001 Sex 16M; 6F 5.5 (3, 9.5)' < 0.001 Smoking Years 26.3 (t 9.0t Cigarettes/day 25 (20, 30)' eCO 27 (15.5, 37.5)' Smoking Failure (< 50% smoking reduction) (n = 5) Age 45.6 (t 7.9)t 20 (20, 20)' 0.157 Sex 2M; 3F 28 (17, 31)' 0.892 Smoking Years 31.2 (t 7)t Cigarettes/day 25 (20 25)' eCO 18 (16, 32)' Abbreviations: SD - Standard Deviation; M - Male; F - Female; eCO - exhaled carbon monoxide *p value - within group Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. t Parametric data expressed as mean (t SD). 'Non- parametric data expressed as median (interquartile range(IQR)). Product Use Details of mean cartridge use throughout the study is shown in Figure 5. The reported number of cartridges/ day used by our study participants was dissimilar, ran- ging from a maximum of 4 cartridges /day (as per manu- facturer's recommendation) to a minimum of 0 cartridges /day ('zero' was recorded in the study diary, when the same cartridge was used for more than 24 hours). For the whole group (n = 27), a mean (t SD) 2.0 (t 1.4) cartridges /day was used throughout the study. The number of cartridges /day used was slightly higher when these summary statistics were computed with the exclusion of the eight study failures; the value increasing to a mean (t SD) of•2.2 (± 1.3) cartridges/ day. Correlation between the number of cartridges /day and smoking reduction in those participants with sustained 50% reduction in smoking was not significant (Rho - 0.003; p = 0.988). Likewise, the correlation between the number of cartridges /day, and combined sustained 50% reduction and smoking abstinence was also non - significant (Rho - 0.185; p = 0.546). Adverse Events The most frequently reported adverse events were mouth irritation (20,6 %), throat irritation (32,4 %), and dry cough (32,4 %) (Table 3). These events were most commonly reported at the beginning of the study and appeared to wane spontaneously by study visit 5. Remarkably, side effects commonly recorded during smoking cessation trials with drugs for nicotine depen- dence were absent (i.e. depression, anxiety, insomnia, irritability, hunger, constipation were not reported). C71 `-1_ Polosa et al. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 Page 7 of 12 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 —♦- >50% reduction —A >80% reduction —w- Quitters -�- Failures 40 30 M v 20 to rn U c 10 0 -5 Week 0 Week 4 Week 8 Week 12 Week 24 Time Figure 3 Changes in the mean (t 51)) cigarette use for each study subgroups throughout the study. Moreover, no serious adverse events (i.e. events requir- ing unscheduled visit to the family practitioner or hospi- talisation) occurred during the study. Product Preferences The 'Categoria' e- Cigarette rated scores well above the mean for satisfaction and for helpfulness (enabling them to refrain from smoking), their mean (± SD) VAS values being 6.3 (± 2.5) and 7.5 (± 2.7) respectively. Moreover, it was observed that participants would enthusiastically recommend the e- Cigarette to friends or relatives who wanted to stop /reduce smoking, the mean (t SD) VAS value being 8.0 (± 3.4). Predictably, the e- Cigarette rated even higher scores when these summary statistics were computed with the exclusion of the study failures (n = 8). On the contrary, the perception and acceptance of the product by those who failed to remain abstinent or to reduce smoking (n = 5) was poor; the mean (± SD) VAS values for satisfaction and for helpfulness being 2.2 (t 0.8) and 2.5 (± 1.0), respectively. As expected, these individuals were unlikely to recommend the 'Categoria' e- Cigarette to friends or relatives; the mean (± SD) VAS value being 2.3 (t 1.2). Among the most positive features of e- Cigarettes were the pleasure of inhalation and exhalation of the vapour. Other positive features mentioned included cleaner and fresher breath, absence of odours in clothing and hair. Although the overall participants' perception and accep- tance of the product was good, its ease of use could be improved and technical defects reduced. During the course of the study, five study participants could not use the product as recommended and had to be retrained Polosa et at BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 Page 8 of 12 httpz/ /www.biomedcentral.com /1471- 2458/11 /786 within 72 hours. Three participants reported that the device often failed to produce mist when puffed (three atomizers had to be substituted). Another two were given a faulty charger (chargers were immediately replaced). According to study participants, perception and acceptance of the product could be improved by increasing manufacturing standards, by providing a recharge lasting at least 24 hours, by reducing the weight of the device and by substituting the hard plastic mouthpiece. Discussion In this pilot study, we have shown for the first time that substantial and objective modifications in the smoking habits may occur in smokers using e- Cigarettes, with significant smoking reduction and smoking abstinence and no apparent increase in withdrawal symptoms. Par- ticipants were not only enthusiastic about using the e- Cigarette, but the majority (67.5 %) were also able to adhere to the program and to return for the final fol- low-up visit at week -24 with an overall quit rate of 22.5 %. Moreover, at least 50% reduction in cigarette smoking was observed in 32.5% of participants. Overall, combined reduction and smoking abstinence was shown in 55% of participants. These preliminary findings are of great significance in view of the fact that all smokers in the study were, by inclusion criteria, not interested in quitting. Although not directly comparable with classic cessation and /or reduction studies with other pharma- ceutical products because of its design (the present study is not an ordinary cessation study), the results of our study are in general accordance with the findings published in the medical literature [171. The large magnitude of this effect suggests the e- Cigarette strongly suppressed cigarette use. However, no correlations were observed between the number of —� >50% reduction —� >80% reduction —� Quitters 50 - Failures a 40 �X O c M 30 c O ca U 20 v co s W 10 c co N 0 Week 0 Week 4 Week 8 Week 12 Week 24 Time Figure 4 Changes in the mean (t 5D) eCo levels for each study subgroups throughout the study. within 72 hours. Three participants reported that the device often failed to produce mist when puffed (three atomizers had to be substituted). Another two were given a faulty charger (chargers were immediately replaced). According to study participants, perception and acceptance of the product could be improved by increasing manufacturing standards, by providing a recharge lasting at least 24 hours, by reducing the weight of the device and by substituting the hard plastic mouthpiece. Discussion In this pilot study, we have shown for the first time that substantial and objective modifications in the smoking habits may occur in smokers using e- Cigarettes, with significant smoking reduction and smoking abstinence and no apparent increase in withdrawal symptoms. Par- ticipants were not only enthusiastic about using the e- Cigarette, but the majority (67.5 %) were also able to adhere to the program and to return for the final fol- low-up visit at week -24 with an overall quit rate of 22.5 %. Moreover, at least 50% reduction in cigarette smoking was observed in 32.5% of participants. Overall, combined reduction and smoking abstinence was shown in 55% of participants. These preliminary findings are of great significance in view of the fact that all smokers in the study were, by inclusion criteria, not interested in quitting. Although not directly comparable with classic cessation and /or reduction studies with other pharma- ceutical products because of its design (the present study is not an ordinary cessation study), the results of our study are in general accordance with the findings published in the medical literature [171. The large magnitude of this effect suggests the e- Cigarette strongly suppressed cigarette use. However, no correlations were observed between the number of Polosa et al. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 Page 9 of 12 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 5 4 M rn 3 CO a M 2 U c M m � 1 0 --0— >50% reduction A reduction --f Quitters Failures Week 4 Week 8 Week 12 Week 24 Time Figure 5 Changes in the mean (t SD) cartridge use for each study subgroups throughout the study. Table 3 Adverse events reported by participants who completed all study visits nicotine cartridges /day used and the level of smoking reduction. This is not unexpected, in view of the power - Adverse Event study visits ful interaction between physical and behavioural depen- 4 -week 8 -week 12 -week 24 -week dence of smoking [18,19] and the modest increases in Throat blood nicotine levels measured after the use of this type 11/34 5/32 5/30 4/27 irritation' (32,4 %,4% ) (15,6 %) (16,7 %) (14,8 %) of devices [20]. Therefore, t is unlike) f i y that the Mouth 7/34 (20,6 %) 4/32 3/30 2127 (7,4 %) observed positive effect of the e- Cigarette is due to nico- Irritation' (12,5 %) (IOA%) tine delivery. Rather, the strong suppression of smoking Sore Throat 4/34 (11,8%) -1/32 (3,1 %) 1/30(3,3%) 0127 (0,0 %) in association with the absence of correlation between Dry cough 11/34 6/32 3/30 3/27 cartridges use and level of smoking reduction, suggests (32,496) (18,8 %) (10,096) 01,1 %) that the positive effect of the e- Cigarette may be also Dry mouth 3/34 (8,8 %) 1/32 (3,1 %) 1/30(3,3%) 1127 (3,7 %) due to its capacity to provide a coping mechanism for Mouth ulcers 1/34 (2,9%) 1/32 (3,1 %) 1/30 (33%) 0127 (0,0 %) conditioned smoking cues by replacing some of the Diainess` 5/3a (14,7%) 2/32 (6,3 %) 2/30 (6,796) 1/27 (3,796) rituals associated with smoking gestures (e.g. hand -to- Headache 4/34 (11,8%) 2132 (6,3 %) 2/30(6,7%) 1127 (3,796) mouth action of smoking). in agreement with this, we have recently demonstrated that nicotine free inhalators Nausea 5/34 (14,7 %) 2/32 (6,3%) 1/30(3,3%) 1127 (3,7 %) can only improve quit rates in those smokers for whom ' Throat and mouth irritation were described either as tickling, itching, or burning handling and manipulation of their cigarette played an sensation 6 Dizziness, was also used to mean vertigo and light- headedness. important role In their ritual Of smoking [21). t �- ( (�Ok Polosa et al. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 Although dry cough and mouth ulcers can be asso- ciated with withdrawal effects, typical withdrawal symp- toms of smoking cessation trials with drugs for nicotine dependence were not reported during the course of the study. It is possible that the e- Cigarette by providing a coping mechanism for conditioned smoking cues could mitigate withdrawal symptoms associated with smoking reduction and smoking abstinence. In contrast from other ENDDs such as Eclipse (which is known to gener- ate substantial level of eCO) [221, e- Cigarettes use does not lead to increased eCO levels [12]. In the present study, the smoking reduction with 'Categoria' e- Cigar- ette use was associated to a substantial decrease in the level of eCO. The most frequent adverse events were mouth irritation, throat irritation and dry cough, but all appeared to wane spontaneously with time. These are likely to be secondary to exposure to propylene glycol mist generated by the e- Cigarette's atomizer. Propylene glycol is a low toxicity compound widely used as a food additive and in pharmaceutical preparations. Exposure to propylene glycol mist may occur from smoke genera- tors in discotheques, theatres, and aviation emergency training and is known to cause ocular, mouth, throat, upper airway irritation and cough [23,24]. Dizziness was often reported by participants at the beginning of the study and can be brought about by the hyperventilation associated to the greater puffing time with the e- Cigar- ette. Alternatively, the dizziness as well as other reported adverse events such as nausea and headaches may be due to nicotine overuse. The substantial reduc- tion in the frequency of dizziness observed by the end of the study may be due to the improved familiarisation with the puffing technique and /or to the overall reduc- tion in nicotine use. Therefore, the 'Categoria "' e- Cigar- ette can be seen as a safe way to smoke although larger and longer studies will be required for a full assessment of its adverse events. The 'Categoria' e- Cigarette rated high scores for a range of subjective ratings of user preferences suggesting that the product was functioning as an adequate cigar- ette substitute. Hence, participants were more likely to recommend the e- Cigarette to friends or relatives. Con- versely, as would be expected the perception and accep- tance of the product by those who failed to remain abstinent or to reduce smoking was poor and these indi- viduals were unlikely to recommend the e- Cigarette. We cannot exclude that technical problems (particularly those who went unreported) and difficulty of use (it takes time to familiarize with the puffing technique) could have affected the number of lost to follow -up and failures. Although the overall participants' perception and acceptance of the product was good, its ease of use could be improved. Technical defects could be reduced by increasing manufacturing standards, providing a Page 10 of 12 recharge lasting at least 24 hours, reducing the weight of the device and substituting the hard plastic mouth- piece. These latter two suggestions would improve device acceptability for certain common rituals of cigar- ette smoking, e.g. keeping the cigarette between lips. Harm - reduction strategies are aimed at reducing the adverse health effects of tobacco use in individuals unable or unwilling to quit. Reducing the number of cig /day is one of several kinds of harm reduction strate- gies [25]. It is uncertain whether substantial smoking reduction in smokers using the e- Cigarette will translate in health benefits, but a number of studies have ana- lyzed the ability of smoking reduction to lower health risks and have reported some reductions in cardiovascu- lar risk factors and lung cancer mortality [26 -28]. More- over, reduction in cigarette smoking by e- Cigarette may well increase motivation to quit as indicated by a sub- stantial body of evidence showing that gradually cutting down smoking can increase subsequent smoking cessa- tion among smokers [15,29 -32]. While not the treatment of choice, reduced smoking strategies might be consid- ered for recalcitrant smokers unwilling to quit, as in the case of our study population. There are some limitations in our study. Firstly, this was a small uncontrolled study, hence the results observed may be due to a chance finding and not to a true effect; consequently the results should be inter- preted with caution. However, it would have been quite problematic to have a placebo arm in such a study. Sec- ondly, 32.5% of the participants failed to attend their final follow -up visit, but this is not unexpected in a smoking cessation study. Thirdly, because of its unusual design (smokers not willing to quit, e- Cigarettes were used throughout the entire study period) this is not an ordinary cessation study and therefore direct compari- son with other smoking cessation products cannot be made. Fourthly, failure to complete the study and smok- ing cessation failures could be due to occurrence of technical defects for the e- Cigarette. However, this could not be assessed with confidence in the present study. Lastly, assessment of withdrawal symptoms in our study was not rigorous. Withdrawal was assessed at each visit by simply asking about the presence /absence of irritability, restlessness, difficulty concentrating, increased appetite /weight gain, depression or insomnia. It is likely that this way of collecting information is liable to recall bias. Therefore, the reported lack of with- drawal symptoms in the study participants should be considered with caution. Conclusions Current smoking cessation interventions can increase the chance of quitting in committed smokers who are already motivated and prepared to stop smoking [33], Polosa et al. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 httpl /www.biomedcentral.com /1471- 2458/11/786 but a broader range of interventions are needed in order to bring more smokers into treatment and increase the numbers who are motivated to make quit attempts. Although not formally regulated as a pharmaceutical product, the e- Cigarette can help smokers to remain abstinent or reduce their cigarette consumption. By replacing tobacco cigarettes, the e- cigarette can only save lives. Here we show for the first time that e- Cigarettes can substantially decrease cigarette consumption without causing significant side effects in smokers not intending to quit. However, large and carefully conducted RCTs will be required before a definite answer about the effi- cacy and safety of these devices can be formulated. Some of these trials are now in progress in Italy [34 -36] and New Zealand [37] and hopefully they will be able to confirm and expand the preliminary observations reported in the present article. Abbreviations e- Cigarette: Electronic -Cigarette; ENDO: Electronic Nicotine Delivery Device; Cig/day: Cigarettes smoked per day; BP: Blood pressure; mmHg: millimetres of mercury; FTND Fagerstrom Test of Nicotine Dependence; BDI: Beck's Depression Inventory; eCO: exhaled carbon monoxide; mg: milligrams; Cartridges/day: cartridges used per day; VAS: Visual Analogue Score; ppm: parts per million; Pack/yrs: pack - years; SD: standard deviation; IQR: interquartile range Acknowledgements We wish to thank Arbi Group Sri (Milano, Italy) for the free supplies of 'Categoria' a -Cigarette kits and nicotine cartridges as well as their support. We would also like to thank the study participants for all their time and effort and LIAF (Lega Italiana AntiFumo) for the collaboration. Author details 'Centro per la Prevenzione e Cura del Tabagismo (CPCT), Azienda Ospedaliero- Universitaria 'Policlinico- Vittorio Emanuele , Universita di Catania, Catania, Italy. 2Institute of Internal Medicine, S. Marta Hospital, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria 'Policlinico- Vittorio Emanuele', Universita di Catania, Catania, Italy. 3IIR Division, School of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton 5016 6YD, UK. Authors' contributions RP: Principal investigator, protocol design, interpretation of the data, writing of the ms; PC: conduction of the study, interpretation of the data, writing of the ms; JBM: statistical analyses, interpretation of the data, writing of the ms; GP: recruiting of patients, conduction of the study, writing of the ms; DC: recruiting of patients, conduction of the study; CR: protocol design, interpretation of the data, writing of the ms. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript. Competing interests None of the authors have any competing interests to declare, but RP has received lecture fees from Pfizer and, from Feb 2011, he has been serving as a consultant for Arbi Group Srl.Arbi Group Sri (Milano, Italy), the manufacturer of the a -Cigarette supplied the product, and unrestricted technical and customer support. They were not involved in the study design, running of the study or analysis and presentation of the data. Received: 25 November 2010 Accepted: 11 October 2011 Published: 11 October 2011 References 1. Tobacco or Health:a Global Status Report. Geneva; 1997. Page 11 of 12 2. Doll R, Peto R, Boreham 1, Sutherland I: Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years' observations on male British doctors. BMJ 2004, 328(7455):1519. 3. Boyle P, Gray N, Henningfield 1, Seffrin J, Zatonski W: Tobacco and Public Health: Science and Polity. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2004. 4. The health benefits of smoking cessation. Edited by Services UDoHaH: USA, US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health 1990. 5. Lightwood JM, Glantz SA: Short-term economic and health benefits of smoking cessation: myocardial infarction and stroke. Circulation 1997, 96(4):1089 -1096. 6. Fiore MC, Jaen CR, Baker T8, Bailey WC, Benowitz NL, Curry SJ. Dorfman SF; et of Treating tobacco use and dependence. Clinical practice guidelines 2008 Update.Edited by: Services UDoHaH. Rockville, MD: Public Health Service 2008. 7. Hughes JR, Keely J, Naud S: Shape of the relapse curve and long -term abstinence among untreated smokers. Addiction 2004, 99(1)29 -38. 8. Casella G, Caponnetto P, Polosa R: Therapeutic advances in the treatment of nicotine addiction: Present and Future. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 201Q 1(3):95 -106. 9. Hon L: A non- smokable electronic spray cigarette (CA 2518174) (Patent notice).Edited by: Record CPO 133:2005. 10. Zezima K Cigarettes without smoke or regulation. New York Times. New York; 2009. H. Etter JF: Electronic cigarettes: a survey of users. BMC Public Health; 1010:10231. 12. Vansickel AR, Cobb CO, WeaverMF, Eissenberg TE: A clinical laboratory model for evaluating the acute effects of electronic 'cigarettes ": nicotine delivery profile and cardiovascular and subjective effects. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 201Q 19(8):1945 -1953. 13. Fagerstrom K0, Schneider NG: Measuring nicotine dependence: a review of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire. J Behav Med 1989, 12(2):159 -182, 14. Beck A, Ward C, Mendelson M, Mock J, Erbaugh J: Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory. New York Harcourt Brace Jovanovich; 1987. 15. Bolliger CT, Zellweger JP, Danielsson T. van Biljon X, Robidou A, Westin A, Perruchoud AP, Sawe U: Smoking reduction with oral nicotine inhalers: double blind, randomised clinical trial of efficacy and safety. BMJ 2000, 321(7257):329 -333, 16. Polosa R, Russo C, Di Maria A, Arcidiacono G, Piccillo G: Smoking cessation .and reduction through e-mail counselling. Respir Med 2008, 102(4):632. 17. Smith SS, McCarthy DE, Japuntich SJ, Christiansen B, Piper ME, Jorenby DE, Fraser DL. Fiore MC, Baker TB, Jackson TC: Comparative effectiveness of 5 smoking cessation pharmacotherapies in primary care clinics. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169(22):2148 -2155. 18. Laurier E, McKie L, Goodwin N: Daily and life- course contexts of smoking. Social Health Illn 2000, 22:289 -309. 19. Jarvis MJ: Why people smoke. BMJ 2004, 328(7434):277 -279. 20. Bullen C, McRobbie H, Thornley S, Glover M, Lin R, Laugesen M: Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e cigarette) on desire to smoke and withdrawal, user preferences and nicotine delivery: randomised cross -over Vial. Tob Control 201Q 19(2):98 -103. 21. Caponnetto P, Cibella F, Mancuso S, Campagna D, Arcidiacono G, Polosa R: Effect of a nicotine free inhalator as part of a smoking cessation program. Eur Respir 12011 May 12. [Epub ahead of Print]. 22. Fagerstrom KO, Hughes A Rasmussen T, Callas PW: Randomised trial investigating effect of a novel nicotine delivery device (Eclipse) and a nicotine oral inhaler on smoking behaviour, nicotine and carbon monoxide exposure, and motivation to quit. Tob Control 2000, '9(3):327 -333. 23. Wieslander G, Norback D, Lindgren T: Experimental exposure to propylene glycol mist in aviation emergency training: acute ocular and respiratory effects. Occup Environ Med 2001, 58(10):649 -655. 24. Varughese S, Teschke K, Brauer M, Chow Y, van Neuen C, Kennedy SM: Effects of theatrical smokes and fogs on respiratory health in the entertainment industry. Am J Ind (bled 2005, 47(5):411-418. 25. McNeill A: Harm reduction. BMJ 2004, 328(7444):885.881, 26. Bolliger CT, Zellweger 1P, Danielsson T, van Biljon X, Robidou A, Westin A, Perruchoud AP, Sawe U: Influence of long -term smoking reduction on health risk markers and quality of life. Nicotine Tab Res 2002, 4(4):433 -439. Polosa et al. BMC Public Health 2011, 11:786 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786 27. Hatsukami DK Kotlyar M, Allen S, Jensen J. Li S, Le C, Murphy S: Effects of cigarette reduction on cardiovascular risk factors and subjective measures. Chest 2005, 128(4):2528 -2537. 28. Godtfredsen N5, Prescott E, Osler M: Effect of smoking reduction on lung cancer risk JAMA 2005, 294(12):1505.1510. 29. Hughes JR, Carpenter MJ: The feasibility of smoking reduction: an update Addiction 2005, 100(8):1074 -1089. 30. Wennike P, Danielsson T, Landfeldt 8, Westin A, Tonnesen P: Smoking reduction promotes smoking cessation: results from a double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of nicotine gum with 2 -year follow - up. Addiction 2003, 98(10):1395.1402. 31. Rennard 51, Glover ED, Leischow S, Daughton DM, Glover PN, Muramoto M, Franzon M, Danielsson T, Landfeldt 8, Westin A: Efficacy of the nicotine inhaler In smoking reduction: A double - blind, randomized trial. Nicotine Tob Res 2006, 8(4):555 -564. 32. Walker N, Bullen C, McRobbie H: Reduced- nicotine content cigarettes: Is there potential to aid smoking cessation? Nicotine Tob Res 2009, 11(11):1 214.1279. 33. Polosa R, Benowitz NL: Treatment of nicotine addiction: present therapeutic options and pipeline developments. Trends Phormacol Sci 2011, 32(5):281 -9. 34, [httpYtclinicaltrials.gov /ct2/ show /NCT01164072 ?term = electronic +cigarette &rank = 11. 35. [httpY/ clinicaltrials .gov /a2/show /NCT0I 194583 ?term= polosa &rank = 21. 36. [httpl /clinicaltrials .gov /ct2/5how /NCT01188239 ?term= polosa &rank = 3). 37. [ httpl/ wwwanzctr .org.au/trial_viewaspx ?ID = 3360911. Pre - publication history The pre - publication history for this paper can be accessed here: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/11/786/prepub doi:10.1186/1471- 2458 -11 -786 Cite this article as: Polosa et at: Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e- Cigarette) on smoking reduction and cessation: a prospective 6 -month pilot study. BMC Public Health 2011 11:786. C� Page 12 of 12 Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central and take full advantage of: • Convenient online submission • Thorough peer review • No space constraints or color figure charges • Immediate publication on acceptance • Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar • Research which is freely available for redistribution Submit your manuscript at (l www.biomedcentral.com /submit 0 BlaMed Central Hindawi Publishing Corporation Journal of Environmental and Public Health Volume 2012, Article ID 989474,8 pages doi: 10. 1155/2012/989474 Research Article Use of Emerging Tobacco Products in the United States Robert McMiUen,1,2 Jeomi Maduka,3 and Jonathan Winickoffl,4 t Department of Psychology and Social Science Research Center Research Boulevard, Suite 103, Starkville, MS 39759, USA 'Julius B. Richmond Center of Excellence, American Academy of Pediatrics, 141 Northwest Point Boulevard, Elk Grove Village, IL 60007, USA University of Texas Southwestern Medical School, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX 75390, USA 'Massachusetts General Hospital, GH Center for Child and Adolescent Health Policy, 50 Staniford Street, Suite 901, Boston, AM 02114, USA Correspondence should be addressed to Robert McMillen, rcml9 @msstate.edu Received 2 December 2011; Accepted I March 2012 Academic Editor: Joanna Cohen Copyright @ 2012 Robert McMillen et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This paper provides the first nationally representative estimates for use of four emerging products. Addressing the issue of land -line substitution with cell phones, we used a mixed -mode survey to obtain two representative samples of US adults. Of 3,240 eligible respondents contacted, 74% completed surveys. In the weighted analysis, 13.6% have tried at least one emerging tobacco product; 5.1% snus; 8.8% waterpipe; 0.6% dissolvable tobacco products; 1.8% electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) products. Daily smokers (25.1%) and nondaily smokers (34.9 %) were the most likely to have tried at least one of these products, compared to former smokers (17.2%) and never smokers (7.7 %), P < .001. 18.2% of young adults 18 -24 and 12.8% of those >24 have tried one of these products, P < .01. In multivariable analysis, current daily (5.5, 4.3 -7.6), nondaily (6.1, 4.0 -9.3), and former smoking status (2.7, 2.1 -3.6) remained significant, as did young adults (2.2, 1.6 -3.0); males (3.5, 2.8 -4.5); higher educational attainment; some college (2.7, 1.7- 4.2); college degree (2.0, 1.3 -3.3). Use of these products raises concerns about nonsmokers being at risk for nicotine dependence and current smokers maintaining their dependence. Greater awareness of emerging tobacco product prevalence and the high risk demographic user groups might inform efforts to determine appropriate public health policy and regulatory action. 1. Introduction Recently, snus, dissolvable tobacco products, and electronic nicotine delivery systems (sometimes called "e- cigarettes" or ENDS) have been introduced to the US market, while waterpipes (hookah), especially in group social settings, have gained popularity [ 11. Snits, dissolvables, ENDS, and water - pipes are often promoted as safer alternatives to traditional cigarettes and a potential way to decrease the harm caused by tobacco [2-41. However, people who may never have smoked a cigarette or who had been addicted to nicotine in the past may be enticed to use tobacco by these alternative products, posing an individual and public health risk. Once in a tobacco using culture and exposed to nicotine, individuals ( / may be at higher risk of regular cigarette use [5]. There is also (/ the potential that current smokers may use these products as an alternative to cessation [6]. Polytobacco use among current smokers may increase levels of nicotine exposure and risk of persistent tobacco dependence relative to the exclusive use of cigarettes [7]. Despite these concerns, little is known about the use of these products among US adults. Although substantial research has examined other alternative tobacco products [8, 91, this is the first nationally representative study to examine the prevalence rates for these new emerging pro- ducts. Data on the use of these emerging products is urgently needed as the FDA considers regulation of these products. Snus is a smokeless tobacco product that does not require the user to spit. The tobacco in some snits has low concen- trations of nitrosamines [2] and is marketed to smokers as a reduced harm product. Snus is also marketed in airports as a tobacco product that can be used in places where smoking is not allowed. If snus was to replace cigarette smoking entirely for an individual, it would be less harmful than cigarettes [3], but its most significant health risks may be in maintaining dependence to cigarettes and as a starter product for other forms of tobacco [ 101. Proponents of the promotion of snus as a harm reduction policy look to the Swedish experience where studies have found that while snus use is increasing, smoking prevalence is declining [7]. However, promoting snus in the United States for harm reduction may reduce smoking cessation [ I 11, perhaps because the USA already has ongoing tobacco control programs. Additionally, US tobacco companies market dual usage of both snus and cigarettes with slogans like: "When you cannot smoke, snus" [12]. Dissolvable tobacco products are also smokeless spit - less tobacco products. These products are typically flavored forms of finely milled tobacco and dissolve in the mouth. Like snus, these products are frequently marketed as forms of tobacco that can be used in places where smoking is pro- hibited or that are tobacco -free. To illustrate, one producer claims, "dissolvable tobacco has no boundaries, there are no locations or situations where you cannot use it, and nobody can tell you're using it" [ 131. These products may also appeal to adolescents, due to the attractive packaging, flavoring, and dissolvable delivery system. ENDS are a category of products that deliver a vapor of nicotine and flavoring on inhalation [ 141. These products are very new and are marketed as both cessation devices and an alternative to cessation [61. ENDS come in a variety of tobac- co, fruit, and food flavors, and, although they do not actually burn tobacco, some ENDS contain a light- emitting diode at the tip that resembles the burning end of a cigarette [6]. Because of their recent emergence, little research exists on their attractiveness. Developed in India during the 1700s [151, a waterpipe is an instrument for inhaling charcoal . tobacco smoke that has been cooled by passing through water. Although users may think that smoke inhaled from a waterpipe is safer than smoke from a cigarette, studies show that waterpipe use produces concentrations of carbon monoxide, nicotine, tar, and heavy metals at levels similar to, or higher than, cigarettes [ 1 ]. There is also the risk of infectious disease transmis- sion, including herpes, from waterpipe mouthpieces [ 1 ]. Due to misperceptions that waterpipes are safe, and the use of these waterpipes in social settings, there is also the risk that nonsmokers might be attracted to waterpipe smoking. Most waterpipe users are intermittent cigarette smokers [ 161, which facilitates an opportunity in a tobacco- friendly environment for nonsmokers to become initiated to the cigarette smoking social culture as well [ 171. The purpose of this study is to assess the prevalence of use of snus, waterpipe, dissolvable tobacco products, and ENDS. The prevalence of lifetime use and current use of these products by cigarette smoking status are examined, as well as other correlates of lifetime use. Results from this study can inform regulatory decisions about these products, while the' identification of potential high risk demographic groups can guide clinical counseling efforts regarding the risks of any tobacco use. Finally, the use of these products among former smokers is examined to determine whether former smokers used these products as an acute form of nicotine replacement therapy to aid in cessation or used these products years after successfully quitting cigarettes. Journal of Environmental and Public Health 2. Methods 2.1. Respondents. The Social Climate Survey of Tobacco Control (SCS -TC) is a nationally representative annual cross - sectional survey that contains items pertaining to normative beliefs, practices /policies, and knowledge regarding tobacco control. Previously, this survey has utilized a random- digit- dialing (RDD) frame of households with landline telephones [ 18, 19]. However, substitution of cell phones for landlines continues to increase and 27.8% of US households are currently wireless only [20]. Moreover, wireless substitution is particularly problematic for surveys of tobacco use, as smoking status, as well as age, region, and several other dem- ographic factors vary by telephone status [201. In order to reduce noncoverage issues arising from wireless substitution, mixed -mode, mixed -frame surveys representing national probability samples of adults were administered in 2010. The design included an RDD (mode 1) frame and an Inter- net panel (mode 2) frame developed from a probability sample. The Institutional Review Board at Mississippi State University approved this study on July 30, 2010. The mode 1 frame included households with listed and unlisted landline telephones. Telephone interviews with re- spondents were conducted in October and November 2010. Household telephone numbers were selected using RDD sampling procedures. Once a household was contacted, the adult to be interviewed was selected by asking to speak with the person in the household who is 18 years of age or older and who will have the next birthday. Five attempts were made to contact those selected adults who were not home. The mode 2 frame included an online survey, admin- istered in September and October of 2010 to a randomly selected sample from a nationally representative pre- estab- lished 50,000 member research panel [21, 22]. The 50,000 panel members were randomly recruited by probability -based sampling, and households were provided with access to the Internet and hardware if needed in order to develop a panel that is representative of the entire US population [21]. This panel is based on a sampling frame which includes both listed and unlisted numbers, those without a landline telephone, and does not accept self - selected volunteers [21, 221. Probability -based recruitment for the panel includes two frames. The RDD frame uses list - assisted RDD sampling techniques and the Address -Based Sampling (ABS) frame from the US Postal Service's Delivery Sequence File, which includes all households serviced by the US Postal Service [21]. The use of RDD and ABS frames for recruiting panel members provides sample coverage for 99% of US households [23]. A recent study examining this probability panel revealed that the panel's primary demo- graphics are representative of the US Census [24]. Moreover, more than a hundred peer- reviewed papers have applied this survey methodology [251, including articles published in health journals [26 -29]. Overall weights were computed in two steps. First, the two modes were weighted based upon 2009 US Census esti- mates to be representative of the US population. Second, three adjustments to these initial weights were computed to account for the overlap in the two samples. Weights from (l 1 Journal of Environmental and Public Health the mode 1 frame were multiplied by .818 to adjust for the overlap (81.8% of households in the mode 2 frame had a landline). Composite adjustments were then computed to combine the two sampling frames. According to AAPOR 1301, observations from two sampling frames with overlap may be combined using composite weights. Two compositing factors that sum to one are typically selected. Given that the effective sample sizes of the mode 1 frame and mode 2 frame are similar, the two compositing factors were set to 0.5. The weights of respondents who were represented in both sampling frames (i.e., landline owners) were multiplied by the compositing factor. In the final adjustment, a restand- ardized weight was computed so that the weighted sample size matched the sum for effective sample size for both inde- pendent frames. 2.2. Measures. Results are from data on a subset of the meas- ures included in the SCS -TC. To assess current cigarette smoking status of respondents, respondents were asked, "Have you smoked at least 100 cigarettes in your entire life ?" Respondents who reported that they had were then asked, "Do you now smoke cigarettes every day, some days, or not at all?" Respondents who reported that they have smoked at least 100 cigarettes and now smoke every day or some days were categorized as daily and nondaiy smokers; respondents who had not smoked at least 100 cigarettes were categorized as never smokers; and respondents who reported that they have smoked at least 100 cigarettes, but no longer smokers were categorized as former smokers. One set of items assessed lifetime use of emerging tobacco products. Which of the following products have you tried, even just one time? (1) Smokeless tobacco, (2) snus, such as Camel or Marlboro snus, (3) roll - your -own cigarettes, (4) smoking tobacco from a hookah or a waterpipe, (5) dissolv- able tobacco products like Ariva/Stonewall /Camel/Camel Orbs /Camel sticks, (6) electronic cigarettes or E- cigarettes, such as Ruyan or NJOY. Respondents who had tried a pro- duct were asked if they had used that product in the past 30 days. Those who had were considered to be current users (analyses in this paper were limited to products that are new to the US market or that have recently gained popularity). Sociodemographic variables included four categories for region (determined by the US Census regions), three cate- gories for self- reported race (white, single race; black, single race; and all other responses), two categories for age (18 -24 and 25 +), and sex. The two age categories were selected in order to determine if younger adults were the most suscep- tible to using these emerging products. 2.3. Analyses. Chi - square tests were used to examine smok- ing status and Sociodemographic characteristics among life- time and current users of these nicotine - containing prod- ucts. For the analyses by smoking status, post hoc multiple comparisons of never smokers versus former smokers and nondaily smokers versus daily smokers were conducted with an adjusted alpha level set at 0.05/6 or 0.008. Multivariable analysis was applied to assess the relation- ship of smoking status, age, and other Sociodemographic characteristics with lifetime use. To explore the possibility that adults were using these products as a form of nicotine replacement therapy, chi- square analyses were used to com- pare use of at least one of these products among former smokers by the length of time since cessation. In order to address the possibility that former smokers used one of these emerging products prior to cessation, chi - square tests were used to examine use of these products among former smokers who quit less than a year ago, one to five years ago, five to 10 years, and more than 10 years. Although our data do not allow us to directly determine whether use of these emerging products occurred before or after smoking cessation, these analyses will provide insight into whether smoking cessation or use of an emerging product occurred first. It is doubtful that someone who quit smoking more than five years ago used one of these emerging products prior to cessation. 3. Results In mode 1, of 2,128 eligible respondents contacted, 1,504 (70.7 %) completed surveys [30). For the mode 2 frame, 2,272 panelists were randomly drawn from the probability panel [311; 1,736 responded to the invitation, yielding a final stage completion rate [26] of 67.5% percent. Length of time on the panel for the mode 2 frame ranged from 0.09 to 11.08 years, with a median length of time on the panel of 2.29 years. Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the overall sample. 3.1. Lifetime Users of Emerging Tobacco Products. Although most adults have not tried any of these tobacco products (86.4 %), some adults have tried a waterpipe (8.8 %) or snus (5.1 %). Fewer adults have tried an ENDS product (1.8%) or dissolvable tobacco products (0.6 %). Nondaily (34.9 %) and daily smokers (25.1 %) were the most likely to have tried each of these tobacco products (P < .001); however, some nonsmokers had tried at least one of these products (see Table 2). Among the nonsmokers, former smokers (17.2 %) were more likely than never smokers (7.7 %) to have used at least one of these tobacco products (P < .001). Use of these products also varied across nondaily and daily smokers. Although daily smokers (12.9 %) were more likely to have tried snus than nondaily smokers (4.1 %), P = .003, ever use of waterpipe was higher among nondaily smokers 26.0% than daily smokers (12.9 %), P < .001. Age, sex, region, race, and education were also signifi- cantly associated with lifetime use for at least one of these products (see Table 2). Younger adults were more likely than older adults to have tried snus and water pipe (8.0% versus 4.6 %, 12.3% versus 8.2 %, resp., P < .01); mates were more likely than females to have tried each of these products (see Table 2), with the exception of electronic cigarettes. Table 3 presents the odds ratios from a logistic regression of lifetime use of at least one of these emerging products on smoking status, region, race, age, education, and sex (the pattern of results did not change when this logistic regression model was replicated with sample frame included 4 Journal of Environmental and Public Health TABLE 1: Demographic characteristics of respondents (unweighted N = 3,240). Demographic variable Overall N Overall weighted percent Mode 1 frame unweighted percent . Mode 2 frame unweighted percent Smoking status Never smoker 1,802 56.9% 56.9% 52.3% Former smoker 787 24.8% 28.3% 28.3% Nondaily smoker 146 4.6% 1.6% 4.0% Daily smoker 434 13.7% 13.2% 15.4% Region 28.6% 29.0% 929 29.3% Northeast 404 12.6% 18.7% 18.9% Midwest 589 18.4% 25.5% 22.4% South 1,203 37.6% 39.5% 37.0% West 1,007 31.4% 16.4% 21:7% Race White African American Other Age 18-24 25+ Education Not a high school graduate High school graduate Some college College graduate Sex Female Male 2,346 74.2% 87.2% 73.8% 364 11.5°x6 10.0% 8.5% 454 14.3% 2.7% 17.7% 440 13.7% 8.3% 8.1% 2,763 86.3% 91.7°x6 91.9% 291 9.2% 5.6% 11.2% 903 28.5% 28.6% 29.0% 929 29.3% 25.9% 28.0% 1,044 33.0% 40.0% 31.7% 1,523 52.3% 36.2% 46.7% 1,675 47.6% 63.8% 53.3% as a predictor). Most notable was the strong association between use of emerging tobacco products with young age, male gender, and higher education when controlling for smoking status. 3.2. Current Users of Emerging Tobacco Products. Current use'of these tobacco products was rare (current use did not exceed 1% for any of these products). However, current use among adults who had ever used these products was nontrivial, snus (14.4 %), waterpipe (11.4 %), and ENDS (19.7 %). Conversely, current use of dissolvable tobacco products among ever users was less than one percent. 3.3. Cessation and Use of Emerging Tobacco Products. Of significant concern is the use of these products by former smokers after they had successfully quit smoking cigarettes. However, it is possible that some former smokers used these emerging tobacco products as a form of nicotine replacement therapy to help them quit, or simply tried one of these products before they quit smoking cigarettes. To address this possibility, we compared the use of these products among former smokers who quit smoking less than 1 year ago (7.2 %), one to five years ago (17.1 %), five to 10 years (14.6 %), and more than 10 years (61.0 %). People who had quit smoking more recently (<1 year ago) were the 'most likely to- report having tried one of these products 32.1 %; 27.1 %; 14.9 %; 13.5 %, respectively (P < .001 for trend). However, the distant former smokers, defined as >5 years quit, accounted for 59.7% of those who had every tried one of these products. 4. Discussion There are many concerns regarding emerging tobacco prod- ucts; this is the first study to examine use of these products in a nationally representative sample. Our findings demonstrate that more than one in 10 US adults have tried at least one emerging tobacco product. Although overall current use of these products was low, a nontrivial percentage of people who had tried snus, waterpipe, or ENDS were current users. More people have tried a waterpipe than snus or ENDS, however ENDS and snus are newer to the US market. Daily and nondaily smokers were the most likely to have tried each of these products. Furthermore, nondaily smokers are the most likely to have tried a waterpipe. Our study also demonstrates that lifetime use of these products is more common among males than females and Younger adults than older adults, whereas lifetime use is Journal of Environmental and Public Health TAet.e 2: Ever use of nicotine products by respondent characteristics. Northeast Snus Waterpipe Dissolvable tobacco ENDS At least one of these Midwest 6.5% (n = 38) 10.0% (n = 59) products 1.4% (n = 8) products Overall 5.1% (n = 162) 8.8% (n = 281) 0.6% (n = 20) 1.8% (n = 56) 13.6% (n = 435) Smoking status P < .001 P <.001 P = .001 P < .00I P < .001 Never smokers 2.7% (n = 48) 5.4% (n = 97) 0.2% (n = 3) 0.3°x6 (n = 6) 7.7% (n = 139) Former smokers 6.5% (n = 51) 11.4% (n = 90) 1.1% (n = 9) 1.5% (n = 12) 17.2% (n = 135) Nondaily smokers 4.1% (n = 6) 26.0% (n = 38) 2.7% (n = 4) 8.2% (n = 12) 34.9% (n = 51) Daily smokers 12.9% (n = 56) 12.9% (n = 56) 0.9% (n = 4) 6.2% (n = 27) 25.1% (n = 109) Region P = .076 P <.001 P = .520 P =.396 P <.001 Northeast 3.2 %(n =13) 12.6 %(n =51) 0.2 %(n =1) 2.7%(n =11) 15.6 %(n =63) Midwest 6.5% (n = 38) 10.0% (n = 59) 0.5% (n = 3) 1.4% (n = 8) 15.1% (n = 89) South 4.5% (n = 54) 4.8% (n = 58) 0.6% (n = 7) 1.6% (n = 19) 9.5% (n = l 14) West 5.7% (n = 57) 11.2% (n = 113) 0.9% (n = 9) 1.9% (n = 19) 16.9% (n = 170) Race P = .372 P =.006 P =.786 P = .971 P =.002 White 5.3% (n = 124) 9.5% (n = 222) 0.6% (n = 15) 1.7% (n = 41) 14.6% (n = 343) Black 3.6% (n = 13) 4.4% (n = 16) 0.8% (n = 3) 1.9% (n = 7) 7.7% (n = 28) Other 4.8% (n = 22) 9.5% (n = 43) 0.4% (n = 2) 1.8% (n = 8) 13.2% (n = 60) Age P =.003 P =.005 P = .626 P =. 195 P =.002 18-24 8.0% (n = 35) 12.3% (n = 54) 0.5% (n = 2) 2.5% (n = 11) 18.2% (n = 80) 25+ 4.6% (n = 128) 8.2% (n = 227) 0.7% (n = 18) 1.6% (n = 45) 12.8% (n = 355) Sex P <.001 P <.001 P <.001 P =.087 P <.001 Males 8.5% (n = 130) 13.6% (n = 208) 1.2% (n = 18) 2.2% (n = 33) 20.8% (n = 317) Females " 2.0% (n = 33) 4.4% (n = 74) 0.1% (n = 2) 1.4% (n = 23) 7.0% (n = 118) r Education P <.001 P <.001 P = .107 P < .001 P <.601 Less than HS 3.8% (n = 1 l) 8.2% (n = 24) 0.0% (n = 0) 0.7% (n = 2) 10.3% (n = 30) High school 7.8% (n = 70) 4.9% (n = 44) 0.3% (n = 3) 1.7% (n = 15) 12.7% (n = 115) Some college 4.8% (n = 45) 12.8% (n = 119) 1.1% (n = 10) 3.7% (n = 34) 18.2% (n = 169) College degree 3.2% (n = 33) 8.9% (n = 93) 0.7% (n = 7) 0.5% (n = 5) 11.3% (n = t l8) INN lowest among adults living in the southern region of the US Contrary to cigarette use patterns, higher levels of education are associated with higher use of at least one of these emerging products. This relationship is the inverse of the trend toward decreased cigarette use in the higher educated demographic groups, suggesting that emerging products may have the capacity to "re- normalize' tobacco use in a demographic that has had significant denormalization of tobacco use previously. All forms of tobacco are potentially harmful but the use of these emerging products is concerning for at least four additional reasons. First, the use of these products by people who have never smoked cigarettes may lead to desensitization to the concept of using tobacco products in general. Tolerance to tobacco and less normative resistance to tobacco could lead to future use of cigarettes. In addition, these products contain nicotine and will therefore start the upregulation of nicotine'receptors in the reward centers of the brain, setting up the potential for nicotine addiction and a facilitated leap to the cigarette [5]. Second, people who have quit smoking may relapse to nicotine addiction after using these products. Recent former smokers are particularly susceptible to relapse early on, whereas distant former smokers may still relapse back to smoking cigarettes especially when using other tobacco products [32]. Third, current smokers may use these products as an alternative to cessation [33]. Although replacing cigarettes with these other tobacco delivery devices might be beneficial, the risk of relapse to cigarette smoking may be elevated compared to people who overcome their addition without continuing the behavioral act of cigarette use itself. And fourth, the lifetime prevalence of using waterpipe among nondaily smokers is more than 25% and substantially higher than among daily smokers and nonsmokers. Polytobacco use among these nondaily smokers may also increase levels of nicotine exposure and risk of persistent tobacco dependence relative to the exclusive use of cigarettes [7]. The higher lifetime prevalence rate for use of these prod- ucts among young adults, males, more educated adults, and residents outside of the southern region suggest that public health strategies should prioritize preventing additional or further use of these products in these populations, while maintaining lower lifetime prevalence rates in other groups. Almost 20% of young adults have tried at least one of these emerging tobacco products. There are at least two unique strengths of this study. These are the first nationally representative data on the prevalence of use of these emerging products. This informa- tion can help to inform efforts to determine the need for regulatory protections. Furthermore, these findings are based 6 TAet.a 3: Final logistic regression model showing odds of having tried a waterpipe, snus, or ENDS (N = 3,158). Model also included race, not significant. Reference groups were as follows: never smokers, south region, 25 years of age and older, females, and no high school degree. on a nationally- representative sample of US adults obtained from a mixed -mode frame that substantially reduces con- cerns of the increasing bias in RDD surveys arising from noncoverage due to wireless substitution. However, this study is subject to at least five limitations. First, although the mixed -mode design substantially re- duced noncoverage bias compared to an RDD design by in- cluding respondents who did not have a landline telephone in their home, it is possible that the dual sampling frame did not entirely eliminate noncoverage issues. The use of the internet panel raises some concern about the repre- sentativeness of the sample. However, several comparison studies have demonstrated that this approach yields results comparable to well- designed RDD surveys, in terms of demographics and outcome variables [24, 341. Chang and Krosnick compared findings from this internet panel, an RDD survey, and a nonprobability internet survey (Harris Interactive Internet Panel). The RDD and internet panel probability samples were found to be more representative than the nonprobability internet sample. Compared to the RDD sample, this internet probability panel demonstrated less evidence of survey satisficing and social desirability than the RDD survey, frequent concerns with tobacco use survey research [341. More recently, Yeager and colleagues conducted a similar comparison study that also included benchmarks from the National Health Interview Survey and the Current Population Survey [24]. Again, this internet panel probability sample was comparable to these large government surveys in terms of demographic, behavioral, and attitudinal benchmarks and were found to be more Journal of Environmental and Public Health representative than seven different nonprobability internet surveys [24). Second, ongoing engagement might lead to panel con- ditioning, and thereby reduce data reliability if respondents develop a "time -in- sample bias' due to increased experience with completing surveys. However, results from the primary analyses did not change with the inclusion of a variable that measured time on the panel. (For the mode 2 frame; analyses presented in Tables 2 and 3 were replicated with the inclusion of a variable that measured length of time on the panel. The pattern of results did not change; and no evidence of a "time - on -panel bias" was detected.) Third, the cumulative response rate for the mode 2 frame is significantly lower than the response rate from mode 1. However, it is important to note the differences between an RDD telephone sample and a probability - based internet panel. An online panel is composed of people recruited at different times and, more importantly, committed to answer many surveys for a period of time and not just that single survey. Further, pastelists must also complete profiling surveys in order to become members of the panel. These differences are reflected in the recruitment and profile rates reported above. These differences make directly comparing response rates between one -time surveys and panel surveys difficult and perhaps not illuminating. When considering the first three limitations, it is worth comparing estimates from the 2010 SCS -TC to those from a large -scale national survey. Both the SCS -TC and the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) [35] assess current smoking status using the same survey items, and produced very similar estimates (SCS -TC, 18.3 %, NHIS, 19.4 %). Thus this prevalence estimate from the SCS -TC is comparable to that from one of the principal sources of information about the health of the US population. The fourth limitation relates to whether any of the recent former smokers had quit cigarettes because of these emerging tobacco products, or, rather, had used these products after successfully quitting. Obviously those former smokers who quit before these products emerged in the US market did not use these products as a cessation strategy, but this is an area for future study among people who have recently quit smoking. The fifth limitation concerns the cross - sectional nature and scope of these data. As noted above, it is not possible from this survey to determine when adults, particularly for- mer smokers, tried these products. Moreover, an expanded pool of survey items that assessed when and under what scenarios people used these products would provide more conclusive insight into the risks that these products pose. Further studies should include more detailed items to examine perceptions and use of these emerging products among adolescents and young adults who are closer to the median age of cigarette smoking initiation. An expanding pool of tobacco products with little or no regulation may increase the overall number of individuals who become nicotine dependent and later use cigarettes. This study demonstrates that some young adults, distant former, and never cigarette smokers have used these emerging nicotine - containing tobacco products, suggesting a need to Have tried one of these Predictors products adjusted OR (95% confidence interval) Smoking status Former smoker 2.71 (2.06, 3.56) Nondaily smoker 6.13 (4.02, 9.33) Daily smoker 5.53 (4.03, 7.58) Region Northeast 1.68 (1.16, 2.42) Midwest 1.65 (1.20, 2.28) West 1.80 (1.36, 2.39) Age 18-24 2.18 (1.60, 2.97). Sex Males 3.51 (2.77, 4.45) Education High school 1.58 (.99, 2.51) Some college 2.67 (1.69, 4.22) College degree 2.04 (1.26, 3.30) Model also included race, not significant. Reference groups were as follows: never smokers, south region, 25 years of age and older, females, and no high school degree. on a nationally- representative sample of US adults obtained from a mixed -mode frame that substantially reduces con- cerns of the increasing bias in RDD surveys arising from noncoverage due to wireless substitution. However, this study is subject to at least five limitations. First, although the mixed -mode design substantially re- duced noncoverage bias compared to an RDD design by in- cluding respondents who did not have a landline telephone in their home, it is possible that the dual sampling frame did not entirely eliminate noncoverage issues. The use of the internet panel raises some concern about the repre- sentativeness of the sample. However, several comparison studies have demonstrated that this approach yields results comparable to well- designed RDD surveys, in terms of demographics and outcome variables [24, 341. Chang and Krosnick compared findings from this internet panel, an RDD survey, and a nonprobability internet survey (Harris Interactive Internet Panel). The RDD and internet panel probability samples were found to be more representative than the nonprobability internet sample. Compared to the RDD sample, this internet probability panel demonstrated less evidence of survey satisficing and social desirability than the RDD survey, frequent concerns with tobacco use survey research [341. More recently, Yeager and colleagues conducted a similar comparison study that also included benchmarks from the National Health Interview Survey and the Current Population Survey [24]. Again, this internet panel probability sample was comparable to these large government surveys in terms of demographic, behavioral, and attitudinal benchmarks and were found to be more Journal of Environmental and Public Health representative than seven different nonprobability internet surveys [24). Second, ongoing engagement might lead to panel con- ditioning, and thereby reduce data reliability if respondents develop a "time -in- sample bias' due to increased experience with completing surveys. However, results from the primary analyses did not change with the inclusion of a variable that measured time on the panel. (For the mode 2 frame; analyses presented in Tables 2 and 3 were replicated with the inclusion of a variable that measured length of time on the panel. The pattern of results did not change; and no evidence of a "time - on -panel bias" was detected.) Third, the cumulative response rate for the mode 2 frame is significantly lower than the response rate from mode 1. However, it is important to note the differences between an RDD telephone sample and a probability - based internet panel. An online panel is composed of people recruited at different times and, more importantly, committed to answer many surveys for a period of time and not just that single survey. Further, pastelists must also complete profiling surveys in order to become members of the panel. These differences are reflected in the recruitment and profile rates reported above. These differences make directly comparing response rates between one -time surveys and panel surveys difficult and perhaps not illuminating. When considering the first three limitations, it is worth comparing estimates from the 2010 SCS -TC to those from a large -scale national survey. Both the SCS -TC and the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) [35] assess current smoking status using the same survey items, and produced very similar estimates (SCS -TC, 18.3 %, NHIS, 19.4 %). Thus this prevalence estimate from the SCS -TC is comparable to that from one of the principal sources of information about the health of the US population. The fourth limitation relates to whether any of the recent former smokers had quit cigarettes because of these emerging tobacco products, or, rather, had used these products after successfully quitting. Obviously those former smokers who quit before these products emerged in the US market did not use these products as a cessation strategy, but this is an area for future study among people who have recently quit smoking. The fifth limitation concerns the cross - sectional nature and scope of these data. As noted above, it is not possible from this survey to determine when adults, particularly for- mer smokers, tried these products. Moreover, an expanded pool of survey items that assessed when and under what scenarios people used these products would provide more conclusive insight into the risks that these products pose. Further studies should include more detailed items to examine perceptions and use of these emerging products among adolescents and young adults who are closer to the median age of cigarette smoking initiation. An expanding pool of tobacco products with little or no regulation may increase the overall number of individuals who become nicotine dependent and later use cigarettes. This study demonstrates that some young adults, distant former, and never cigarette smokers have used these emerging nicotine - containing tobacco products, suggesting a need to Journal of Environmental and Public Health I restrict how and to whom these products are marketed, sold, and used. Furthermore, clinicians need to be aware of emerging tobacco products, both to better screen high risk demographic groups, and to offer counseling about the risks of these products as another form of tobacco use. Acknowledgments The authors are supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics Julius B. Richmond Center of Excellence, funded by grants from the Flight Attendant Medical Research Institute and Legacy. The findings and conclusions are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of any of these institutions. No financial disclosures were reported by the authors of this paper. References [ 1 ] B. Knishkowy and Y. Amitai, "Water -pipe (Narghile) smoking: an emerging health risk behavior," Pediatrics, vol. 116, no. 1, pp. a 113-e 119, 2005. [21 I. Stepanov, J. Jensen, D. Hatsukami, and S. Hecht, "New and traditional smokeless tobacco: comparison of toxicant and carcinogen levels; Nicotine and Tobacco Research, vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 1773 -1782, 2008. [31 N. Gray, J. E. Henningfield, N. L. Benowitz et al., "Toward a comprehensive long term nicotine policy," Tobacco Control, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 161 -165, 2005. [4] Non - Smokers' Rights Association Smoking and Health Action Foundation, "Harm reduction in tobacco control: what is it? Why should you care ?" Policy Analysis, Non - Smokers' Rights Association Smoking and Health Action Foundation, 2010. (51 J. R. DiFranza and R. J. Wellman, A sensitization - homeostasis model of nicotine craving, withdrawal, and tolerance: inter grating the clinical and basic science literature," Nicotine and Tobacco Research, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 9 -26, 2005. [6] J. F. Etter, "Electronic cigarettes: a survey of users," BMC Public Health, vol. 10, article 231, 2010. [7] J. M. Bombard, L. L. Pederson, J. J. Koval, and M. O'Hegarty, "How are lifetime polytobacco users different than current cigarette -only users? Results from a Canadian young adult population," Addictive Behaviors, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 1069- 1072, 2009. [8] M. Parascandola, E. Augustson, and A. Rose, "Characteristics of current and recent former smokers associated with the use of new potential reduced- exposure tobacco products;' Nicotine and Tobacco Research, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 1431 -1438, 2009. [91 M. Parascandola, E. Augustson, M. E. O'Connell, and S. Marcus, "Consumer awareness and attitudes related to new potential reduced - exposure tobacco product brands;' Nicotine and Tobacco Research, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 886 -895, 2009. 1101 J. E. Henningfield, C. A. Rose, and G. A. Giovino, "Brave new world of tobacco disease prevention: promoting dual tobacco - product use ?" American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 226 -228, 2002. [ l 11 S. H. Zhu, J. B. Wang, A. Hartman et al., "Quitting cigarettes completely or switching to smokeless tobacco: do US data replicate the swedish results ?" Tobacco Control, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 82 -87, 2009. [12] C. E. Gartner, W D. Hall, S. Chapman, and B. Freeman, "Should the health community promote smokeless tobacco (Snus) as a harm reduction measure ?" PLoS Medicine, vol. 4, no. 7, p. e185, 2007. [13] "Star Scientific promotional website, under What is it? tab," January 2011, : http:// www .dissolvabletobacco.com/main -w .html. [ 141 World Health Organization Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation, "Report on the scientific basis of tobacco pro- duct regulation: third report of a WHO study group;' WHO Technical Report Series 955, World Health. Organization, 2010, http:/ /whglibdoc.who.int/publications /2009/978924120 9557- eng.pdf. [ 15] J. D. Klein, "Hookahs and waterpipes: cultural tradition or addictive trap ?" Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 434-435,2008. [ 161 W. Maziak, "The waterpipe: time for action," Addiction, vol. 103, no. 11, pp. 1763 -1767, 2008. [171 World Health. Organization Study Group on Tobacco Pro- duct Regulation, "Waterpipe tobacco smoking: health effects, research needs and recommended actions by regulators," WHO Advisory Note, 2005, http: / /www.who.int /entity/tobac- co /global -interaction /tobreg/ Waterpipe %20recom mend a- tion- Final.pdf. [ 181 R. C. McMillen, J. P. Winickoff, J. D. Klein, and M. Weitzman, "U.S. adult attitudes and practices regarding smoking restric- tions and child exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS): changes in the social climate from 2000 - 2001," Pediat- rics, vol. 112, no. 1, pp. e55-e60, 2003. [19] J. Winickoff, R. McMillen, D. Vallone et al., "US attitudes about banning menthol in cigarettes: results from a nationally representative survey," American Journal of Public Health, vol. 101, no. 7, pp. 1234 -1236, 2011. [20] S. J. Blumberg and J. V. Luke, "Wireless substitution: early release of estimates from the National Health Interview Sur- vey, January-June 2011 ' Tech. Rep., Center for Health Statis- tics, 2011. [211 Knowledge Networks, 2010, http: / /www.knowledgenetworks .com /ganp /reviewer -info. html. [22] Knowledge Networks, KnowledgePanel design summary, 2010, http: / /www.knowledgenetworks .com /knpanel/docs/ KnowledgePanel(R) -Design -Sum mary- Descri pt ion. pd f. [23] Knowledge Networks, "KnowledgePanel: processes & pro- cedures contributing to sample representativeness & tests for self - selection bias;' 2010, http: / /www.knowledgenctworks .com /ganp /does /Knowledge Panel R- Statistical - Methods -Note .pdf. [24] D. Yeager, J. Krosnick, L. Chang et al., "Comparing the accura- cy of RDD telephone surveys and internet surveys conducted with probability and non - probability samples," Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 709 -747, 2011. [251 Knowledge Networks, "Knowledge networks bibliography: articles and presentations based on knowledge networks' col- lected panel data, analysis, or methodology," 2012, http: / /www .knowledgenet%vorks.com/ganp/docs/KN-Bibliography.pdf. [261 A. Richardson, H. Mao, and D. Vallone, "Primary and dual users of cigars and cigarettes: profiles, tobacco use patterns and relevance to policy," Nicotine err Tobacco Research. In press. 127] A. Dempsey, D. Singer, S. Clark, and M. Davis, "Adolescent preventive health care: what do parents want ?" Journal of Pediatrics, vol. 155, no. 5, pp. 689 -694, 2009. [281 E. Rothman, E. Edwards, T. Heeren, and R. Hingson, "Adverse childhood experiences predict earlier age of drinking onset: results from a representative US sample of current or former drinkers;' Pediatrics, vol. 122, no. 2, pp. e298 -e304, 2008. (� =' 8 Journal of Environmental and Public Health (29] R. Caskey, S. Tessler Lindau, and G. Alexander, "Knowledge and early adoption of the HPV vaccine among girls and young women: results of a national survey," Journal of Adolescent Health, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 453162, 2009. [301 AAPOR Cell Phone Task Force, "New considerations for survey researchers when planning and conducting RDD telephone surveys in the U.S. with respondents reached via cell phone numbers," AAPOR Cell Phone Task Force Report, 2010. [311 M. Callegaro and C. Disogra, "Computing response metrics for online panels," Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 72, no. 5, pp. 1008 - 1032,2008. [321 E. A. Krall, A. J. Garvey, and R. I. Garcia, "Smoking relapse after 2 years of abstinence: findings from the VA normative aging study," Nicotine and Tobacco Research, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 95-100,2002. [331 M. Parascandola, E. Augustson, and A. Rose, "Characteristics of current and recent former smokers associated with the use of new potential reduced - exposure tobacco products," Nicotine and Tobacco Research, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 1431 -1438, 2009. [341 L. Chang and J. A. Krosnick, "National surveys via RDD telephone interviewing versus the internet: Comparing sam- ple representativeness and response quality," Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 73, no. 4, pp. 641 -678, 2009. [351 B. W. Ward, P. M. Barnes, G. Freeman, and J. S. Schiller, "Early release of selected estimates based on data from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey," National Center for Health Statistics, 2011, http : / /www.cdc.gov /nchs/nhis.htm. E-10 May 2013 fact )sheet action on smoking and health Use of e- cigarettes in Great Britain among adults and young people (2013) t �.:. .,� i 1rrrAiiti�rc�k�l �ilq�i �•I -r Summary ASH has commissioned surveys on e- cigarette use starting in 20101 with a survey of smokers, followed in February 20122 and 20133 by surveys of all adults and in March 20134 with a survey of children aged 11 to 18. Among children regular use of e- cigarettes is extremely rare. Children who had heard of e- cigarettes were asked about their use and knowledge of them. What little use that is reported is confined almost entirely to children who currently smoke or used to smoke. 1 in 10 16 -18 year olds who had heard of e- cigarettes (1 in 20 among 11 -15 year olds) has "tried e- cigarettes once or twice ". • 1 in 100 16 -18 year olds (0% 11 -15 year olds) uses e- cigarettes more than once a week.5 • Among young people who have never smoked 1 % have "tried e- cigarettes once or twice ", 0% report continued e- cigarette use and 0% =� expect to try an e- cigarette soon. Among adults electronic cigarette current use has grown among smokers and ex- smokers and remains at 0% among those who have never smoked. Ex- smokers report having used e- cigarettes to help a quit attempt (48 %) to prevent relapse to tobacco use (32 %). E- cigarette use Awareness of e- cigarettes is widespread among children aged 11 to 18. among children Two thirds of 11 -18 year olds and 83% of 16 -18 year olds had heard of e- cigarettes. E -cigarette use by age among children who had heard of e- cigarettes t00% - — w.- - --- {.Lale.� � - � ■ luse themoften (more than once aweekr j a I ■ 1 use them sometimes 501A 98% 98 " /0�— 96% 96 °k1 —'90% 90%t-91 %�— 89 %i (nve than mce a maithl ■ I have tried them once or tNICC 0 l 1 1 t e I have never used them 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Base: 1,428 children who have heard of e- cigarettes Understanding of e- cigarettes is generally good. Children who have heard ( ; of e- cigarettes believe correctly that they are less harmful than cigarettes to the user (74 %) and those around them (79 %). Most (51 %) 16 -18 year olds who have heard of e- cigarettes believe that they contain nicotine. ASH fact sheet on the use of e- cigarettes in Great Britain Planned review dale: May 2014 Among children who have heard of e- cigarettes, sustained use is rare and confined to children who currently or have previously smoked. Of .,� those who had heard of e- cigarettes, 7% (11 % among 16 -18 year olds) had tried e- cigarettes at least once. Two percent reported using them monthly or weekly. Among the 8% of children who reported some use of e- cigarettes, only 28% had used them in the last month. Of those who had never smoked a cigarette, 99% reported never having tried e- cigarettes and the remaining 1 % reported having tried them "once or twice ". We found no evidence of regular e- cigarette use among children who have never smoked or who have only tried smoking once. Few children expect to use an e- cigarette soon, except those who already smoke. Only 1 % of those who had never smoked think that they would try an e- cigarette soon. Frequent (more than weekly) use of e- cigarettes was confined almost entirely to ex- smokers and daily smokers. Among those who smoke more than 6 cigarettes a week and had heard of e- cigarettes, 48% had tried e- cigarettes once or twice, 7% use them more than once a month and 5% use them once a month. E- cigarette use Awareness of e- cigarettes is widespread but continued use is confined arnong adults to current and ex- smokers. In 2013, 91% of smokers and 71% of non- smokers had heard of e- cigarettes. Among those who have never smoked, 1 % report having tried them and 0% report currently using them. E- cigarette use by smoking status (Children who have heard of e- cigarettes) 1001% P j 01 use them often (more than 751% �— 7K 4 1 t " once a week) 50' #, �_ ' k f MI use them sometimes (more 99% — g2y. 82 °/. 74,/ s than once a month) 25 °k I 1— 59% ' it have tried them once or ° j 39/° i ; tvice 0 ^,b Never Tried Used to Smoke <1 Smoke 1 -6 Smoke 6+ have never used them smoked smoking smoke a week a week' a week once Base: 1.123 Children 'Note: Very small sample. Cnl » 1 np y Y. subjects in this catayory. Current use is slightly more common among ex- smokers with 3% reporting current use and a further 5% reporting having tried them or used them in the past. O.Y. 1 — - — --- , Never smoked ex- smoker Base: 12.170 aduts 2 ASH fact sheet on the use of e- cigarettes in Great Britain current311oker E- cigarette use by smoking status among adults (2013) 40% 30% ■ 1 have tried a- cigarettes and still use iEM them tti L0% to 1 have tried them butdon'tuse them y anymore 10% O.Y. 1 — - — --- , Never smoked ex- smoker Base: 12.170 aduts 2 ASH fact sheet on the use of e- cigarettes in Great Britain current311oker Use is most common among daily smokers with 11 % reporting current use and 25% having used them in the past. E- cigarette use is constant across ages and socio economic groups. E- cigarette use by smoking status among 4G% adults 30% INIcurrently use them ■ I hate tried them but don't use 2C% them anymore 10% 111% 0% t , :- -s_as� "rw 1 4ss� 2012 ex- 2013 ex- 2010 2012 2013 smokers smokers smokers snickers smokers Base: 2010 n= 2.587: 2012, n= 11.314, 2013, n= 12.701 Use has increased among smokers and ex- smokers but not among those who have never smoked. Use has increased steadily among smokers and ex- smokers but current use among those who have never smoked remains 0 %. Smokers and ex- smokers report different reasons for using e- cigarettes. The main reasons ex- smokers report having used e- cigarettes are to help a quit attempt (48 %) and "to help me keep off tobacco" (32 %). The main reason smokers report having used e- cigarettes is to "help me reduce the amount of tobacco I smoke, but not stop completely" (31 %) followed by help in a quit attempt (30 %); and "to help me keep off tobacco" (29 %). Adults who report using f having used e- cigarettes... To avoid putting those around me at risk due to second- hand tobacco smoke Because I wart to continue to smoke tobacco and I needed something to help deal with situations where I cannot smoke (e.g. workplaces, bars or restaurants) Because I felt I was addicted to smoking tobacco and could not stop using it even though I warned to To save money compared with smoking tobacco To help me reduce the amount of tobacco I smoke, but not stop completely Because I had made an attempt to qua srnoking already and I warded an aid to help me keep off tobacco To help me stop smoking tobacco entirety Base: 1,035 a:iutts Who h9ve used e- cigarettes 3 ASH fact sheet on the use of e- cigarettes in Great Britain Other 0% 5% 10% 1590 20 1.0 25 °0 30 °e We References 1. Total sample size was 12597 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 17th and 22nd March 2010. All surveys were carried out online. All figures have been weighted and are representative of GB adults (aged 18 +) or children (11 to 18) as appropriate. 2. Total sample size was 12436 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between Fieldwork was undertaken between 27th February and 16th March. 3. Total sample size was 12171 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 1 st and 19th February 2013. 4. Total sample size was 2178 children aged 11 to 18. Fieldwork was undertaken 21 st - 28th March 2013. 5. All figures are rounded to the nearest percentage point. 0% may mean no respondents or respondents <0.5 %. r For more information on issues raised, visit wwwash.org.uk action on:. >tiiq� ��9 5raun 12/9/13 Comparison of the effects of e- cigarette vapor... [Inhal Toxicol. 20121 - PubMed - NCBI PubMed �'�isplay Settings: Abstract nforma ACCESS nanrvre FULL TEXT Inhal Toxicol. 2012 Oct;24(12):850 -7. doi: 10.3109/08958378.2012.724728. Comparison of the effects of e- cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality. McAuley.TR, Hopke PK, Zhao J, Babaian S. Consulting for Health, Air, Nature, & A Greener Environment, LLC (CHANGE), Corporate Headquarters, Queensbury, NY 12804 -9358, USA. mcauleyt @airqualitychange.com Abstract CONTEXT: Electronic cigarettes (e- cigarettes) have earned considerable attention recently as an alternative to smoking tobacco, but uncertainties about their impact on health and indoor air quality have resulted in proposals for bans on indoor e- cigarette use. OBJECTIVE: To assess potential health impacts relating to the use of e- cigarettes, a series of studies were conducted using e- cigarettes and standard tobacco cigarettes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Four different high nicotine e- liquids were vaporized in two sets of experiments by generic 2 -piece e- cigarettes to collect emissions and assess indoor air l - ncentrations of common tobacco smoke by products. Tobacco cigarette smoke tests were .iducted for comparison. Results: Comparisons of pollutant concentrations were made between e- cigarette vapor and tobacco smoke samples. Pollutants included VOCs, carbonyls, PAHs, nicotine, TSNAs, and glycols. From these results, risk analyses were conducted based on dilution into a 40 m'room and standard toxicological data. Non - cancer risk analysis revealed "No Significant Risk" of harm to human health for vapor samples from e- liquids (A -D). In contrast, for tobacco smoke most findings markedly exceeded risk limits indicating a condition of "Significant Risk" of harm to human health. With regard to cancer risk analysis, no vapor sample from e- liquids A -D exceeded the risk limit for either children or adults. The tobacco smoke sample approached the risk limits for adult exposure. CONCLUSIONS: For all byproducts measured, electronic cigarettes produce very small exposures relative to tobacco cigarettes. The study indicates no apparent risk to human health from e- cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyzed. PMID: 23033998 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Publication Types, McSH Terms, Substances (Out - more resources www.ncbi .nlm.nih.gov /pubmed/230-13998 1/2 12/9/13 Adolescent males' awareness of and willingn... IJ Adolesc Health. 20131 - PubMed - NCBI ( PubMed _ j adolescent males awareness of and willingness to try electronic cigar i`�='u isplay Settings: Abstract Showing results for Adolescent[Title]AND Males[Tide]AND Awareness[Title]AND Willingness[Tit/e]AND TryfTitle]AND ElectronicfTitle]AND CigarettesfTitle]. Your search for "Adolescent Males' Awareness of and Willingness to Try Electronic Cigarettes retrieved no results. See 1 citation found by title matching your search. J Adolesc Health. 2013 Feb;52(2):144 -50. doi: 10 .1016 /j.jadohealth.2012.09.014. Epub 2012 Nov 30. Adolescent males' awareness of and willingness to try electronic cigarettes. Pel2ber JK, Reiter PL, McRee AL, Cameron LD, Gilkey MB, Brewer NT. Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599- 7440, USA. Abstract PURPOSE: Electronic cigarettes (e- cigarettes) are a new type of device that delivers vaporized nicotine without the tobacco combustion of regular cigarettes. We sought to understand (''" - vareness of and willingness to try e- cigarettes among adolescent males, a group that is at risk smoking initiation and may use e- cigarettes as a "gateway" to smoking. METHODS: A national sample of 11- 19- year -old males (n = 228) completed an online survey in November 2011. We recruited participants through their parents, who were members of a panel of U.S. households constructed using random -digit dialing and addressed -based sampling. RESULTS: Only two participants (< 1 %) had previously tried e- cigarettes. Among those who had not tried e- cigarettes, most (67 %) had heard of them. Awareness was higher among older and non - Hispanic adolescents. Nearly 1 in 5 (18 %) participants were willing to try either a plain or flavored e- cigarette, but willingness to try plain versus flavored varieties did not differ. Smokers were more willing to try any e- cigarette than nonsmokers (74% vs. 13 %; OR 10.25, 95% CI 2.88, 36.46). Nonsmokers who had more negative beliefs about the typical smoker were less willing to try e- cigarettes (OR .58, 95% CI .43, .79). CONCLUSIONS: Most adolescent males were aware of e- cigarettes, and a substantial minority were willing to try them. Given that even experimentation with e- cigarettes could lead to nicotine dependence and subsequent use of other tobacco products, regulatory and behavioral interventions are needed to prevent "gateway" use by adolescent nonsmokers. Campaigns promoting negative images of smokers or FDA bans on sales to youth may help deter use. ,jyright © 2013 Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ww%v.ncbi . nlm.nih.gov /pubmed/ ?term =" Adolescent +Males' +Awareness +of +and +Willingness +to +Try +Electronic +Cigarettes 1/2 12/9/13 Adolescent males' awareness of and willingn... I1 Adolese Health. 20131 - NbMed - NCBI Comment in Electronic cigarettes: a new nicotine gateway? r` AID: 23332477 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] PMCID: PMC3569032 [Available on 2014/2/11 Publication Types, McSH Terms, Substances, Grant Support LinkOut - more resources IM www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov /pubmed /? term = "Adolescent +Males' +Awareness +of +and +Willingness +to +Try +Electronic +Cigarettes 2/2 12/9113 The electronic - cigarette: effects on desire to ... (Addict Behay. 20121 - PubMed - NCBI PubMed splay Settings: Abstract a Z Addict Behay. 2012 Aug; 37(8):970 -3. doi: 10. 101 6/j. addbeh. 2012.03.004. Epub 2012 Mar 10. The electronic - cigarette: effects on desire to smoke, withdrawal symptoms and cognition. Dawkins L, Turner I Hasna S, Soar K. School of Psychology, University of East London, Water Lane, Stratford, London, England, United Kingdom. i.e.dawkins@uel.ac.uk Abstract Electronic cigarettes (e- cigarettes) are battery operated devices that deliver nicotine via inhaled vapour. Few studies have evaluated acute effects on craving and mood, and none have explored effects on cognition. This study aimed to explore the effects of the White Super e- cigarette on desire to smoke, nicotine withdrawal symptoms, attention and working memory. Eighty -six smokers were randomly allocated to either: 18 mg nicotine e- cigarette (nicotine), Omg e- cigarette (placebo), or just hold the e- cigarette (just hold) conditions. Participants rated their desire to smoke and withdrawal symptoms at baseline (T1), and five (T2) and twenty (T3) minutes after using the e- ..->rigarette ad libitum for 5 min. A subset of participants completed the Letter Cancellation and own- Peterson Working Memory Tasks. After 20 min; compared with the just hold group, desire to smoke and some aspects of nicotine withdrawal were significantly reduced in the nicotine and placebo group; the nicotine e- cigarette was superior to placebo in males but not in females. The nicotine e- cigarette also improved working memory performance compared with placebo at the longer interference intervals. There was no effect of nicotine on Letter Cancellation performance. To conclude, the White Super e- cigarette alleviated desire to smoke and withdrawal symptoms 20 min after use although the nicotine content was more important for males. This study also demonstrated for the first time that the nicotine e- cigarette can enhance working memory performance. Further evaluation of the cognitive effects of the e- cigarette and its efficacy as a cessation tool is merited. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. PMID: 22503574 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE] Publication Types, McSH Terms, Substances LinkOut - more resources www.ncbi.nIm- nih.gov /pubmcd /2250374 1/1