Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-08-06_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA JOINT CITY COUNCIL /HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD WORK SESSION CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA COMMUNITY ROOM AUGUST 6, 2012 5:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS IV. HERITAGE DESIGNATIONS: A. City Wide Designations B. Morningside Bungalows C. Southdale Center — Eligible For Landmark Designation D. Mid - Century Modern Historic Context Study V. DESIGN REVIEW — Summary of COA's Approved In Last 12 Months VI. COMMUNITY AWARENESS & EDUCATION VII. 2012 WORK PLAN VIII. 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- 886172 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS Mon Aug 6 Work Session — France Avenue Intersection Enhancements 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Mon Aug 6 Joint Work Session — Heritage Preservation Board 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Mon Aug 6 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Aug 14 PRIMARY ELECTION DAY — POLLS OPEN 7:00 A.M. UNTIL 8:00 P.M. Tues Aug 21 Work Session — Budget Process /Joint Meeting w Sch Board 4:00 P.M.. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Aug 21 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Sept 3 LABOR DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED —City Hall Closed Tues Sept 4 Joint Work Session — Planning Commission 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Sept 4 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wed Sept 19 Work Session — Board & Commissions Work Plan Proposals 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Wed Sept 19 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Oct 2 Work Session — CIP Workshop 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct 2 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Oct 16 Work Session — Business Meeting/Work Plan 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct 16 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Nov 5 Human Services Funding /Liquor Ordinance 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Nov 5 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Nov 9 Canvass of Election Returns 5:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS .s Nov 20 Work Session — Finalize 2013 Work Plans 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Nov 20 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 4 Work Session — Name Your Neighborhood 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Dec 4 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 18 Work Session —TBD 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Dec 18 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 0 1 (I AM VU • f� v • REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL City Council Workshop Agenda Item Item No: III From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering F-1 Action ® Discussion Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: France Avenue Intersection Enhancements INFORMATION /BACKGROUND : For this item we will be discussing the design and funding as it relates to Item A. A. of the City Council Meeting Agenda; please bring this agenda packet to the workshop. The Edina Transportation Commission has been informed that this project will be discussed by the City Council and they are welcome to attend. City Hall • Phone 952 - 927 -8861 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 • www.CUofEdina.com Date: July 9, 2012 To: Heritage Preservation Board From: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner Re: The Process for Designating Properties Edina Heritage Landmarks Following is the process for designating a property an Edina Heritage Landmark: MEMO �• w9 ^r�. A k ;, `�• • 0 to Y4GA- 1. Contact the owner and ask them if they would be interested in having their property designated an Edina Heritage Landmark. 2. With the consent of the owner, the HPB directs staff to prepare the necessary heritage landmark nomination study which includes a plan of treatment for the property. The landmark nomination study identifies and describes the property being nominated, explains how it meets one or more of the Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria, and makes the case for historic significance and integrity; the plan of treatment lays out a vision for the future of the preservation resource and provides guidance for evaluating applications for Certificates of Appropriateness. 3. The homeowner meets with the Planning Staff to.discuss the nomination study to ensure that they approve of the plan of treatment. 4. Once the nomination study and plan of treatment has been approved by the property owner, the HPB will formally move the nomination. By statute, the Minnesota Historical Society (SHPO) must be provided an opportunity to comment on the nomination before they are acted on by the city (the review period is 60 days); city code also requires review by the Planning Commission. When the review and comment period by SHPO is over, the nomination documents may be revised to reflect agreed upon changes they recommend. The nomination is then heard first by the Planning Commission because the action entails adding a heritage landmark overlay zoning designation to the property. The Planning Commission provides their opinion to the City Council who ultimately holds a public hearing to approve adding the Edina Heritage Landmark to the property. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50Th St. • Edina, MN 55424 MEMOa, : o e �V Provided for your information is the list of properties determined eligible for landmark designation which includes the address, the year determined eligible and the status of the contact with property owners. I have also added samples of typical letters that have gone out to property owners inviting them to consider designating their properties Edina Heritage Landmarks. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARKS Designated Heritage` Landmarks: Address`°& Year Designated 1. Grimes House, 4200 W. 44th Street =1976 2. Minnehaha Grange Hall, Frank Tupa Park, 4918 Eden Avenue - 1977 3. Cahill School, Frank Tupa Park, 4918 Eden Avenue - 1977 4. Baird House, 4400 W. 50th Street -1978 5. Peterson House; 5312 Interlachen Boulevard_ -1987 6. Country. Club District, NE Edina - 2003 7. Edina: Theater Sign, 3911 W. ..50'h Street - ,2006 8. Edina Mill Site; Dwight Williams Park, W. 50th Street.- 2006 9. Browndale Bridge, Browndale Avenue over Minnehaha Creek - 2008 The properties listed" above have been officially rezoned by the City Council upon nomination by the HPB. Certificates of Appropriateness. are required for demolition, moving a building, new construction, and excavation. Determined Eligible for Landmark Designation: (Heritage Award winners = *) Formal ` eligibility for landmark designation places no restriction on the property owner, but would put some limits on the government's ability to do projects that impact the property. 1. Erickson House, 4246 Scott . Terrace 1980 2. Odd Fellows Hall, 4388 France Avenue -1980 3, St. Stephen the Martyr Episcopal Church* , 4439 W. 50th Street -1980 4. Simmons House, 41.16 W. 44th Street -1980 5. Leeskov House, 4410 Curve Avenue -1980 6. Skone House, 4311 Eton Place -1980 7. Morningside United Church of Christ *, 4201 Morningside Road - 1980 8. Onstad House, 4305 Morningside Road - 1980 9. Sly House; 6128 Brookview Avenue —1980 10. West Minneapolis Heights (NW Edina) -1980 11. Wooddale Bridge, 5000 block of Wooddale Avenue - 2008 12. Blackbourn House, 5015. Wooddale Lane - 2010 13. Morningside Bungalow Style Homes — 52 Homes 2011 14.4400-74412 France Ave. Commercial Building. - 2012 15. Convention Grill* — 3912 Sunnyside Road - 2012 16. Southdale Center — W. 66th St:/France Ave./ W. 69th St./ York Ave. - 2012 By ordinance, the HPB has sole responsibility for nominating properties for designation as Edina Heritage Landmarks. The first step in the nomination process is the HPB Determination of Eligibility, which is a policy statement that in the opinion of the Board a given property meets one or the Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria by being associated with an important historic context and by retaining historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance. The next.step is to prepare a written nomination and a plan of treatment, which is prepared by staff subject to the approval of the HPB. All authority for, the designation of Heritage Landmarks is vested in the City Council. EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK PROPERTIES 1. Grimes House 4200 West 44th Street — designated 1976 The historic Jonathan Taylor Grimes house, built in 1869, is a product of mid - nineteenth century American pattern book architecture, probably inspired by Andrew Jackson Downing's The Architecture of Country Houses (1850). The oldest house standing in Edina, it is a rare, well preserved example of cottage architecture from the early settlement period. The design of the house is a 1 and 1/2 story frame cottage with a compound plan, clapboard siding, intersecting gable roofs, dormers, a bay window, and a shallow front porch. The house displays Gothic Revival style detailing in the form of its steeply pitched roofs, gabled wall dormers, and lancet second -floor windows. The shallow portico and wide eaves with their scroll -cut brackets are an Italian Villa (Italianate) stylistic detail. The original plan of the house was modified by the addition of a two -story rear wing and an attached garage - otherwise, the property is in a good state of preservation. Contextually, the home relates to the themes of agriculture and rural life, and it is also historically significant for its association with Jonathan Taylor Grimes (1818- 1903), an early settler and pioneer horticulturist. After 1905, the Grimes farm was subdivided and became part of the Morningside community, an early streetcar suburb. 2 Minnehaha Grange Hall Frank Tuna Park, 4918 Eden Avenue — designated 1977 The Minnehaha Grange No. 398 Hall is a one -story, frame, vernacular meeting hall with a rectangular plan, a gable roof, and limestone foundation walls. The exterior walls are finished with horizontal lap siding and the original wood shingle roof is covered with asphalt shingles. The front gable is embellished with decorative stickwork and brackets and there is an open entry portico with a gable roof supported by two square posts. The interior walls are unfinished car siding and there is a small balcony and an elevated stage. The Patrons of Husbandry Grange No. 398 was organized on 12 December 1873 and its meeting hall was originally located at what is now the corner of 50th Street and Wooddale Avenue. After the incorporation of Edina in 1888, the village council held its meetings at the Grange Hall, which also functioned as a polling place and community room. The building was moved to a new location on Normandale Road in 1935, and ultimately to its present site in 1969. Major rehabilitation work was undertaken in 1979 -80 and again in 1986. 3 Cahill School Frank Tuna Park, 4924 Eden Avenue — designated 1977 The historic District 16 schoolhouse, commonly known as the Cahill School, was built in 1864 at what is now the southeast corner of 70th Street and Cahill Road. The building is a one -story, frame, vernacular one -room schoolhouse with a rectangular plan, a gable roof, and limestone foundation walls. The exterior walls are finished with horizontal lap siding and the original wood shingle roof has been covered over with asphalt shingles. The interior walls and ceiling are lath and plaster, with a beaded wood wainscot, maple flooring, and slate chalkboards. The schoolhouse was moved to its present location in 1970 and shares Frank Tupa Park (formerly known as Edina Historical Park) with the historic Minnehaha Grange Hall. Today, the building functions as a working museum - providing children from Edina Heritage Landmark Properties throughout the Metropolitan area an all day, one room schoolhouse experience; schoolmarm and all. 4 Baird House 4400 West 50th Street — designated 1978 The historic George W. Baird House is a two - story, red brick, Eastlake style cottage home. Viewed from West 50th Street, the house has a striking silhouette, with multiple roof shapes, dormers, a square tower, a large front porch, and tall brick chimneys. The exterior finishes are embellished with stone window trim, transoms, wooden shingle "feathers" in the gables, and belt coursing. The raised front porch features wooden posts and balusters, with a pediment over the entrance. Built in 1886 for George W. Baird, a prosperous farmer, the house was designed by the prominent Minneapolis architect Charles S. Sedgwick. A well -known community landmark, the house was "unquestionably the most imposing residence in nineteenth- century Edina." In its current condition, it is a well preserved specimen of Late Victorian period domestic architecture. Although the National Register documentation suggests that it is not an outstanding example of a Sedgwick- designed Eastlake style house in comparison with other, similar properties in Minnesota, in the context of Edina history the Baird House is a rare and notable example of the style. In addition to reflecting the history of domestic architecture, the house provides a physical record of Edina's rural heritage and is important for its association with George W. Baird. Baird, a native of Pennsylvania, immigrated to Minnesota with his wife Sara in 1857 and purchased a farm in the Edina Mills settlement. An ardent promoter of scientific farming, Baird was a pioneer in livestock breeding and is credited with bringing the first Merino sheep to the state. In 1936, eighty acres of the Baird family farm was platted as part of the Country Club district. The property is in an excellent state of preservation, thanks to investments in rehabilitation made by the previous and current owners. The house received a 3,500 square foot addition in 2002 -2003, including a garage and living space attached to the rear elevation. The new work is compatible in scale, color, and texture with the original construction and does not detract from the property's historic character when viewed from West 50th Street. The historic property comprises a 1.7 acre site that is surrounded on all sides by suburban residential development. A one -story frame outbuilding, itself an amalgam of different structural elements assembled at different times, is located on the grounds near the house and contributes to the historic character of the property. 5 Peterson House 5312 Interlachen Boulevard — designated 1987 The historic Paul Peterson House is a frame, 1 and 1/2 story cottage with Eastlake style detailing. It has a compound plan, intersecting gable roofs, a gabled dormer, and an enclosed porch. The walls are finished with clapboard siding. Eastlake style detailing is present in the form of spindled bargeboards, decorative shingle "feathering" in the gables, a bay window, and corner boards. The porch and window treatment have been altered; otherwise, -the house is in a good state of preservation. Built ca. 1880, the Peterson House is a notable, well preserved specimen of Late Victorian period domestic architecture. The design of the house is based upon the vernacular Gabled 2 Edina Heritage Landmark Properties Ell cottage form, but the exterior has been embellished with picturesque ornamentation, obviously inspired by the "Eastlake Revival" of the 1870's- 1880's. Contextually, it relates to the theme of rural residential development in Edina. Paul Peterson built this house and lived there with his family for about forty years. — Boundaries: Sunnvside Road to the to the south. and Minnehaha Creek to the west — designated 2003 The County Club District was platted in 1924 by Thorpe Brothers Realty Company and the majority of the homes were constructed between 1924 and 1944. The historical significance of the district is the product of its association with the themes of community planning, zoning, and suburban residential development. The Edina Country Club District was one of the first modern planned communities in Minnesota and the land use controls exercised by the original Country Club Association formed the basis of the municipal zoning ordinance adopted in 1929. The district represents a significant, well preserved concentration of historic domestic architecture and related historic landscape features. Examples of English Cottage (Tudor), Colonial Revival, 'Mediterranean (Spanish Colonial Revival), and Italian Renaissance Revival style homes predominate. The district retains a high degree of historic integrity and the majority of the historic homes are in a good state of preservation. In 1980, the Country Club District was placed on the National Register of Historic Place. The designation recognized the district as the first planned community in the state comprised of a significant and well preserved concentration of historic domestic architecture. Due to the National Register designation, many people assumed that there were controls in place to regulate building activity in the district. However, the National Register depends on the local government to provide controls and regulations. Recognizing the need to protect the historic integrity of the district, in 2003, the district was locally designated an Edina Heritage Landmark District. As part of the designation process, a plan of treatment was created which serves as a guide for protecting the historic integrity of the Country Club District by requiring a certificate of appropriateness (COA) process for any work where a City permit is required for the demolition and new construction of any principal dwelling or detached garage within the district boundaries. Additionally, a COA is required for any significant structural changes to street facing facades. The plan of treatment identifies homes built from 1924 - 1944 as heritage preservation resources because that is the period when the Thorpe enforced rigid architectural standards on new home construction through restrictive covenants. Furthermore, it is stipulated that no COA will be approved for the demolition, in whole or in part, of any heritage preservation resource in the district unless the applicant can show that the subject property is not a heritage preservation resource, or no longer contributes to the historical significance of the district because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage, or by inappropriate additions or alterations. 3 Edina Heritage Landmark Properties 7 Edina Theater Sign 3911 W. 50th Street - designated 2006 The Edina Theater sign that exists today is a reconstruction of the original 1934 electric lighted sign that was destroyed by a tornado in 1981. The sign is made of steel and covered with sheet metal. "Edina" is spelled out with fluorescent tubing, surrounded by flashing incandescent light bulbs that are illuminated in sequence to simulate movement. In combination with the bright fluorescent and blinking lights on the marquee and canopy, which were intended to draw attention to the signboards advertising the current features, the purpose of the lighted sign was to capture the attention of passing motorists. This type of animated signage was first seen in 1923 in New York City's Times Square and was a common movie house design element until World War II. More than seventy years after it was first illuminated, the sign continues to produce a dramatic transformation of the nighttime streetscape along 50th Street. An important example of public art in its own right, the sign defines the historic character of the 50th and France commercial district, where it evokes a strong sense of community identity as well as nostalgia. 8 Edina Mill Site W 501h Street & Browndale Avenue — designated 2006 The Edina Mills Archaeological Site is located on Minnehaha Creek in Dwight Williams Park, a unit of the city park system. Today, the only existing structure associated with the historic mill is the mill dam, which is located underneath the Browndale Bridge. This structure is a concrete gravity spillway with an uncontrolled crest approximately 24 feet in length. The abutment walls blend into the stream banks, which are high and have steep slopes. The raceway or flume from the Mill Pond, now filled in, runs for a distance of approximately 34 feet underneath the embankment formed by Browndale Road; the intake is buried under several feet of alluvium, fill, and riprap. A considerable amount of silt and debris has accumulated in front of the upstream face of the mill dam; below the spillway, a large scatter of rocks and boulders line the stilling basin. The creek bed and banks are mostly gravel and coarse sand, which scours easily. Several times over its history the mill and associated structures were damaged by floodwaters: owing to repeated fillings to prevent bank erosion, the creek bed is largely covered with boulders and large pieces of broken stone, and both banks have been armored with riprap. The archaeological remains of the mill house are located on the left bank (descending) of the creek. The mill was a large timber and masonry structure measuring approximately 40 by 36 feet. The concrete piers and floors, as well as some timber framing members and foundation stones, lie buried under several feet of fill. The turbine pit was filled with mud, sand, and rubble when the site was excavated in 1977. After the archaeological work was completed, the city developed a small interpretation facility on the site, consisting of an information kiosk, a preserved millstone, and an outline of the millhouse walls marked with square wooden posts. The importance of the Minnehaha Creek waterpower resource in early Edina history can hardly be over - estimated. When the area was first settled in the mid - nineteenth century, the creek was seen as an inexhaustible power source that could be harnessed to a wide range of 4 Edina Heritage Landmark Properties industrial uses. Even after steam engines rendered waterwheels obsolete, the motive power of falling water continued to be an important economic resource. When the Edina Mill was running at its peak of performance, the mill dam generated as much as fifteen feet of hydraulic head (about 50 horsepower) and could grind roughly 150 bushels of wheat, oats, corn, or other small grains daily. (In addition to grain milling, the Edina mill dam also provided power for a blacksmith and machine shop by means of a wire rope or cable.) Craik and his sons were merchant millers, in that they shipped part of the mill's product in barrels to market in Minneapolis. The quality of the flour made at the Edina Mill was probably less than satisfactory, however, because the hard spring wheat grown in Minnesota during the nineteenth century produced a grade of flour that was inferior to that made from winter wheat, which was softer, easier to grind, and produced a whiter flour. For making cornmeal, oatmeal, pearl barley, and animal feed, the old French burr stones could be set farther apart, with fewer grindings and screenings required to produce a marketable product. Whenever the creek's natural flow diminished below a certain level, the mill had to shut down. This happened most often during periods of prolonged summer drought and when late- winter ice jams blockaded Minnehaha Creek upstream from the mill. The effect of upstream dams also reduced the available hydraulic head at Edina; the construction of a water control structure at the mouth of Minnehaha Creek in 1893 forced Browndale Farm to use a gasoline engine to power the feed mill; after the new dam was built at Gray's Bay in 1897, the district court indemnified Brown $2000 for the loss of his waterpower. In 1906 a severe flood washed out the mill dam and the county replaced the stone structure with the existing concrete spillway. The Edina Mill appears to have closed for good around this time, although the millhouse and related structures were not torn down until 1932. The site was later used as a dump. The Edina Mills Archaeological Site is historically significant because of its association with the Edina waterpower development and because the archaeological data it contains has potential value in answering important research questions. The 1977 archaeological investigation appears to have excavated only about 5% of the mill complex: the current state of knowledge about the site suggests that both Dwight William Park and the areas bordering the lower end of the Mill Pond have good potential for undisturbed cultural deposits associated with nineteenth century settlement and development activities. 9 Browndale Bridge Browndale Avenue & W. 50th Street — designated 2008 The Browndale Bridge is a concrete arch bride that carries Browndale Avenue over Minnehaha Creek a short distance north of 50 Street at the entrance to the Edina Country Club District. The main span of the spandrel - filled arch is 24 feet 8 inches in length; including the concrete abutments, the historic structure is 31 feet long. The bridge deck is 24 feet wide, with a bituminous roadway and 6 -inch concrete curbs. The concrete spillway of the former Edina Mill dam is directly underneath the bridge; the archaeological remains of the mill are preserved in Dwight Williams Park along the north side of Minnehaha Creek, immediately downstream from the Browndale Bridge. Flared concrete wing walls, built in two phases, protect the bridge abutments. 5 Edina Heritage. Landmark Properties In 2008, The City rehabilitated the bridge and wing walls with new concrete facing that matched the rough -sawn board finish. The roadway was widened and resurfaced with new curb and gutter which extended along the approaches. Renovation also included repairs to the slope embankment and replacement of the. bridge railing with a new historically appropriate ornamental metal railing. 2 Historic Bungalows of the Morningside Neighborhood Executive Summary The Edina Heritage Preservation Board(Edina HPB) is pleased to announce the completion of a significant study entitled "Historic Bungalows of the Momingside Neighborhood: A Multiple Property Study ", prepared by Preservation Planning Consultant, Robert C. Vogel, financed in part by a Fed_ eral Certified Local Government (CLG) grant in 2010. The study: • Defines bungalows, including specific categories of bungalows, • Provides the historical context of the development of the Morningside suburb; including the impact of the streetcar on that development, and • Sets forth the methodology by which the Edina HPB will designate properties as Edina Heritage Landmarks: Asa result of the Study, approximately 135 Morningside homes, built between about 1905 and 1930, h. ave been identified as possible candidates for designation as Edina Heritage Landmarks. Bungalow Defined. A product of the.American Arts and Crafts movement, the bungalow represented a major innovation in domestic architecture: a small comfortable house that provided . homebuyers of modest means with the comforts and conveniences of a much larger, architect- designed house. For planning purposes, the Edina HPB uses the term "bungalow" to refer to a small, detached, single - family home constructed between 1905 and 1930 that is less than two full stories high, has a core footprint of less than 800 square feet, and exhibits any combination of the following American Arts and Crafts Movement design characteristics: • Gable or hip roofs • Wood or stucco wall cladding Entry and/or sun porches • Dormers P Exposed structural elements, such as rafters or beam ends .. =hung wood sash.windows with divided lights in the upper sash Multi =pane double Ribbon, bay or piano windows • Fireplaces and end -wall chimneys • Brick faced or rusticated concrete block foundation walls • Informal, open floor plans, with a living room in the front of the house • Built -in furniture, such as bookcases or buffets • Hardwood flooring(oak or maple) • Rustic landscaping featuring flower boxes, trellises or pergolas The Morningside Suburban Landscape. Morningside's residential landscape reflects several of the important broad themes in the pattern of suburban development in the Twin Cities area: the relatively high- density of people per square mile within the platted subdivisions, the architectural similarly of the houses and the dependence upon mass - transit. Between about 1905 and 1930, Morningside developers built several hundred N new single — family homes, mostly bungalows, on standard -sized suburban lots along- ' straight -line streets, replacing land previously occupied by farm fields and orchards. The: 4 ., population of Edina village (including Morningside) more than doubled between 1900 and 1920 from 749 to 1833; between 1920 and 1930, the number of residents living in the newly incorporated village of Morningside rose from just over 500 to 903. . y Morningside: Edina's Streetcar Suburb. Morningside was situated on the outer edge of the Minneapolis urbanized area, far enough from the center city to require residents to commute to work. In 1905, the principal mode of transportation was the street railway or streetcar. The Minneapolis, Lyndale & Minnetonka Railway, organized in 1879, planned a stop in Morningside to be named "Grimes" after Jonathan and Eliza Grimes, whose home at 4200 West 44th Street is considered the birthplace of Morningside, but the segment west of Lake Calhoun was abandoned due to financial problems in 1886. The Como - Harriet Streetcar Line, using the right -of -way of the defunct Minneapolis, Lyndale & Minnetonka, providing service between Lake Harriet and Excelsior was opened on September 30, 1905, with important stops added in Morningside at 44th and France, 44"' and Grimes and 44`x' and Wooddale. The Como - Harriet Line was the catalyst for the initial phase of residential development in Morningside. Workers living in Morningside could commute to factory jobs in Hopkins and office jobs in downtown Minneapolis. The streetcar also encouraged small retail and service businesses to set up near the stops, particularly along France Avenue between Morningside Road and 44th Street, increasing the economic vitality of the neighborhood and lowering the cost of living for everyone. Personal automobiles did not supplant the streetcar until the 1920s. Designating a Morningside Bungalow as an Edina Heritage Landmark. To be eligible to be designated an Edina Heritage Landmark, a property must be associated with an important historic context and retain specific aspects of its historic integrity. Survey data shows that changes have taken place over the course of time in the appearance of most of the Morningside bungalows. Generally, a bungalow should be considered a potential heritage preservation resource when it has been altered from its original as —built appearance, but retains enough of its historic character - defining elements to achieve significance within its historic context. By ordinance, when a property is designated as an Edina Heritage Landmark, it must have a Plan of Treatment designed in partnership with the homeowner that provides general and specific guidelines for heritage resource management, including design review for Certificates of Appropriateness for demolition, new construction and moving buildings. For more information about how you can apply to have your Morningside bungalow designated an Edina Heritage Landmark, contact Joyce Repya, Associate Planner, 952- 826 -0462, or jrepya@ci.edina.mn.us. To read the complete Historic Bungalows of the Morningside Neighborhood: Multiple Property Study, click on the link. 2 Historic Bungalows of Morningside Neighborhood Morningside Bungalows Eligible for Edina Heritage Landmark Designation Jonathon Taylor Grimes House 4200 W. 441h Street Birthplace of Morningside The Edina Heritage Preser- vation Board ( "HPB ") re- cently completed a study on the historic bungalows of the Morningside neighborhood. The objective of the study was to simplify the process for designating historic bun- galows in the Morningside neighborhood as Edina Heri- tage Landmarks. The study found that bunga- lows are an essential compo- nent of the historic fabric of the Morningside neighbor- hood. They reflect early 20th century American life and represent a form of resi- dential architecture that was widely popular across the United States and world- wide from1905 -1930. It has been widely written that the bungalow was not just a place to live; it was a way of life. Designed to be practical, inexpensive, con- venient and beautiful, the preserved bungalow is a true cultural artifact that sheds light on two important elements of American social history, namely, the housing reform movement and the growth of suburbia. The study on historic bunga- lows in Morningside gives the Edina Heritage Board and What is a Bungalow? The Edina HPB uses the term "bungalow" to refer to any small, detached single family residence constructed be- tween about 1905 -1930 that is less than two full sto- ries in height, has a core footprint of less than 800 sq. feet (excluding porches and appendages), and exhibits any of the following Ameri- can Arts and Crafts Move- ment and Craftsman Style design characteristics: • Gable or hip roofs • Wood or stucco walls • Entry or sun porches • Dormers • Exposed structures (e.g rafters) • Multi -pane wood sash windows with upper divided lights • Fireplaces home owners guidelines on how bungalows may become designated ass Edina Heri- tage Landmarks. Of course, not every Morn- ingside bungalow can or should be preserved and protected as an Edina Heri- tage Landmark. Eligibility criteria require that property have historic integrity. The study, however, gives the Board and homeowners the architectural and historical context within which to desig- nate bungalows as Heritage Landmarks. A copy of the Historic Bun- galow Study can be ob- tained by visiting the HPB website or by contacting Joyce Repya, Edina Staff Liaison to the HPB. • Ribbon, bay, and piano windows • Brick or rusticated con- crete block foundations • Open floor plans • Built -in furniture • Hardwood flooring • Rustic landscape featur- ing flower boxes, trel- lises or pergolas JnnuurY I, ./U I I Did you know ... • MORNINGSIDE WAS FIRST PLATTED IN 1905 • APROXIMATELY 150 BUN- GALOWS HAV BEEN IDENTI. FLED IN MORNINGSIDE • AMERICAN BUNGALOWS ARE SYMBOLS OF THE AMERICAN DREAM • THE COMO- HARRIETT STREET CAR LINE WAS IHE CATALYST FOR INITIAL DEVELOPLENT • BUNGALOWS ARE "GREEN" Inside this issue: BUNGALOW STYES 2 WALKING TOURS 2 LANDMARK DESIGNATION 3 PROCESS HERITAGE PRESERVATION 3 LANDMARKS HERITAGE PRESEVATION 3 BOARD Historic Bungalows of Morningside Neighborhood Five Types of Bungalows in Morningside "LOCAL CONTRACTORS C Common Bungalow Boxy, rectilinear bungalows with single story wall heights 'PREFERRED TO and low- pitched roofs. The front porches are almost al- EMBELLISH EVEN ways enclosed. Although this box style was often undeco- rated, local contractors preferred to embellish even mod - MODEST est bungalows with Craftsman - inspired detailing. 4249 Crocker (1925) BUNGALOWS WITH CRAFSTMAM- INSP.IRED DETAILING" x, o Craftsman or "California" Bungalow Classic arts - and - crafts movement - inspired bungalow usu- ally built between 1910 and early 1920s. Morningside examples show considerable variation, with some homes with highly stylized decorative treatments and others quite modest. 4238 Crimcs (1910) G Airplane Bungalow Need better photo, Another "California' bungalow style, this home is distin- or photo shop with - or by a large projecting element, such as a front out signs in yard and porch or living room) that is covered by a broad, low- cars pitched gable roof. The profile gives it a striking street - scope presence. 4305 Morningside (1920) Bungalow Cottage This bungalow house is characterized by wall heights of one-and-one-half to slightly less than two stories, medium to'steeply pitched roofs, sun porches, large dormers, and bay windows. The most common type has a deep front porch that extends the full width of the fafade. 4248 Crocker (1924) o Portico Bungalow Although similar to other bungalow forms, it is distin- guished by a unique fa5ade geometry. The location of the front entry porch is always placed in the center of the fa4ade and is covered by gable roof supported by sim- ple wooden braces or round columns. 4401 Curve Ave. (1924) Walking Tour Maps Available A self - guided walking tour of the Morningside bungalows can be found on the HPB web site or by contacting Joyce Repya; Edina Staff Liaison to the HPB. Most of the bungalow heri- Page 2 tage preservation resources are found within the area bounded by West 42nd Street, France Avenue, 44th Street and Grimes Avenue. There are also scattered bun- galows and bungalow cot- tages along Sunnyside Road, Crocker Avenue, Curve Ave- nue and Eton Place. Be prepared to wear com- fortable walking shoes since it takes over one hour to com- p lete the entire tour. Historic Bungalows of Morningside Neighborhood How to Designate Your Bungalow as a Heritage Landmark Section 850.20 of the Edina City Code provides that a resource such as a historic bungalow may be zoned as an Edina Heritage Landmark if the resource meets certain eligibility requirements. T To be eligible for designation a bungalow must have a quality of significance in his- tory and architecture. The Historic Bungalow Study will be used by the HPB to evalu- ate the historical significance and integrity of any bunga- low considered for Heritage Landmark designation. If a bungalow meets the eli- gibility criteria, the HPB may nominate the bungalow for designation as a Heritage Landmark and submit the nomination to the City Coun- cil. Each nomination must include: o The identity and detailed description of the bunga- low • An explanation of how the bungalow meets one or more of the eligibility criteria o A description of the his- torical and integrity of the bungalow • A plan of treatment with guidelines for preserva- tion, rehabilitation, resto- ration and reconstruction, as appropriate Edina Heritage Landmarks 1. Edina Theater Sign 2. Baird House 3. Country Club District 4. Grimes House 5. Cahill School 6. Minnehoha Grange Hall 7. Peterson House 8. Edina Mill Site 9. Browndale Bridge Edina City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Phone: 952- 927 -8861 Fax: 952 -826 -0390 Web: wwww.ci.edino.mmus 3911 W. 501h Street 4400 West 50i1 Street 4200 West 44i1 Street The City Planner submits the nomination to 1 ) the State Historic Preservation Office for review and comment within 60 days; and 2) the Edina City Planning Commis- sion. Once these steps are con - ciuded the City Council holds a public hearing on the nomi- nation. The City Council may then designate the bungalow as a Heritage Landmark. Once designated the prop- erty is placed on the city zon- ing map as a designated Heritage Landmark. If you are interested in the learning more about this process visit the HPB website. Frank Tupa Park Frank Tupa Park 5312 Interlachen Boulevard Dwight Williams Park Browndale Avenue & W. 50i1 Street Craftsman Cottage 4412 Grimes (1910) "A building does riot have to be an important work of architecture to become a first -rate landmark. Landmarks are not created by architects. They are fashioned by those who encounter them after they are built. The essential feature of a landmark is not its design, but the place it holds in a city's memory. Compared to tite place it occupies in social history, a landmark's artistic qualities are Incidental." Herbert Muschomp 1947 -2007 The Heritage Preservation Board (HPB) advises the City Council on the identification and preser- vation of buildings, land or areas of particular historical, architectural, cultural or educational sig- nificance. The Board safeguards significant Edina heritage properties by identifying and nominat- ing them for designation by the City Council as Heritage Landmarks. The Board is responsible for developing and maintaining a comprehensive preservation plan; reviewing applications for City permits in relation to properties designated as Heritage Landmarks; and encouraging the preser- vation of significant heritage properties through public education. The Board typically meets at 7 p.m. the 2nd Tuesday of most months. Meetings are open to the public and held at City Hall. Important: This newsletter is intended for informational purposes only. You should not rely on its contents in making financial or legal decisions regarding your property. Refer to city ordinances. Page 3 0 U) O �M DATE: i0!iiOlRN1NGSIDE BUNGALOW REQUEST FOR E DINA HEIRI TAG E 'LANI) MARK EVALUATION (No I7ec) FOR INFORMATION: Fdina Planning Department -- Joyce .Repya, Associate Planner 4801 West Fiftieth Street * Edina, MN 55424 * (952) 826 -0462 FAX (952) 826 -0389 PROPERTY ADDRESS: L/ D D l s0r, /fV...r/ 1?1!lAII,: -� r .f�'.f (. ?CT U /?i "i, r.'c ,/ PHONE: �/�� �� BUNGALOW STYLE OF HOME: DESCRIPTION OF THE KNOWN HISTORY OF T14E HOME: %>>r. A �'_ >✓tr, 1al�s Sri. in IV I/ ADDITIONAL INFORNIATION REGARDING TIE HISTORIC INTEGRITY OFTHE Include photographs and any information determined pertinent to file proposed designation. erty i) n is Signature Date Page l of 1 0 file : //1 \ed- ntl \citywide\PDSImages \Photos \0702824440051001 jpg 3/10/2011 LOGISMap Output Page 4707 4308 I I 3978 3916 4388 4711 7970 7920.7920 4711 4310 3936 4312 a 4313 1- 4313 \ 4400 4010 7008 4715 24 4315 4006 4004 7316 kyili 51'74 3919 4402 4011 TI D,B 40,6 JD1J 7925 0 4712 7945 3904 4022 7020 4001 24 3918 3910 � 4005 24 050 4011 4401 3920 3970 4500 4015 4405 4400 rA 4006 3940 e 4021 m 4000' 4406 m 4407 4002 3003 4405 4409 4004• 3905 4410 4008 3907 4407 4010' 391 4412 4012 4411 4014 4001 4528 4414 4003 4413 16 4005 4007 JSJO 4417 4418 40091 4052 4040- 4011 �\ 4419 \ 4015 J01J' 4541 4572 1 4501 4050 4047 4576 4060 4503 4064 4062 / 4045 24 4$44 4540 4505 y7�f p� 4053 4545 40514049 4047 4544 �a 4507 4055 �A � 4548 z4 i� 24 4511 4600 Page 1 of 1 littp:// gis. logis. org/ LOGIS_ Arc1MS/ ims? ServiceName= ed_LOGISMap_OVSDE &ClieiitV... 3/10/2011 4601 4600 4601 4602 4604 4600 4604 4607 7606 600 24 ` 24- t4612 4605 24 4607 4608 ?4 4621 4620 4081 4611 24 4607 462 1621 24 4611 4613 4630 ® 4605 24 4615 4615 4634 4838 4700 TOMES M. 4640 W rr.mr. nA•c1U5 Cmr. nr.lC ll•J.A�Gl: 2r:r1 �� 0 71511 Page 1 of 1 littp:// gis. logis. org/ LOGIS_ Arc1MS/ ims? ServiceName= ed_LOGISMap_OVSDE &ClieiitV... 3/10/2011 City of Edina June 29, 2012 John Fitch 3424 Rainbow Drive Minnetonka, MN 55345 Re: 4009 Sunnyside Road Dear Mr. Fitch: I am pleased to send you the Edina Heritage Landmark Nomination Study that has been completed on your Edina home. As I explained to you a while back, this study is the first step in classifying properties Edina Heritage Landmarks. The delay in receiving this information was due to the City's need to access grant funds to pay for the study. The study provides contextual information on the Morningside neighborhood as well as details on your home. You will notice that on pages 4 — 9 of the study a Plan of Treatment is provided which serves as a recommended guide for preserving the property. The entire landmark designation process is collaborative in nature with the Heritage Preservation Board working with the property owner to define the important elements of the property and how best to provide preservation using the Plan of Treatment. That being said, your input is very important At this time, Robert Vogel, the City's Preservation Consultant and I would like to meet with you to discuss the study - particularly focusing on the recommended Plan of Treatment to ensure that it is in keeping with your vision for your home. We will also explain the Edina Heritage Landmark designation process as well as its potential ramifications and benefits. Mr. Vogel will be available on Monday, July 9th to meet with you. If that date works for you, please contact me to schedule a time; or we can find a date /time that works best for you. I can be reached at 952 - 826 -0462, or jrepya c(DD EdinaMN.Gov. I look forward to meeting with you to continue the discussion on preserving your charming Morningside bungalow. Sincerely, L,Joyce Repya Associate Planner Enclosure City Hall 952 - 927 -8861 y FAX 952 - 826 -0390 4801 WEST 50TH STREET TTY 952 - 826 -0379 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK NOMINATION STUDY FITCH HOUSE, 4009 SUNNYSIDE ROAD Prepared by Robert C. Vogel Preservation Planning Consultant Edina Heritage Preservation Board June, 2012 INTRODUCTION Edina Heritage Landmark is the official overlay zoning designation for historic buildings, sites, structures, objects, and districts significant in Edina history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture that have been nominated by the Heritage Preservation Board. By ordinance, Heritage Landmark designation assists in preserving heritage resources through recognition and appreciation of their importance as critical, nonrenewable cultural resources; designated properties also receive special consideration in community development planning and may qualify for federal and state tax benefits. The subject property consists of the house located at 4009 Sunnyside Road. This property does not have a historic name. For general reference, the name of the current owner and the street address are used to identify the heritage resource. The geographic area being designated for heritage preservation comprises the entire parcel. The property is being nominated individually for landmark designation and is not located within the boundaries of a historic district. The property is a single family dwelling that is currently owned and occupied by John N. Fitch. For preservation planning purposes, it has been classified as a building. The house, garage, and home grounds are considered a historically and functionally related unit. Based on its physical characteristics and historic significance, the house is the primary preservation resource which embodies the historical associations and architectural values for which the property is significant and worthy of preservation. This property has been nominated for Heritage Landmark designation as part of a multiple property study, "Historic Bungalows of the Morningside Neighborhood," adopted by the Heritage Preservation Board in 2010. The Fitch property was determined eligible by the Heritage Preservation Board in May, 2012. DESCRIPTION The subject property is a 1 Y2 -story frame bungalow with a modified rectangular plan, a front - facing gable roof, and an integral front porch. The exterior walls are finished with stucco, the foundation is concrete block, and the roof is covered with asphalt shingles. There is a small addition on the rear elevation. Architecturally, the house is classified as a vernacular bungalow, but it shows the influence of the Arts and Crafts Movement and Fitch House, 4009 Sunnyside Road Page 1 Craftsman style detailing. The interior of the six -room house reflects the vernacular bungalow aesthetic. The house is located on a quiet, tree - lined residential street in, the heart of the Morningside neighborhood. It fronts northwest, onto Sunnyside Road, and is set behind a modest, cultivated lawn which slopes toward the street. The view of the facade is framed by mature evergreens placed at the sides and there are low foundation plantings on all of the street- facing elevations. A single -stall detached garage, echoing the house in design and materials, is set at the back of the lot at the end of a straight, two -track driveway, which is separated from the front yard, by a fieldstone retaining wall. The. house was built in.1916. The names;'of the original owner, architect, and builder are not known.. 'It is likely that the house was designed and. built by .one of the small local construction companies that specialized in building small, solid homes in conventional styles that were' marketed to middleclass ' families. It: illustrates how developers "utilized standardized house plans and' mass- produced materials to meet the needs of suburban homeowners. The property occupies Lot 5 of Block 2 in the Berkeley Addition, a: speculatively built residential subdivision that was platted in 1910 on part of the historic Jonathan Grimes farm. Although this subdivision was relatively small (only twenty lots), development occurred incrementally over a period of years. Many of the lots were sold unbuilt upon by the developer, either to prospective homeowners who .would contract with their own builder, to independent builder - speculators who acquired multiple lots to construct homes for resale, or to investors intending to construct houses for use as rental: ;property. The older homes in the. neighborhood include a high proportion of `bungalows. The streets were graded but not paved or equipped with street lights until the 1920s, and this particular house was not connected to the municipal sewer-system until 1940. The house is in'- a� good state of preservation and the street facade has not been substantially altered from its historic (i.e., pre -circa 1962) appearance. The most important architectural character defining features of the house are: • rectangular plan (deeper than wide) • broad, front- facing gable roof with wide eaves, triangular knee braces (omamental) • stucco wall cladding • integral front porch with 8 .windows, center entry door with side lights • triple attic windows • double hung sash windows No important alterations have been made to the appearance of the property and the changes which have occurred do not seem to have had any significant adverse effect on its historic integrity. There have been some changes to. the :interior features and finishes and some room functions have been changed. The environmental setting of the property, is somewhat changed from its historic appearance; however, the outdoor landscape features and vegetation that characterize the property today reflect traditional landscape gardening and the general physical relationship between the house, grounds, and garage has.not changed. Fitch. House, 4009 Sunnyside Road Page 2 The boundaries of the heritage landmark are the lot lines described in the parcel's legal description. The property is a rectangular parcel measuring approximately 50 by 187 feet, encompassing 0.22 acres. HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE The Fitch House is a notable, well preserved example of a Morningside bungalow. Contextually, it relates to the development of the Morningside neighborhood as a streetcar suburb between circa 1905 and 1954; to the dissemination of the bungalow philosophy and the influence of the Arts and Crafts Movement in early twentieth century domestic architecture; and to the broad themes of suburban development and culture change in Edina. The house meets Heritage Landmark eligibility criterion A for its linkage to important historical events and patterns of events; and criterion C for its design and construction values. It retains historic integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The property achieved the historical significance qualifying it for Heritage Landmark designation when it was built in 1916. For Morningside bungalows, the closing date for the period of historical significance is defined as 1954, the year the streetcar system was dismantled. Edina is a city of neighborhoods. The early growth of the Morningside neighborhood corresponded with the growth of the Como - Harriet Line of the Twin City Rapid Transit Co. streetcar system, which was built across the northern part of Edina in 1905, connecting the Minneapolis urban core with Excelsior. As soon as the streetcar lines extended beyond the Minneapolis city limits, several prominent real estate investors began purchasing blocks of farmland for development. The early subdivision activity in Edina was focused primarily on the creation of residential lots which could be platted, graded, and made ready for building relatively cheaply. The northern parts of Edina offered excellent sites for residential development, especially bungalows and small cottages that could be marketed to working class and middleclass families who relied upon mass - transit facilities for commuting to work. The first major streetcar - related development in Edina was started in 1905, when real estate investor C. I. Fuller of Minneapolis purchased 264 acres of the historic Jonathan Grimes farm and laid out a 322 -lot subdivision he named Morningside. Other subdivisions followed. Fuller and the other early Morningside developers limited their investment to platting the raw land into building lots and providing some kind of utilities infrastructure —the actual construction and sale of homes was handled by local builders and realtors, and new home construction often lagged for several years after a particular subdivision was platted. Nevertheless, population growth was dramatic (especially after 1910) and home building was stimulated by the rapidly expanding Twin Cities economy. When it seceded from Edina and self- incorporated in 1920, the Village of Morningside contained about 150 households and 500 residents. The Fitch House is typical of the modest bungalows built in the Morningside neighborhood between circa 1905 and 1925. Inspired by the Arts and Crafts Movement, the bungalow house form was first popularized by architects and builders in southern Fitch House, 4009 Sunnyside Road Page 3 California and quickly disseminated nation =wide through the medium of popular magazines, such as Gustav Stickley's The Craftsman (1903- 1916), and architectural pattern books. Bungalow design in Morningside was conventional and highly standardized: while individual bungalows sometimes exhibit ornamentation that reflects the .influence of the Colonial Revival, Tudor, and other Eclectic period styles, the overwhelming majority of surviving specimens are variations on the "basic bungalow" design embellished, with modest Arts and Crafts or Craftsman style detailing.; The bungalow rapidly faded.from favor during the late 1920s, only,a handful of authentic bungalows were built in Edina after circa 1930. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES City of Edina. Building permit files. Building Inspections. Department. City Hall. Edina Assessor field cards. Edina Historical Society. .Hennepin County. Deed records. Public Records Division, County Recorder and Registrar of Deeds, Hennepin County Government Center. Vogel, Robert C. Historic Bungalows of the Morningside Neighborhood. A Multiple Property Study. Edina Heritage Preservation Board, 2010. PLAN OF TREATMENT By ordinance, a plan of treatment is mandatory.for every, property that is designated an Edina Heritage Landmark. The plan (which is developed in partnership with the property owner). serves as a guide for design review decisions involving Certificates of Appropriateness (COAs) and provides the outline of a master plan for the property. The plan 'of treatment focuses on the unique challenges and opportunities which may be unique to this particular historic property and provides an opportunity for the.city and the property owner to frame critical issues and reach agreement on a strategic vision for the historic resource. General Standards The City of Edina has adopted the Secretary of the Interior's Standards _ for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the required. basis for COA decisions. These standards are neither technical nor prescriptive, but are . intended to promote responsible preservation practices that help protect irreplaceable cultural resources. The preferred general treatment strategy that is applicable to all Morningside bungalows is rehabilitation, which is defined as the act or process of making possible a .compatible use for a property through repair, alterations or additions, while preserving 'those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, and architectural values. This treatment concept gives property owners and city officials considerable latitude in planning for the types of activities which are subject to design review (demolition, new Fitch House, 4009 Sunnyside Road Page 4 construction, moving a building, excavation). For work that may not require a COA, the following standards are non - regulatory and compliance is voluntary: 1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property that requires minimal alteration of the building and its environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose. 2. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible. 3. All buildings and sites shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations which have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier appearance shall be discouraged. 4. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the — property's history and development. These changes may have acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall be recognized and respected. 5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsman which characterize a building shall be treated with sensitivity. 6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replace, wherever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other visual qualities. Repair of replacement of missing architectural features should be based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historical, physical, or pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different architectural elements from other buildings or structures. 7. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the gentlest means possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage the historic building materials shall not be undertaken. 8. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archaeological resources affected by, or adjacent to, any rehabilitation project. 9. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing properties shall not be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant historical or architectural material and such design is compatible with the size, scale, color, material, and character of the property and its environment. Fitch House, 4009 Sunnyside Road Page 5 10. Whenever possible, new additions or alterations to structures shall be done in such a manner that if such additions and alterations were to be removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the structure would be unimpaired. For more information about the Secretary of the Interior's standards and guidelines, go to the National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services website at www .nps.gov /hps /tps /standguide /. Demolition For design review purposes, demolition is defined as the physical alteration of a building that requires a City permit and where (a) 50% of more of the surface area of all exterior walls, in the aggregate, are removed; or (b) 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed, changing its shape, pitch, or height; or (c) a front porch, side porch, vestibule, dormer, chimney, attached garage or porte - cochere is removed or destroyed. This definition does not apply to removal of existing siding, roofing, trim, fascia, soffit, eave moldings, windows or doors. If it were badly damaged or allowed to become seriously deteriorated, the subject property may no longer qualify for Heritage Landmark status. If this were to occur, the applicant for a demolition permit would need to show that the subject property no longer meets the Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria because it does not retain the physical characteristics necessary to convey its historic significance, and the Heritage Preservation Board could grant a COA for demolition. If demolition of the historic bungalow was deemed appropriate, the COA would need to stipulate an appropriate mitigation strategy to avoid complete loss of the resource. The conventional mitigation options include, but are not limited to: relocation of the historic property to a new site with compatible surroundings where it can be preserved and rehabilitated; and architectural recordation to document the historic property with photographs, drawings, and written information so that a body if data will remain when it is demolished. City policy discourages salvage of architectural elements for reuse in new development (or for display in a museum). A COA would not be required for demolition of the existing detached garage, which is not considered to be a heritage preservation resource. New Construction The heritage preservation goals for COAs involving new construction are straightforward: (1) avoid the loss of historic fabric and damage to historic character defining features; and (2) make the new work visually compatible with the historic bungalow and its setting. New construction that takes the form of a major addition to the historic house should be kept to a minimum and designed to be compatible in size, scale, massing, building materials, color, and texture with the historic property. Structural additions should be visually unobtrusive when viewing the property from the public street: the preferred location is on the rear elevation. New construction does not Fitch House, 4009 Sunnyside Road Page 6 necessarily need to "match" the historic bungalow: contemporary designs and materials are appropriate when they respect the historic character of the heritage resource and its setting. Any new detached garage should be placed in an inconspicuous location. The preferred location would be on a rear elevation; if possible, the doors should not be visible from the public street. The garage should also be visually compatible with the historic house when viewed from adjacent historic properties. Any new driveway should be compatible in width and material with other historic properties in the Morningside neighborhood and should be designed in such a manner that it does not radically change, obscure or destroy the historic character - defining spatial organization and landscape features of the lot and yard. Public Works and Utilities The City will need to develop and implement plans for the preservation, maintenance and repair of all public works and utilities, including streets, trees, sidewalks, street lighting, signs, and open spaces in the vicinity of this Heritage Landmarks to ensure that no harm is done to the heritage preservation resource. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location map 2. Photographs documenting existing conditions Fitch House, 4009 Sunnyside Road Page 7 City Hall • Phone 952 - 927 -8861 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 • www.CityofEdina.com Date: April 10, 2012 To: Heritage Preservation Board From: 'Southdale Center Artifact Working Group Re: Research Discoveries MEA4 Southdale General Manager Laurie Van Dalen graciously allowed representatives from the Edina Heritage Preservation Board and the Edina Historical Society access to the mall's historic archives and we discovered several "treasures," including: • Six large format scrapbooks of newspaper clippings: ranging in date from 1956 through the 1970s. • Minutes from the merchants' association meetings, 1950s. • Brochures with mall maps, various eras. • Tearsheets of newspaper ads from the 1950s, possibly 1960s. Ads show various iconic images from early Southdale; including sculptures, birdcage, parking lot animal signage, etc. I • Photo album of mall storefronts, circa 1970s. • Several dozen 8 x 10 black and white photos of major publicity events in opening year (auto show, circus, Truth or Consequences show, etc.) and major art works and their artists. • Press kit announcing Southdale opening. • Miscellaneous paper ephemera. Simon Properties also retains ownership of one of the original sculptures, "Unicycle" by Dorothy Berge, that was displayed at near the Dayton's (Macy's) outdoor entrance until the mid- 1990s. It was taken down when the Edina mall's parking lot was reconfigured, and Simon is considering refurbishing the sculpture (which is intact except for its concrete pedestal base).for reinstallation at Southdale. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 • a MEMORANDUM TO: Heritage Preservation Board FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant DATE: August 5, 2011 SUBJECT: Southdale Mall — Heritage Landmark Evaluation 1. For preservation planning purposes, Southdale Mall (Southdale Shopping Center) should be categorized as a site, the heritage resource classification used to distinguish from historic buildings those resources that represent the location of a significant event, where the place itself possesses historical and cultural values regardless of the preservation value of any architectural features. 2. Southdale derives its primary historical significance from its association with the development of the first totally enclosed, climate controlled shopping mall in the United States. In 1952 the Dayton family of Minneapolis commissioned Victor Gruen & Associates to develop a master plan for a new retail form that reflected the changing pattern of suburban living; Gruen's plan combined elements of European city centers, gallerias, and arcades in a climate - controlled, multi -level enclosure surrounded by a broad expanse of paved off - street parking. Ground was broken in 1954 and the mall officially opened in 1956 with 72 stores. 3. The site meets the following Edina Heritage Landmark eligibility criteria: "Association with important events or patterns of events that reflect significant broad patterns in local history" (City Code §850.20, subd. 2). Southdale Shopping Center was a center of commerce and social life for residents of Edina and surrounding communities. It is the oldest fully enclosed, climate controlled shopping mall in the United States and the prototype for the other suburban "dales" built in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. 4. The site is associated with the local historic context "Southdale: Shopping Mall Culture," delineated in the 1999 Edina Historic Context Study (adopted as part of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan). The mall is historically significant in the areas of community development, commerce, and social history; it also relates to the broad themes and patterns of postwar suburban development. 5. Although it has been altered from its circa 1956 appearance, the site retains historic integrity of those features necessary to convey its significance. Notwithstanding that parts of the original structure are still in place and used for their originally intended purpose, the mall's architectural significance has been compromised by major additions and alterations, with the result that many features of the original form, plan, structure and ornamentation have been changed or lost, so that it no longer reflects the aesthetics of Victor Gruen. Architectural restoration to heritage preservation standards is probably not feasible. 6. The most important aspects of integrity relating to its historical significance are location (the place where the mall was built), setting (the. physical environment), feeling (historic character), and association (direct, documented links to important historic events). The site also retains integrity of design (form, plan,,and style), workmanship (evidence of artisans' labor), and materials (exterior fabric), but the relationship between the preservation resource and these architectural characteristics is of secondary importance. 7. Southdale also encompasses a number of historically significant objects —the term "object" is used to distinguish from buildings and sites those constructions that are primarily artistic in nature. As built, Southdale incorporated a number of pieces of public art, including several notable sculptures originally placed in the ,Garden Court. Although some of these objects may have been by design movable, their preservation value is entirely the product of their physical association with the mall. Therefore, in order to be considered heritage preservation resources, the objects would have to retain general historic integrity of location and setting. Objects relocated outside the boundaries of the Southdale Center would not be eligible for landmark designation. 8. The Heritage Preservation Board may wish to issue a determination of Edina' Heritage Landmark eligibility pursuant to City Code §850.20, subd. 3. Before nomination of the property proceeds, a study will need to be completed by the ,city. planning department that identifies and describes the historic site in detail, explains .how it meets the landmark eligibility criteria, makes the case for historic significance, and recommends a plan of treatment for the site and any significant art objects deemed worthy of preservation. The plan of treatment should, be developed in consultation with the. mall's owner and other s, takehold.ers. R I � CITY OF EDINA MID - CENTURY MODERN HISTORIC CONTEXT STUDY RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, 1941 -1975 RESEARCH DESIGN Objectives The purpose of this project is to develop a historic context statement that will provide a framework for identifying, evaluating, and designating historic buildings and landscapes associated with residential and commercial development in the City of Edina between circa 1941 and 1975. It; will provide information on "Midcentury Modern" architectural and engineering resources, . suburban land use patterns, vernacular and designed cultural landscapes, and the cultural trends which shaped the postwar. built environment. Specific project objectives include: • Provide a contextual framework for the identification. of heritage resources associated with the, recent past • Identify the character- defining features of important mid -20th century architectural styles and vernacular building forms • Document the important design themes associated with Modern design in Edina • Document the significant architectural and landscape property types associated with residential and commercial. development • Develop landmark designation requirements for mid -20th century architectural and landscape resources • Conduct a windshield survey of selected commercial areas and residential neighborhoods developed during the period circa 1941 -1975 • Develop a preliminary inventory of known (i.e., previously recorded) significant heritage preservation resources dating from circa 1941 4975 • Develop context -based goals and priorities for future survey -work • Provide recommendations for implementing the results of the historic context study Methodology The historic context study will be carried out using an approach based on current professional standards and procedures, including the preservation planning guidelines established by the U.S. Department of the Interior and the State Historic Preservation Office. Historical research will utilize a wide range of primary and secondary source materials accessed through multiple repositories. These materials include the following: historic and modern maps, plats, aerial photographs, building permits, assessor records, village council and planning commission minutes, local newspapers and periodicals, published community histories, architectural and engineering publications, reports of previous historic preservation studies, census records, and previous historic context studies of heritage resources of the "recent past" undertaken by other suburban communities. In order to better understand the types of heritage resources that exist in Edina for the period 1941 -1975 as well as their distribution throughout the city, a "windshield survey" will be conducted of selected commercial areas and residential neighborhoods. This reconnaissance will focus on identifying property types and assessing historic integrity — individual properties will not be recorded. Expected Results It is expected that the historic context study will produce a fully documented and illustrated narrative report that will serve both technical and informational purposes. The historic context statement will be integrated with the goals and policies contained in the city's comprehensive heritage preservation plan. The study will identify the important broad patterns of commercial and residential development and the significant heritage preservation resource types associated with them. It will provide a framework for investigation of the city's mid -20th century heritage resources that will guide future survey, evaluation, and landmark designation efforts. In addition, the study will provide city policy- makers with an action plan for revising the city's planning strategies with respect to the preservation, protection, and use of heritage resources from the recent past (i.e., properties less than 50 years old). July 2, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO:. Heritage Preservation Board FROM: Robert Vogel, Preservation Planning Consultant DATE: July 2, 2012 SUBJECT: Mid - Century Modern Historic Context Study — Progress Report The City of Edina has been awarded a Certified Local Government (CLG) grant to conduct a historic context study on residential and commercial development during the period 1941 to 1975. The study has been underway since early June, 2012 and will need to be completed before the end of July, 2013. CLG grants utilize federal funds administered by the United States Department -of the Interior which are passed through the State Historic Preservation Offices to qualified local government preservation. programs:: This project is'.also being financed in part with a state historical and cultural grant from the Arts'and Cultural Heritage Fund (Legacy Act). The Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation are the program regulations used for both grant programs. Historic contexts are the cornerstone of the heritage preservation planning process in Edina. The city has developed local historic contexts as part of its comprehensive planning process. The historic contexts link specific heritage resource types to identified themes, geographic areas, and time periods and provide city decision makers with a consistent framework within which to contextually identify and evaluate individual properties and groups of related properties. Historic context studies are intended to be used to inform heritage resource surveys and to ensure that evaluations for determining Edina Heritage Landmark eligibility are consistent with local, state, and federal preservation standards. The present historic context study is city -wide in scope and focuses on the period 1941 -1975. The chronological limits of the study are generally consistent with what cultural historians commonly refer to as the "Postwar" era. Architectural historians, on the other hand, are more apt to use the terms "Modern" and "Midcentury Modern" to describe the aesthetics and design trends dating _from the late 1920s through the 1960s, while preservationists commonly refer to the period of time that encompasses the present up to 50 years ago as the "Recent Past." The study involves three sets of preservation planning activities: archival research, development of a historic context statement, and development of context -based goals and priorities. Archival research (defined as the study and organization of documentary data) is a vital part of the project and will consume most of the staff and consultant resources-committed to the study. For this reason, 'the first critical task has been to develop. a written research design that. establishes goals and directions for the research. A copy of the research design (submitted to SHPO for review) is attached. During the last month, and for some time to come, research will focus on assembling relevant background information about the broad patterns and trends in Edina's physical development since the 1930s. A working bibliography of the sources consulted is provided as an attachment to this progress report. The list will be periodically updated so that you can get an idea of where the historic context research is doing. ,d fir EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD i CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS July 2011 — July 2012 1. 4607 Wooddale Avenue Request: Move Detached Garage /Change to Street Facing Facade Action: Approved 2. 4621 Edina Boulevard. Request: Replace existing attached garage with new /addition above on a street facing facade Action: Approved 3. 4907 Arden Avenue Request: Add a front entry canopy Action: Approved 4. 4511 Bruce Avenue Request: New detached garage and addition Action: Approved 5. 4603 Browndale Avenue Request: Add.a front entry canopy Action:' Approved 6. 4620 Moorland Avenue Request: New detached garage /2 story addition /changes to street facing facade Action: Approved 7. 4524 Bruce Avenue Request: New Home with attached garage (non- historic resource) Action: .Approved 8. 4624. .Bruce Avenue Request: New home with detached garage. (non- historic resource) Action: Approved 9. 4601 Wooddale Avenue Request: Changes to street facing fagade — attached garage Action: Approved Y COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS BY STREET ARDEN AVENUE 4505 H -10 -1 Decertify Heritage Resource- Denied 4508 H -04 -1 New Detached Garage 4517 H -04 -4 New Detached Garage 4519 H -10 -2 New Detached Garage & Front Entry Portico 4523 H -05 -7 Move Detached Garage 4528 H -09 -3 New Detached Garage 4609 H -07 -3 New Detached Garage 4611 H -09 -7 New Detached Garage & Front Entry Portico 4624 H -04 -2 New Detached Garage 4907 H -11 -8 New Front Entry Canopy 4910 H -03 -7 New Detached Garage 4912 H -07 -4 New Detached Garage BRUCE AVENUE 4501 4506 H -03 -8 New Detached Garage H -08 -8 4511 H -11 -9 New Detached Garage /Addition New Detached Garage /Front Portico — change from H -08 -8 4524 H -12 -3 Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New 4602 H -09 -2 Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New 4604 H -05 -1 New Detached Garage Change to Street Facade 4608 H -06 -2 Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New 4608 H -06 -8 Revisions to Plan approved with H -06 -2 H -11 -1 4609 H -09 -4 New Front Entry Portico New Detached Garage 4623 H -10 -3 New Detached Garage 4631 4626 H -12 -4 Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New 4626 H -07 -9 New Detached Garage 4629 H -08 -2 New Detached Garage 4903 H -04 -11 New Detached Garage CASCO AVENUE 4501 H -10 -4 Remove Detached Garage/New Attached — corner lot 4512 H -08 -8 New Detached Garage /Front Facade 4512 H -10 -5 New Detached Garage /Front Portico — change from H -08 -8 4523 H -07 -6 New Detached Garage 4526 H -06 -6 New Detached Garage 4527 H -06 -1 New Detached Garage 4600 H -11 -5 Change to Street Facade 4615 H -05 -4 New Detached Garage 4622 H -07 -5 New Detached Garage 4623 H -11 -1 New Detached Garage /Addition 4625 H -09 -8 New Detached Garage 4628 H -01 -11 New Detached Garage 4631 H -07 -2 New Detached Garage July 2012 Page 1 4634 H -09 -1 DREXEL AVENUE 4507 H -06 -4 4512 H -06 -3 4517 4526 4601 4619 4620 `:4622 4622 4622 4623 .4624 4625 4633 H -08 -13 H -04 -7 H -05 -8 H- 04 -'10 H -04 -8 H -0.6 -5 H -08 -1 H -08 -3 H -08 -12 H -06 -7 H -03 -4 H -08 -7 WOODDALE AVENUE 4501 H -03 -3 4501 H -03 -6 4508 H -07 =7 4512 H -07 -8 4600 H -09 -5 4605 H -07 -1 New Detached Garage Demolish Detached Garage — Build New Demolish Detached Garage Construct Attached Garage New Detached Garage New Detached Garage Demolish House — Build New corner lot New Detached Garage Demolish Detached Garage — Construct Attached Garage ,Demolish House — Build New Change in COA #H -06 -5 New Construction New Detached Garage New Detached Garage New Detached Garage New Detached garage Demolish Detached Garage - Construct Attached Garage -VOID Demolish House — Build New — corner lot New Detached Garage New Detached Garage New Detached Garage — corner lot New Detached Garage 4607 H -11 -6 Move Detached Garage /Change to Street Facing Facade 4615 H -08 -14 Demolish Home /Garage to Build New 4615 H -09 -6 Change side to James Hardie Artisan Lap 4625 H -03 -5 Demolish Detached Garage — Construct Attached Garage EDINA- BOULEVARD 4511 H -08 -11 New Detached Garage -VOID 4515 H -03 -2 New Detached Garage 4600 H -08 -4 New Detached Garage — corner lot 4621 H -11 -7 Chance to Street Facine Facade — Variance MOORLAND AVENUE 4513 H -08 -5 New Detached Garage 4602 H -04 -3 New Detached Garage 4603 H -05 -3 New Detached Garage 4607 H -05 -2 New Detached Garage 4619 H -03 -1 Demolish House — Build New 4620 H-12 -2 New Detached Garage /Addition July 2012 Page 2 BROWNDALE AVENUE 4405 H -03 -9 4603 H -12 -1 4627 H -08 -10 EDGEBROOK PLACE SUNNYSIDE ROAD 4600 H -04 -06 4805 H -11 -4 4901 H -10 -6 New Detached Garage — corner lot New Front Entry Canopy Demo. Hot Tub House - None New Detached Garage Change to Street Facade Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 4408 H -10 -7 Demolish House (non heritage resource) — Build New RIGHT OF WAY — CITY PROJECTS *HWY 100 —WESTERN BOUNDARY H -04 -09 Sound Wall From Creek North to W. 44th St. *RECONSTRUCTION OF DISTRICT SEWER, WATER AND STREETS H -05 -6 Conceptual Plan Approved *RECONSTRUCTION OF DISTRICT SEWER, WATER & STREETS H -07 -10 Traffic calming improvements *RECONSTRUCTION STREETS & CROSSWALKS H -08 -6 Traffic Calming deleted — crosswalk changes only Total by year: 2003 9 2004 11 2005 8 2006 8 2007 10 2008 14 2009 8 2010 7 2011 7 2012 5 87 Needs final inspection July 2012 Page 3 HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD COMMUNITY AWARENESS AND EDUCATION Community awareness and education have been identified as one of the major missions of the Heritage Preservation Board. As part of the 2012 Work Plan the following activities have been identified as priorities: I) Provide Heritage Preservation Board members and staff with information, education and training in historic preservation. a) New member orientation b) Chair Carr attend NAPC Forum, Norfolk, VA — July 18 -22 via CLG Scholarship Grant c) One or more members attend the 32"dAnnual Minnesota Preservation Conference — September 13 & 14, in Fergus Falls, MN. 2) Sponsor Preservation Month (May) activities. a) City Council Proclamation — May, Preservation Month — May 15C b) Caring for Your Historic Home workshop — May 5 ", Grange Hall (Canceled) c) joint event with Edina Historical Society — Tour Cahill School & Grange Hall d) Heritage Award Presentation — Convention Grill, 3912 Sunnyside Rd. 3) Annual.Summer Walking Tour — Morningside (west side abutting St. Louis Park) in cooperation with the Edina Historical Society & the St. Louis Park Historical Society on July IOth. 4) Advise and assist historic property owners in building conservation and rehabilitation matters. 5) Work with the City's administration in the creation of a neighborhood association program for the community. a) Assist neighborhoods in promoting voluntary heritage preservation practices. 6) Use existing planning tools more effectively and create a better "tool box" to address emerging, heritage preservation challenges. 7) Improve public ,access to heritage preservation information through the city's web site, media and public outreach. HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD WORK PLAN 2012 RESEARCH 1) Revise and update Historic Context Study to reflect changes since originally written in 1999. 2) Complete nomination studies for landmark designations of Morningside bungalows utilizing CLG grant. 3) Update the information, in the Heritage Resources Inventory and convert it to electronic form. so that it can be manipulated, used and retrieved quickly. The inventory should be made adaptable for Geographic Information Systems (GIS) .users. 4) Identify potential properties for heritage landmark designation. 5) Research preservation, protection, and use of mid -20' century heritage resources. PRESERVATION 6) Process. Certificate of Appropriateness applications for proposed changes to properties designated Edina Heritage Landmarks. 7) Promote voluntary landmark designation of Edina Heritage Resources to include: • At least 3 identified bungalow style homes in the Morningside neighborhood. • At least I property designated eligible for landmark designation. 8) Complete inventory of original artifacts at Southdale Center; and work with Center management to recognize the historic sign ificance.of the' In enclosed mall in the country. 9) Follow -up on the Thematic'- Study-of Women Related to.Edina's Historic Resources as future resources undergo research. EDUCATION 10) Provide Heritage Preservation Board members and staff with information, education and training in historic preservation. a) New member orientation b) Chair Carr attend NAPC Forum , Norfolk , VA — July 18 -22 via CLG Scholarship Grant C) One or more members attend the 32 "dAnnual Minnesota Preservation Conference — September 13 & 14, in Fergus Falls, MN. 1 1) Sponsor Preservation Month (May) activities. a) City Council Proclamation — May, Preservation Month — May I" b) Caring for Your Historic Home workshop — May 5th, Grange Hall (Canceled) c) Joint event with Edina Historical Society — May 8"' d) Heritage Award Presentation — May I" 12) Advise and assist historic property owners in building conservation and rehabilitation matters. 13) Work with the City's administration in the creation of a neighborhood association program for the community. a) Assist neighborhoods in promoting voluntary heritage preservation practices. 14) Use existing planning tools more effectively and create a better "tool box" to address emerging heritage preservation challenges. 15) Improve public access to heritage preservation information through the city's web site, media and public outreach.5 On -going Items Sub - Committee Working Group EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD ANNUAL CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (CLG) REPORT 2011 FISCAL YEAR The following is a summary of the projects, reviews and activities reported to the City Council and Minnesota Preservation Office for the fiscal year 2011, (October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011): A. Local Designation of Preservation Sites: The following properties are designated Edina Heritage Landmarks: 1. George Baird House, 4400 West 50th Street 2. Jonathan Grimes House, 4200 West 40 Street 3. Paul.Peterson House, 5312 Interlachen Boulevard 4. Grange'Hall, 4918 Eden Avenue 5. Cahill ,School, 4924 Eden Avenue 6. Country, Club District 7. Edina Theater Sign, 3911 West 50th Street 8. Edina Mill Site & Browndale Bridge — West 50th at Browndale Avenue No significant heritage resources were destroyed or damaged as a result of any activity financed, permitted; or otherwise supported by the City of Edina. B. Review of Requests for a Certificate of Appropriateness in the historic Country Club District: 1. 4501 Casco Avenue Request: Demolish an existing detached garage in the rear yard and construct an addition including an attached garage. Action: Approved after redesign 2. 4512 Casco Avenue Request:. Changes made to a previously approved COA for a new Front entry portico '& a new detached garage. Action: Approved 3. 4901 Sunnyside Road Request: Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New Action: Approved 4. 4408 Country Club Road Request: Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New Action: Approved 5. 4628 Casco Avenue Request: New Detached Garage Action: Approved Edina Heritage Preservation Board 2011 CLG Report 6. 4623 Casco Avenue Request: New Detached Garage /Addition Action: Approved 7. 4805 Sunnyside Road Request: Changes to Street Facing Fagade — Addition Above Attached Garage Action: Approved 8. 4600 Casco Avenue Request: Changes to Street Facing Fagade — Addition Above Attached Garage Action: Approved 9. 4607 Wooddale Avenue Request: Move Detached Garage /Change to Street Facing Fagade Action: Approved C. Heritage Preservation Board Membership: 2011 1. Joel Stegner, Chairman 2. Claudia Carr, Vice Chair 3. Jean Rehkamp Larson 4. Bob Schwartzbauer 5. Colleen Curran 6. Ross Davis 8. Terry Ahlstrom* 9. Bob Moore* 10. Anna Ellinboe *, Student Member (Sept. 2011 —Aug. 2012) 11. Samuel Copman *, Student Member (Sept. 2011 — Aug. 2012) (Students are non - voting members) *Application attached as Exhibit "A" D. National Register Nominations: NONE The following properties in Edina are listed on the National Register of Historic Places: 1. George Baird House, 4400 West 50th Street 2. Jonathan Taylor Grimes House, 4200 West 44th Street 3. Grange Hall, 4918 Eden Avenue 4. Cahill School, 4924 Eden Avenue 5. Country Club District E. Local Inventories and Studies: Local Inventory: "Historic Building Survey of Edina, MN ", Prepared by Setter, Leach & Lindstrom, July 1979, Historic Consultant, Jeffrey A. Hess. 4 Edina Heritage Preservation Board 2011 CLG Report • "Historic Context Study ", Prepared by Robert C. Vogel and Associates, July 1999. • Recodified Section 850.20 "Edina Heritage Landmarks" of the Zoning Ordinance, 2003 • Comprehensive Heritage Preservation Plan, June 2006 • Heritage Preservation Element of City's Comprehensive Plan submitted to Metropolitan Council, 2009 • Morningside Bungalow Multiple Property Study, 2010 • Section 801 Heritage Preservation Board of City Code replaced with Section 1500/1504 (Attached as Exhibit "B ") • , Thematic�Study for Heritage Resources Associated with Edina Women, 2011 F. Assurances: The HPB held monthly meetings as needed. The minutes of said meetings are recorded and kept at City Hall, Edina, MN. The meetings were posted and open to the public. The assurance statement is attached for Public Participation and Commission records. G. Activities Accomplished in 2011 and Future Projects: 2011 1. The City of Edina contracted with Pathfinder CRM, LLC to provide heritage preservation advice and services. 2. 2011 Heritage Preservation Award — Awarded during Preservation month to St. Stephen's the Martyr Episcopal Church, 4585 West 50th. Street — recognizing its "Excellence in Preservation" in honor of its 75 anniversary year. 3. Held an open house for -the Morningside Neighborhood to introduce the Morningside Bungalow Study and explain the heritage landmark designation process. 4. Held an Open House in partnership with the Edina Historical Society at the historic Cahill School and Grange Hall in recognition of Preservation Month, on May10, 2011. 5. Approached owners of properties designated eligible for heritage landmark designation regarding the potential designation of their properties. 3 Edina Heritage Preservation Board 2011 CLG Report 6. The HPB was awarded a CLG matching grant to assist in funding the nomination studies for prospective Morningside bungalow homes in preparation for potential heritage landmark designation. 7. The following board members attended the State Preservation Conference in Faribault, September 22 -23: Claudia Carr, David Anger, and Joel Stegner. 8. The HPB was awarded a CLG scholarship grant for the 2011 State Preservation Conference to defray the costs of two board members (Claudia Carr and David Anger) who attended both days of the event. 9. Completed the CLG grant for a Thematic Study for Historic Resources Associated with Edina Women. 10.Addressed nine Certificates of Appropriateness in the Country Club District Future Projects In addition to the routine review of Certificate of Appropriate applications for landmark designated properties, the HPB proposes the following projects for 2012 • Historic Context Study revisions to Country Club District & Morningside • Tupa Park-(Cahill School /Grange Hall) accessibility improvements • Designate at least 2 new Edina Heritage Landmark properties • Research potential properties for heritage landmark designation • Survey 44th & France commercial properties • Promote voluntary landmark designation of identified bungalow style homes in the Morningside neighborhood. • Conduct 'a "Preservation of Historic Resources" class through Edina Community Education • Continue work on a comprehensive preservation education and outreach program aimed at property owners, realtors, developers, etc. • Work with the City's administration in the creation of a neighborhood association program for the community • Assist neighborhoods in promoting voluntary heritage preservation practices • Historic objects inventory for Southdale Shopping Center • Work with Southdale Center ownership on recognizing the historic significance of the 1St enclosed shopping mall in'the country • Expand activities to celebrate Preservation Month in May, 2012 Prepared by: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner and Staff supporting the Heritage Preservation Board. 4 HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD WORK PLAN 2012 RESEARCH 1) Revise and update Historic Context Study to reflect changes since originally written in 1999. 2) Complete nomination studies for landmark designations of Morningside bungalows utilizing CLG grant. 3) Update the information in, the:Heritage Resources Inventory and convert it to electronic form so that it can be.manipulated, used and retrieved.quickly. The inventory should be made adaptable for Geographic Information- Systems (GIS) users. 4) Identify potential properties for heritage landmark designation. 5) Research preservation, protection, and use of mid -20' century heritage resources. PRESERVATION 6) Process. Certificate of Appropriateness applications for proposed changes to properties -designated Edina Heritage Landmarks. 7) Promote voluntary-landmark designation of Edina Heritage Resources to include: •. At least 3 identified zbungalow style homes in the Morningside neighborhood. • At least I property, designated eligible for landmark designation. 8) Complete inventory of original artifacts at Southdale Center; and work with Center management to recognize the historic significance of the :V' enclosed mall in the country. 9) Follow -up on the Thematic -Study of Women Related to:Edina's:Historic Resources as future resources undergo research. EDUCATION 10) Provide Heritage Preservation Board members and staff with information, education and training in historic preservation. a) New member orientation b) Chair Carr attend NAPC Forum , Norfolk , VA —July 18 -22 via CLG Scholarship Grant C) One or more members attend the 32 "dAnnual Minnesota Preservation Conference — September 13 & 14, in Fergus Falls, MN. 1 1) Sponsor Preservation Month (May) activities. a) City Council Proclamation — May, Preservation Month — May l' b) Caring for Your Historic Home workshop — May 51h, Grange Hall (Canceled) c) Joint event with Edina Historical Society — May 8' d) Heritage Award Presentation —May I" 12) Advise and assist historic property owners in building conservation and rehabilitation matters. 13) Work with the City's administration in the creation of a neighborhood association program for the community. a) Assist neighborhoods in promoting voluntary heritage preservation practices. 14) Use existing planning tools more effectively and create a better "tool box" to address emerging heritage preservation challenges. 15) Improve public access to heritage preservation information through the city's web site, media and public outreach.5 On -going Items Sub - Committee Working Group EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD ANNUAL CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (CLG) REPORT 2011 FISCAL YEAR' The following is a summary of the projects, reviews and activities reported to the City Council and Minnesota Preservation Office for the fiscal year 2011, (October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011): A. Local Designation of Preservation Sites: The following properties are designated Edina Heritage Landmarks: 1. George Baird House, 4400 West 50th Street 2. Jonathan Grimes House, 4200 West 44th Street 3. Paul Peterson House, 5312 Interlachen Boulevard 4. Grange Hall, 4918. Eden Avenue 5. Cahill School, 4924, Eden Avenue 6. Country Club District 7. Edina Theater Sign, 3911 West 50th Street 8. Edina Mill Site & Browndale Bridge — West 50th at Browndale Avenue No significant heritage resources were destroyed or damaged as a result of any activity financed, permitted, or otherwise supported by the City of Edina. B. Review. of Requests for a Certificate of Appropriateness in the historic Country Club District: 4501 Casco Avenue Request: Demolish an existing detached garage in the rear yard and construct an addition including an attached garage. Action: Approved after redesign 2. 4512 Casco Avenue Request: Changes made to a previously approved COA for a new Front entry portico & a new detached garage. Action: Approved- 3. 4901 Sunnyside Road Request: Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New Action: Approved 4. 4408 Country Club Road Request: Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New Action: Approved 5. 4628 Casco Avenue Request: New Detached Garage Action: Approved Edina Heritage Preservation Board 2011 CLG Report 6. 4623 Casco Avenue Request: New Detached Garage /Addition Action: Approved 7. 4805 Sunnyside Road Request: Changes to Street Facing Fagade — Addition Above Attached Garage Action: Approved 8. 4600 Casco Avenue Request: Changes to Street Facing Fagade — Addition Above Attached Garage Action: Approved 9. 4607 Wooddale Avenue Request: Move Detached Garage /Change to Street Facing Facade Action: Approved C. Heritage Preservation Board Membership: 2011 1. Joel Stegner, Chairman 2. Claudia Carr, Vice Chair 3. Jean Rehkamp Larson 4. Bob Schwartzbauer 5. Colleen Curran 6. Ross Davis 8. Terry Ahlstrom* 9. Bob Moore* 10. Anna Ellinboe *, Student Member (Sept. 2011 — Aug. 2012) 11. Samuel Copman *, Student Member (Sept. 2011 — Aug. 2012) (Students are non - voting members) *Application attached as Exhibit "A" D. National Register Nominations: NONE The following properties in Edina are listed on the National Register of Historic Places: 1. George Baird House, 4400 West 50th Street 2. Jonathan Taylor Grimes House, 4200 West 44th Street 3. Grange Hall, 4918 Eden Avenue 4. Cahill School, 4924 Eden Avenue 5. Country Club District E. Local Inventories and Studies: • Local Inventory: "Historic Building Survey of Edina, MN ", Prepared by Setter, Leach & Lindstrom, July 1979, Historic Consultant, Jeffrey A. Hess. 6 Edina Heritage Preservation Board 2011 CLG Report • "Historic Context Study ", Prepared by Robert C. Vogel and .Associates, July 1999. • Recodified Section 850.20 "Edina Heritage Landmarks" of the Zoning Ordinance, 2003. • Comprehensive Heritage Preservation Plan, June 21,006 • Heritage Preservation Element of City's Comprehensive Plan submitted to Metropolitan Council, 2009 • Morn ingside Bungalow Multiple. Property Study, 2010 • Section 801 Heritage Preservation Board of City Code replaced with Section 1500/1504 (Attached as Exhibit "B ") Thematic Study for Heritage Resources Associated with Edina Women, 2011 F. Assurances: The HPB held monthly meetings as needed. The minutes of said meetings are recorded and kept at City Hall, Edina, MN. The meetings were posted and open to the public. The assurance statement 'is attached for Public Participation and Commission records. G. Activities Accomplished in 2011 and Future Projects: 2011 1. The City of Edina contracted with Pathfinder CRM, LLC to provide heritage preservation advice and services. 2. 2011 Heritage Preservation Award — Awarded during Preservation month to St. Stephen's the Martyr Episcopal Church, 4585 West 50th Street — recognizing its "Excellence in Preservation" in honor of its 75 anniversary year. 3. Held an open house for the Morningside Neighborhood to introduce the Morningside Bung_ alow Study and explain the heritage landmark designation process. 4. Held an Open House in partnership with the Edina Historical Society at the historic Cahill School and Grange Hall in recognition of Preservation Month, on May10, 2011. 5. Approached owners of properties designated eligible for heritage landmark designation regarding the potential designation of their properties. 3 Edina Heritage Preservation Board 2011 CLG Report 6. The HPB was awarded a CLG matching grant to assist in funding the nomination studies for prospective Morningside bungalow homes in preparation for potential heritage landmark designation. 7. The following board members attended the State Preservation Conference in Faribault, September 22 -23: Claudia Carr, David Anger, and Joel Stegner. 8. The HPB was awarded a CLG scholarship grant for the 2011 State Preservation Conference to defray the costs of two board members (Claudia Carr and David Anger) who attended both days of the event. 9. Completed the CLG grant for a Thematic Study for Historic Resources Associated with Edina Women. 10.Addressed nine Certificates of Appropriateness in the Country Club District Future Projects In addition to the routine review of Certificate of Appropriate applications for landmark designated properties, the HPB proposes the following projects for 2012 • Historic Context Study revisions to Country Club District & Morningside • Tupa Park (Cahill School /Grange Hall) accessibility improvements • Designate at least 2 new Edina Heritage Landmark properties • Research potential properties for heritage landmark designation • Survey 44th & France commercial properties • Promote voluntary landmark designation of identified bungalow style homes in the Morningside neighborhood. • Conduct 'a "Preservation of Historic Resources" class through Edina Community Education • Continue work on a comprehensive preservation education and outreach program aimed at property owners, realtors, developers, etc. • Work with the City's administration in the creation of a neighborhood association program for the community • Assist neighborhoods in promoting voluntary heritage preservation practices • Historic objects inventory for Southdale Shopping Center • Work with Southdale Center ownership on recognizing the historic significance of the 1St enclosed shopping mall in the country • Expand activities to celebrate Preservation Month in May, 2012 Prepared by: Joyce Repya, Associate Planner and Staff supporting the Heritage Preservation Board. 4 AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS AUGUST 6, 2012 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL 111. 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 July 17, 2012 and Work Session Of July 17, 2012, B. Receive Payment Of Claims As Per: Pre -List Dated 07/19/2012, TOTAL$ 1,015,745.91 And Per Pre -List Dated 07/26/12 TOTAL $2,976,461.63 And Per Pre List Dated 08/02/12 TOTAL $747,878.49 and Credit Card Transactions Date 5/26/12 — 6/25/12 $19,632.16 C. Engineering Services For Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Project D. Resolution No. 2012 -100 Bike Lane Designations E. Resolution. No. 2012 -101 No Parking Resolution On Antrim Road From West 701h Street To Valley.View Road And On Cahill Road From Dewey Hill Road To West 78th Street F. Elimination of 2005 Edina Transportation Commission Policy and the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan G. Traffic Safety Report of July 11, 2012 H. Request For Purchase — Fiber Optic Cabling — Utley Park To. Edina Liquor Store, Improvement No. FO -007 I. Request For Purchase — Edina Bike Boulevard — Phase 1, ENG 12 -6 J. Resolution No. 2012 -102 Nine Mile Creek, Regional Trail; Fred Richards Golf Course To Xerxes Avenue Agreement K. Professional Park Construction Design And Construction Administration Services Agreement For Countryside Park L. Set Date For Canvass Of Municipal Election For November 9. 2012 At 5:00 p.m. M. Request For Purchase Overlay Of Frontage Road From Eden Avenue To Southview Lane Agenda/Edina City Council August 6, 2012 Page 2 V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS A. Resolution No. 2012 -105 Community Gardens VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS I 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 —. France Avenue Intersection Enhancements, Resolution No. 2012 -103 (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) B. PUBLIC HEARING Appeal Heritage .,Preservation Board's Issuance Of Certificate of Appropriateness For New Home,At 4524 Bruce Avenue, Resolution No. 2012 -104 (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve) VII. COMMUNITY COMMENT During "Community Comment,.,'. the City Council will invite residents to share new issues or concerns that haven't been considered 'in the past '30 days by the Council or which aren't slated for future consideration. Individuals must 'limit their 'comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit the number of speaks on the same issue.in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community: Comment. Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to 'respond to their comments tonight. Instead the Council might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VIII. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A. Student Appointments To Advisory Boards And Commissions B. Ordinance No. 2012 -15 Franchise Ordinance CenterPoint Energy (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only.) C. Ordinance No. 2012 -16 Franchise Ordinance Xcel Energy (First Reading: Requires offering of Ordinance only.) D. Special Assessment Policy Revision E. Residential Curbside Recycling Contract F. Request For Purchase — Woodd ale Avenue Intersection Improvements, ENG 12 -7 G. Resolution No: 2012 -98 Adopting Findings And Decision RE: Valley View Road And Sally Lane Tree Removal i '' Agenda /Edina City Council August 6, 2012 Page 3 H. Resolution No. 2012 -97 Accepting Various Donations IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS A. Correspondence B. Advisory Boards & Commission Correspondence: 1. Minutes - Edina Community Health Committee, May 15, 2012 2. Minutes - Edina Human Rights & Relations Commission, June 26, 2012 3. Minutes - Planning Commission, July 11, 2012 4. Minutes — Edina Transportation Commission, June 21, 2012 and July 9, 2012 X. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS XI. MANAGER'S COMMENTS XII. 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- 886172 hours in advance of the meeting. SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /DATES /EVENTS Mon Aug 6 Work Session — France Avenue Intersection Enhancements 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Mon Aug 6 Joint Work Session — Heritage Preservation Board 6:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Mon Aug 6 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Aug 14 PRIMARY ELECTION DAY — POLLS OPEN 7:00 A.M. UNTIL 8:00 P.M. Tues Aug 21 Work Session — Budget Process /Joint Meeting w Sch Board 4:00 P.M.. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Aug 21 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Sept 3 LABOR DAY HOLIDAY OBSERVED — City Hall Closed Tues Sept 4 Joint Work Session — Planning Commission 5:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Sept 4 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Wed Sept 19 Work Session — Board & Commissions Work Plan Proposals 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Wed Sept 19 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Oct 2 Work Session — CIP Workshop 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct 2 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Oct 16 Work Session — Business Meeting /Work Plan 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Oct 16 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Mon Nov 5 Human Services Funding/Liquor Ordinance 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Nov 5 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Fri Nov 9 Canvass of Election Returns 5:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Nov 20 Work Session — Finalize 2013 Work Plans 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Nov 20 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS Tues Dec 4 Work Session — Name Your Neighborhood 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM is Dec 4 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS .es Dec 18 Work Session — TBD 5:30 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Tues Dec 18 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JULY 17, 2012 5:07 P.M. Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:070 p.m. in the Community Room of City Hall. Answering rollcall .were Members Bennett, Brindle, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. Member Sprague entered the meeting at 5:11 p.m. Staff attending the meeting: Kris Aaker, Assistant City Planner; Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications and Technology Services Director; Wayne Houle, Director of Engineering; John Keprios, Park & Recreation Director; Ari Klugman, City Manager Intern; Karen Kurt, Assistant City Manager; Jeff Long, Police Chief; Debra Mangen, City Clerk; Scott Neal, City Manager; Brian Olson, Public Works. Director; Eric Roggeman, Assistant Finance Director; Marty Scheerer, Fire Chief and John Wallin, Finance Director. Mayor Hovland noted the purpose of the' work session was to review the City's Finances' for the 2012 Operating Year, to review the Work Plan and some discussion regarding: City Council minutes, acceptance of board and commission minutes and board and commission member performance concerns. FINANCIAL REVIEW Assistant Finance Director Roggeman presented an overview of the City's General Fund and all enterprise funds' incomes and expenses to date for the 2012 Operating Year. The Council asked questions of staff and discussed the'status of the various funds. 2012 CITY OF EDINA WORK PLAN Assistant'Manager Kurt reviewed the 2012 -2013 Council Priorities as of July 17, 2012 and reported the progress in each area. Staff and Council discussed the body of work accomplished to date in 2012 and made some adjustments to the priorities of items listed in the work plan and, parking lot. DISCUSSSION OF CITY. COUNCIL MINUTES, ADVISORY BOARD & COMMISSION MINUTES ACCEPTANCE AND BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBER PERFORMANCE CONCERNS Council and staff briefly discussed .the contents of the Council's minutes. It was determined that the existing format of recording a testifiers' name and address and noted the testifier addressed the council, Without statine,their comments would be continued. The /`.,uneel kideeated a deSiFe to haye the „A„4 packet T1 he Council requested that going forward, all board and, commission minutes and advisory communications in the Council packet be listed under Correspondence and Petitions on the Council Agenda., Finally, the Council agreed that the City Manager should handle any performance issues with current board and commission members. Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Minutes approved by Edina City Council, July 17, 2012. Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL JULY 17, 2012 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m 11. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson and Mayor Hovland. 111. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, approving the meeting agenda.. Ayes: Bennett,, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Member Bennett made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, approving the consent agenda as revised to remove Items IV.E. Authorization to Participate in 2013 — 2014 Fuel Consortium; IV.F. Resolution No. 2012 -93, Lot Division (lot line adjustment) to shift the existing lot line that divides the properties at 5100 Ridge Road and 5101 Green Farms Road for Margaret Scholz; IV.G. Resolution No. 2012 -96, authorizing staff to apply for a grant from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development to tear down the old Public Works Building at 5146 Eden Avenue; and, IV.J. Resolution No. 2012 -98, adopting Findings and Decision regarding Valley View Road and Sally Lane, as follows: IV.A. Approve regular, closed session, and work session meeting minutes of June 19, 2012 Receive payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated June 21, 2012, and consisting of 35 pages; General Fund $388,014.22; Police Special Revenue $104.93; PIR Debt Service Fund $825.41; Working Capital Fund $485,872.18; Equipment Replacement, Fund $603:56; Art Center Fund $4,644.28; Golf Dome Fund $598.79; Aquatic Center Fund $55,585.00; Golf Course Fund $32,932.72; Ice Arena Fund $8,994.77; Edinborough Park ;Fund $24,403.26; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $4,926.22; Liquor Fund;$182,352.57; Utility Fund $897,82.6.86; Storm Sewer Fund $537,036.19; PSTF, Agency Fund $5,575.36; Payroll Fund $5,344.55; TOTAL. 2,641,700.87 and for approval of payment of claims dated June 28, 2012, and consisting of ,31 pages; General Fund $300,871.35; Police Special Revenue $1,046.97; General Debt Service Fund $1,000.00; PIR Debt Service Fund $3,585.00; Working Capital. Fund $89,872.91; Art Center Fund $15,857.62; Golf. Dome Fund $49:28; Aquatic Center Fund $28,808.74; Golf Course Fund $19,760.14; Ice Arena Fund $8,901.43; Edinborough Park Fund $12,025.22; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $8,255.75; Liquor Fund $204,123.46; Utility Fund $98,972.15; Storm,Sewer Fund $32,529.18; Recycling Fund $32.95; PSTF Agency Fund $24,201.95; TOTAL $849.894.10; and for approval of payment of claims dated July: S. 2012, and consisting of 27„ pages; General Fund $255,429.82; Police Special Revenue $561.06; Working Capital Fund $13,597.99; Equipment Replacement Fund $9,195.53; Art Center Fund $4,023.23; Golf Dome Fund $365.01; Aquatic Center Fund $13,123.89; Golf Course Fund $61,353.19; Ice Arena Fund $12,139.48; Edinborough Park Fund $3,323.83; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $4562.31; Liquor Fund $174,765.42; Utility Fund $14,450.39; Storm Sewer Fund $927.71; PSTF Agency Fund, $3,149.99; TOTAL $570,968.79; and for approval of payment of claims dated July 12, 2012, and consisting of 33 pages; General Fund $123,894.08; Police Special Revenue $410.17; Working Capital Fund $102,623.08; Equipment Replacement. Fund $15,610.30; Construction Fund $2,850.74; Art Center Fund $7,644.96; Golf Dome Fund $28,800.00; Aquatic Center Fund $49,651.73; Golf Course Fund $19,543.97; Ice Arena Fund $24,867.73; Edinborough Park Fund $646.03; Centennial Lakes Park Fund $9,504.86; Liquor Fund $245,860.06; Utility Fund $486,961.77; Storm Sewer Fund $18,578.39; Recycling Fund $39,958.20; IV.B. Page 1 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 PSTF Agency Fund $2,526.31; Payroll Fund $3,453.84; TOTAL $1.183,386.22; and, Credit Card Transactions dated April 28 - May 25, 2012; TOTAL $10.970.21. IV.C. Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -86, Findings of Fact denying a request for Vacation of Right -of -Way, Natchez Avenue & 415` Street IV.D. Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -92, authorizing Public Health Emergency Preparedness Grant Project Agreement 1-9.F A, to PaFt+eipate4n 4 A el G..ws,.k:...,. V. F. Re-sa-li-Alen Ala— 2-0-1-2 93, Lot Division (lot line adjustment) te- shift- the P-K*St*Ag l8t line that dewodps thew ...►1..._ am 63 -0-0- Ridge Read and 6901 Green rams Raild iwr MaFgaFet s..Lwh PA Q Resolution Ale 2012 96, allthOFoileAg staff to apply f9F a gFaRt frem the 4in IV.H. Accept Traffic Safety Committee Report of June 6, 2012 IV.I. Approve engineering services for Gallagher Drive Street Improvements Re-se-lutien Ne. 2-0-12 99, adepting Findings and DerisiGn FegaFding Valley View Read and Sally Lie IV.K. Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -99, designating no parking on Gallagher Drive from Parklawn Avenue to France Avenue Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA IV.E. PARTICIPATION IN2013 -2014 FUEL CONSORTIUM- AUTHORIZED Public Works Director Olson indicated the primary reason for lower gas consumption was due to last season's mild winter. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, authorizing participation in the 2013 -2014 Fuel Consortium. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV.F. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -93 ADOPTED - LOT DIVISION (LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT) TO SHIFT THE EXISTING LOT LINE THAT DIVIDES THE PROPERTIES AT 5100 RIDGE ROAD AND 5101 GREEN FARMS ROAD FOR MARGARET SCHOLZ The Council discussed the requested lot line adjustment and acknowledged that as a result, the lot on Green Farms Road would be proportionately larger, allowing the option for a larger home to be constructed that might not be within the character of the neighborhood. It was noted the front and sideyard setback requirements would remain so any addition into the rear property would not be visible from the front. In addition, the lot was currently nonconforming, the lot line adjustment would bring it into conformity, and the City would need to find a violation of the ordinance or Comprehensive Plan standard to consider denial. Member Swenson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -93, Lot Division (lot line adjustment) to shift the existing lot line that divides the properties at 5100 Ridge Road and 5101 Green Farms Road for Margaret Scholz. Member Brindle seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV.G. RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -96 ADOPTED - AUTHORIZING STAFF TO APPLY FOR A GRANT FROM THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO TEAR DOWN THE OLD PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING AT 5146 EDEN AVENUE Manager Neal and Engineer Houle answered questions of the Council relating to the grant application and costs to demolish the old Public Works building. Mr. Houle indicated that once the building was demolished, the site would be restored to prevent erosion and might be used for temporary parking during the 501h and France road project. Mr. Neal explained the future use for this site had not yet been determined but would be part of a greater redevelopment plan ultimately presented to the City Council. Page 2 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 Member Brindle introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2012 -96, authorizing staff to apply for a grant from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development to tear down the old Public Works Building at 5146 Eden Avenue. Member Bennett seconded the motion. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague,`Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IV.L RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -98 — TABLED — FINDINGS AND DECISION REGARDING VALLEY VIEW ROAD AND SALLY LANE The Council discussed the WSB recommendation to remove the six spruce trees and 21 arborvitae trees closest to the intersection and the determination made at the Council's December 20, 2011, meeting to support delimbing (not removing) the trees closest to the intersection. Concern was expressed that following the WSB recommendation would greatly impact the private property owner by completely exposing this corner. The Council stated its support to protect the public with a level of safety to provide clear view and also protect the private property owner to the extent possible. Member Sprague made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, tabling consideration of Resolution No. 2012 -98, findings and decision regarding Valley View Road and Sally Lane, for two weeks and directing the City Attorney to amend Section 3 to reflect intent as determined on December 20, 2011. Mr. Houle advised there were six spruce trees on the east side and the lilac bushes on the west side were also an issue. Member Sprague made a substitute motion, seconded by Member Brindle, tabling consideration of Resolution No. 2012 -98, findings and decision regarding Valley View Road and Sally Lane, for two weeks and directing the City Attorney to amend Section 3 to reflect intent as determined on December 20, 2011, to delimb, up to a height of eight feet, the six spruce trees adjacent to the intersection on the east side at 7025 Sally Lane and removal of the three lilac bushes on the west side of the intersection at 7028 Sally Lane. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. V. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS None. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS HELD - Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VI.A. NEW ON -SALE & SUNDAY SALE LIQUOR LICENSES P.F. CHANG'S CHINA BISTRO, 2700 SOUTHDALE CENTER — APPROVED City Clerk Mangen presented the request of P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc. dba P.F. Chang's China Bistro, for a new On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License and Sunday On -Sale Liquor License for the period beginning July 18, 2012, and ending March 31, 2013. Ms. Mangen indicated staff found the request complied with code requirements and satisfactory background investigation, and recommended approval. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:27 p.m. Public Testimony Katherine Becker, legal counsel for P.F. Chang's, offered to answer questions. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to approve a new On -Sale and Sunday Sale Liquor Licenses for P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc. dba P.F. Chang's China Bistro, 2700 Southdale Center, for the period beginning July 18, 2012, and ending March 31, 2013. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Page 3 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 VI.B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REGARDING BUILDING HEIGHT, PRELIMINARY REZONING FROM POD -1 TO PUD AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR 4005 WEST 65TH STREET AND 6500 FRANCE AVENUE FOR MOUNT PROPERTIES — DENIED Assistant Planner Presentation Assistant Planner Aaker presented the request of Mount Properties to tear down the existing office buildings at 4005 West 65`h Street and 6500 France Avenue to build a new six -story, 81 -foot tall, 102,406 square foot medical office /retail building with a podium height of two stories and detached five -level parking ramp. It was noted the project was proposed to be developed in two phases with the first phase construction of a four -story, 69,456 square foot medical office with a three -level detached parking ramp and the second phase construction of two levels to each structure. The site was located in a "Potential Area of Change" within the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Aaker described the approval process and indicated the Council was being asked to determine if a Small Area Plan was needed prior to rezoning. She concluded presentation of the application and enumerated the considerations before the Council. Ms. Aaker advised the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that a Small Area Plan was not needed in this case since the proposed use was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and recommended approval subject to conditions as detailed in the staff report. Proponent Presentation Luigi Bernardi, Aurora Investments, stated they were excited about this project and hoped it would be approved by the Council. Stephen Michals, Mount Development Company, commented on the review process and stated agreement with the staff report and recommendation. He noted this was a gateway location to the Southdale area, valuable land, and deserved a high profile building. Mr. Michals stated the adjacent land was purchased to provide better circulation, created relatively small floor plates on the sixth level building, and noted the five adjacent buildings were equal or greater in height as certified by Alliant Technologies. Edward Farr, Farr Architects, presented features of the site and landscaping plans as well as exterior building and parking structure elements. He advised that depending on the tenant mix, the fifth level of the parking structure might not be constructed. Mr. Farr indicated that phase one would be 54 feet in height to the cornice line. The phase two build out would have six stories and be about 1.5 floors above the tree line. Mr. Farr displayed and described the exterior building materials board. . With regard to the height of Cornelia Place, Mr. Michals explained the view depicted in packet materials dated July 6 were taken from the curb line on Valley. "°°v•• se there ti•g° feet diffeFenee from 90 ^• ° ^° t° " °Iley Vi The Council discussed the proposed project and asked questions of the proponents. Support was stated for the building design, drop off area, generous sidewalk width, corner pavilion area, proposed lighting, and upscale landscaping. Suggestions were made to assure the parking lot discouraged cut - through traffic, provide a public access off France Avenue leading to the internal corridor system, enhanced stormwater retention strategies since it was an impaired water body, and the option of a green roof. It was agreed that if approved, Metro Transit should be informed of the need for a stop at this location. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m. Public Testimony Marilyn Kemme, 6566 France Avenue S., #1206, Point of France Association Board President, addressed the Council. John Windhorst, 6566 France Avenue S, #204, Point of France Association Board Member and Legal Chair, addressed the Council. Page 4 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 Stacy Gallup, speaking on behalf of the 6500 France building owners, addressed the Council. Peter Pustorino, 4005 West 56th Street building owner, addressed the Council. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Brindle, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Members Sprague, Swenson, and Bennett concurred that they would support a maximum building height of four stories, or 62 feet. However, they were unwilling to consider a Comp Plan amendment to allow for the proposed building height of six stories, or 81 feet in this case. Meebers-SpmgUe, Swe °^^, aAd Bennett stated SUPP90 feF the pFejeet t height ef feur steries Hem !YeF-, an unwillingness w, 4&4M. Support was also expressed to allow all parking levels to be constructed above grade to lower redevelopment costs. Member Brindle and Mayor Hovland advocated for the project as unanimously recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. That recommendation found a Small Area Plan was not needed and supported a Comprehensive Plan height amendment. It was noted adjacent buildings were taller than four stories, the proposed use was consistent with PUD to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design, and density was needed to accommodate high land costs. Mr. Michals explained that additional tenants would be required to trigger Phase 2 and due to the high land cost, the project was not feasible unless approved for six stories. Mr. Michals stated the project needed 102,000 feet floor to area ratio at 1.0 or else the high land costs could not be absorbed into the project. He noted the proponent had been forthright on that perspective from the beginning. Motion by Member Sprague, seconded by Member Swenson, directing staff to prepare a resolution, with the City Attorney's assistance, with findings for denial of the Comprehensive Plan amendment requested by Mount Properties. Ayes: Bennett, Sprague, Swenson Nays: Brindle, Hovland Motion carried. Motion by Member Sprague, seconded by Member Swenson, directing staff to prepare a resolution, with the City Attorney's assistance, with findings for denial of the Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan requested by Mount Properties. Ayes: Bennett, Sprague, Swenson Nays: Brindle, Hovland Motion carried. VI.C. AGREEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING WITH DRIVE FOR THE HIVE, LLC —APPROVED Director of Parks Presentation Director of Parks and Recreation OKeprios presented the Hornets Nest Agreement creating a public - private partnership for an estimated $3 million project. The Drive would donate $750,000 cash plus 25% of additional costs above $3 million. The City would contribute $2,250,000 plus 75% of additional costs above $3 million. The project would be a 26,450 sq. ft. addition to the north side of West Arena, lower level locker rooms, with a training facility and retail on the upper level. He displayed concept drawings and reviewed the terms of the agreement, noting it would be conditioned on the following: the City receiving the full amount of the donation promised a $750,000 denatien from the Drive; finalization of a facilities use agreement with the School District an agFeement %vith the Se- DiStricT a $20 per participant per year Page 5 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 surcharge from the Edina Hockey Association and the Braemar City of Lakes Figure Skating Club (BCLFSC) for the life of the bonds; securing two commercial tenants, with lease agreements to be negotiated by the City Manager and approved by the City Council,seGUFiRg twe leases. the Drive se"Gitin , tenant. lease ents F,,.., getiatieR by the City ManageF and a ,al by the City Gewneil; the City securing permits, licenses, survey, soil tests and other entitlements; the City reserving all naming rights; the City controlling all vending machine rights; the City controlling all branding decisions with the Drive selling some interior space naming rights; the City controlling interior and exterior signage; and, any non - expended funds donated by the Drive would be returned to the Drive. Mr. Keprios stated the City would reserve its right to cancel the project for any reason. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:25 p.m. Public Testimony Brian Hedberg, representing the BCLFSC, addressed the Council. Dana Anderson, 6712 West Trail, addressed the Council. Erik Anderson, 6501 Indian Hills Road, representing Drive for the Hive, indicated this nonprofit organization had not set an active role beyond construction, but were open to helping in any way needed. He advised that $800,000 in contributions had been pledged with $500,000 in the bank, an additional $150,000 would be wired tomorrow, and remaining pledges would be contributed following Council approval bFeught sheFtly theFe,f+e. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Sprague, to close the public hearing. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. i. AGREEMENT WITH DRIVE FOR THE HIVE, LLC - APPROVED ii. FACILITIES USE AGREEMENT FOR BRAEMAR ARENA WITH EDINA SCHOOL DISTRICT — APPROVED iii. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH RIM FOR HORNETS NEST PROJECT — AWARDED IV. TWO COMMERCIAL TENANT LEASES FOR HORNETS NEST — APPROVED V. ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SR ARCHITECTS — APPROVED Vi. CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT WITH ERIK ANDERSON — AUTHORIZED Mr. Keprios presented the terms for each of the requested approvals and eight recommended conditions of approval. The Council asked questions of Manager Neal, Director Keprios, and Mr. Anderson relating to the proposed agreements and commercial tenant leases with General Sports and Velocity Hockey. With regard to the option of a personal guarantee, Mr. Neal stated the debt was being secured via monetization of the leases and it would be difficult to propose such a guarantee at this point. Mr. Keprios advised that eight competitive bids were received for the construction project and the low bid of RJM Construction at $3,647,000 was 14% higher than the estimate. He reviewed the value engineering items equaling approximately $459,500 identified by the project architect and engineers to reduce project construction costs. Mr. Keprios presented a financial summary of the project showing a total project cost of $3,650,300, Drive for the Hive contribution of $795,707, leaving $2,854,593 to be bonded. It was noted the estimated annual revenue of $181,475 would cover bond payments and provide a positive cash flow. Mr. Keprios indicated the additional projects (ADA pathway, railing, lobby expansion) were not part of the Hornets Nest project and needed to be bid; however, staff recommended those projects be included in this bonding. Staff recommended approval of the agreements and to authorize the sale of bonds for the Hornets Nest project and Braemar Arena project for $2,854,593 plus cost of bonds. Mr. Neal indicated it was proposed for the City to pay 75% of costs over $3 million and the Drive to pay 25% because the City was paying 75% of the project cost; it mirrored the same ratio. The Council reviewed the Page 6 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 construction bid and value engineering that could be realized by making several changes including the type of HVAC unit to a rooftop system. Erik Anderson stated he was comfortable with the value engineering items and advised that all contractors that bid were reputable and experienced. Mr. Neal reviewed his experience with RJM and indicated he would give them a high recommendation. The Council concurred there would have been benefit with a personal guarantee to lower the City's risk; however, agreed it should have been negotiated at the start of the process. Erik Anderson noted the Edina Hockey Association had committed to rent the training facility, which was 77% of the second floor, but was unable to enter into a long -term contract due to the nature of its organization. He stated the Drive was deliberate in its selection of the training facility operators to assure a long and successful operating history. The Council asked questions of iBraemar Arena General Manager Susie Miller relating to the BCLFSC lease and suggested it be worded to identify the spaces intended. Mr. Keprios displayed a slide that identified revenue sources and advised that General Manager Miller had indicated the Arena would be able to sell an estimated $30,000 in additional ice time sales. That figure had not been included in projections. Mr. Neal stated staff met with financial advisors and put together a debt service schedule in sync with the lease agreements and mirrored in the debt service agreement. He explained that should there be a shortfall, the City had the benefit of Edina law that allowed pooling revenues of recreation enterprises so it need not be a direct charge on the taxpayers. Member Brindle made a motion, seconded by Member Swenson, approving the following: agreement with Drive for The Hive, LLC; facilities use agreement for Braemar Arena with Edina School District; award of bid to RJM Construction at $3,647,000; two commercial tenant leases; authorize City Manager to negotiate architect /engineering contract with SR Architects; authorize owners representative agreement with Erik Anderson as construction advisor; and, authorize the sale of bonds for the Hornets Nest project and Braemar Arena project (including ADA pathway, railing, lobby expansion projects) for $2,854,593 plus cost of bonds, contingent upon receipt of $795,707 from Drive for the Hive before agreements were signed and bid awarded. In response to Council's questions, Mr. Keprios indicated the proposed placement of the Hornets Nest would not interfere with the location of a sports dome based on staff's recommendation. The Council agreed that a level of comfort would have been gained by negotiating a personal guarantee off long -term leases to secure the debt; however, the $750,000 in contributions would defray costs for this $3 million project and cushion the risk. In addition, both commercial lease tenants were known quantities. Member Bennett asked Erik Anderson to provide to the Council a copy of the National Parks Association policy he had cited on operation of private businesses in national parks 'EFik Andersen ... asked to PFGV;de narks and public r Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Vll. COMMUNITY COMMENT Katherine Bergren, 3501 Normandy Hills Circle, Greensborough, North Carolina, addressed the Council and requested City assistance related to a sewer back up at her mother's home at 5844 Brookview Avenue. VIII. REPORTS / RECOMMENDATIONS VIII.A. ORDINANCE NO. 2012-13 REPEALING CABLE TELEVISION REGULATOR ORDINANCE— ADOPTED Brian Grogan, Moss & Barnett, representing the Southwest Cable Commission, reviewed the history of the cable franchise process, findings of the consultant's report, and key provisions of the 10 -year franchise document. Mr. Grogan stated it was the recommendation of the Southwest Cable Commission to approve the new cable franchise, granting a 10 -year nonexclusive franchise to Comcast, and repeal the existing regulator ordinance since those provisions were now incorporated into the new cable franchise. The Council expressed its concern with the impact of Comcast closing its Eden Prairie studio and loss of the public's ability to create programming in a non - government owned facility. Mr. Grogan explained the law Page 7 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 had changed since the last franchise agreement and the City could no longer require Comcast to staff a studio. Under the terms of the proposed agreement, a Comcast studio would not be provided. However, the five member cities (Edina, Hopkins, Richfield, Minnetonka and Eden Prairie) would receive a pool of capital, two and one half times the amount previously collected, and each could make a determination whether or not to use those funds to construct /provide a studio. Mr. Grogan advised that in 2009, about 1,000 programs were put on the public access channel and of those, about 800 were produced outside the Comcast studio. Out of 205,000 residents and 57,500 cable subscribers in the five member cities, there were only 13 users. He noted that programming could still be submitted for playback. It was noted that lower use might be a result of the antiquated studio facility /equipment and it was not possible to determine how many viewed the programming provided by those 13 users. With regard to control of content, Mr. Grogan noted Comcast was not a non - profit entity and also had an interest in not broadcasting controversial content. Communications Director Bennerotte stated Edina had operated a successful government channel without a studio and she had never received a call of complaint from the public about the Comcast studio's equipment. She noted there might be an option to partner with Edina Public Schools for use of the high school's Bloom Studio; however, it was not conducive for public access during normal business hours. The Council noted there might also be opportunity to partner with the Minneapolis Media Institute. Questions were asked of Mr. Grogan relating to contract provisions for enforcement to assure customer service and desire to assure customers received technology upgrades from Comcast. Mr. Neal, one of Edina's two members on the SWCC, stated his support for the recommendation of the Southwest Cable Commission. Mr. Grogan recommended the Council act on the cable television franchise prior to considering repeal of the cable television regulator ordinance. VIII.B. ORDINANCE NO. 2012 —14 GRANTING A CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISE TO COMCAST — ADOPTED Member Swenson made a motion to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2012- 14 granting a franchise to Comcast of Arkansas / Florida / Louisiana / Minnesota / Mississippi / Tennessee, Inc. (Grantee" or "Comcast ") to construct, operate, and maintain a cable system in the City of Edina; Minnesota, setting forth conditions accompanying the grant of the franchise; providing for regulation and use of the system and the public rights -of -way; and prescribing penalties for the violation of the provisions herein. Member Sprague seconded the motion. Member Bennett stated she would support the motion with the intention the City would follow up on options for a public access studio and would advocate for resident customers by employing enforcement options in the franchise agreement to prevent or address poor customer service. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. Member Sprague made a motion to grant First and waive Second Reading adopting Ordinance No. 2012- 13 renewing the grant of a franchise to Comcast of Arkansas / Florida / Louisiana / Minnesota / Mississippi / Tennessee, Inc. (Grantee" or "Comcast") to operate and maintain a cable system in the City of Edina; setting forth conditions accompanying the grant of the franchise; providing for City regulation and administration of the cable system; and terminating Ordinance No. 1996 -5. Member Swenson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.C. EDINBOROUGH PARK STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS —APPROVED Page 8 r Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 Mr. Neal introduced the item and indicated a consultant report of Edinborough Park had been conducted and a proposal with direction created for the Council's consideration. Assistant Park and Recreation Director Ann Kattreh presented the history of the Edinborough Park Study and findings prepared by ATS &R and Ballard King. She described components of Option A, Option B recommended by the consultant, and Option C. Ms. Kattreh indicated that legal staff reviewed the Edinborough Association contracts and advised the City had the ability to make changes to the facility without losing association fees; however, there was a 30 -year limit on the public - private contract relating to fees. The 30 -year contract would not renew upon expiration and the City would then lose those association fees. Ms. Kattreh explained legal staff drafted a contract addendum that would renew townhomes for an additional seven years. Staff met with association representatives and received a favorable response from all four. Assistant Finance Director Roggeman explained that it was difficult to determine financial projections because assumptions had to be made but was still a useful exercise to show trajectory and provide a comparison with each option using the same assumptions with each. Mr. Roggeman presented the baseline scenario and financial projections for Options A, B, and C. The Council discussed the financial projections and asked questions of staff. With regard to rentals for weddings or other receptions, Ms. Kattreh indicated those functions were dropped because it required the great hall to be closed from noon on Friday until noon on Sunday; however, that revenue was made up from the six birthday party sites. Ms. Kattreh advised of her research on lighting options that were more efficient and still provided lighting levels necessary to sustain plant life. She then displayed slides of the grotto area and architectural diagrams of how it would appear if filled. Ms. Kattreh completed presentation of options for covering the operating losses through the Liquor Fund, CIP through the Construction Fund, or to raise taxes. She agreed there were no easy choices and it could impact funding for other enterprise facilities. Senior Recreational Facility Manager Susan Faus presented marketing plan goals for the pool and playpark and described how awareness could be increased through marketing and promotion. The Council discussed the potential partnership with the Edina Swim Club (ESC) that would result in revenues of $53,000 for a 43 -week season. and potential to keep the peel open afteF 9 p.Fn. t^ lessen impact t^ publiG aecess. Member Bennett asked that if the ESC were granted exclusive use of the pool from 3:30 to 8:30 p.m. Monday through Friday, consideration be given to keeping the pool open later than 9 p.m. to lessen the reduction of public access. Ms. Kattreh indicated there had been some past issues relating to scheduling that were resolved following a meeting between the two groups. Brad Gray, 6005 Girard Avenue South, representing the ESC, indicated the ESC was pleased to be the official swim club of Edina. He reviewed the terms of their proposal to use the Edinborough pool as the primary practice pool with the exception of elite swimmers that use the University of Minnesota pool. He noted that since ESC had an extensive coaching program, it might be able to offer programs through the City's park program that were not currently available. In addition, its 300+ member club was focused on being good community members. Mr. Gray stated the ESC had the financial ability to offer a long -term commitment with a guaranteed amount and hoped it was approved so the ESC could grow its program with Edina residents. The Council and Ms. Kattreh reviewed the history of Centennial Lakes properties not paying for use of Edinborough Park facilities. Following discussion, the Council agreed with the need to review all association arrangements in terms of current costs and negotiate agreement with the Centennial Lakes residents /properties to provide financial input to use the facilities. It was clarified that Centennial Lakes Page 9 Minutes /Edina City Council /July 17, 2012 residents do pay an association fee 'that was directed towards Centennial Lakes Park instead of Edinborough Park. The Council concurred with the need to eliminate cost centers to stabilize financial losses and support was expressed to consider Edinborough Park projects that would not require large capital investment such as renovating the lighting, removal of overgrown trees, filling the grotto, and keeping the pool and fitness facility so the City could enter into a contract with the ESC. Ms. Kattreh agreed the largest cost was renovation of the locker rooms and that was scheduled for 2014. The pool resurfacing project was moved out a year or two in the CIP and would not preclude entering a contract with the ESC. She presented cost estimates for the proposed projects. It was acknowledged that the City currently had less money to fund this facility and it was a reality there might be a need to consider the Liquor Fund, Construction Fund, or to increase taxes. The Council and Ms. Kattreh reviewed the history of association fees paid by Centennial Lakes residents. It was clarified that those fees are directed toward Centennial Lakes Park, but entitled residents to use Edinborough Park because Centennial Lakes Park had not been built when the fee agreements were made. The Council agreed there is need to review all association agreements, considering current costs, user fees, and amount of free public access. The Geuncil neted the .,RiRtend-„a consequence ef sepaFating the Centennial Lakes Fund -amd- r-ad-iRbeFOUgh Fund aAd eMphas;Zed the fae+i+t+es. Member Swenson made a motion, seconded by Member Bennett, accepting the Edinborough Park Study recommendations as revised to keep the pool and fitness facility; remove approximately 38 large trees in the Park; renovate the lighting system to significantly improve energy efficiency and reduce energy costs; reduce staffing levels needed for horticultural maintenance; fill in the lower level of the grotto; increase the pool /track and playpark daily admission rate by $1.07 /person and increase the ten admissions pass by $10.73; increase the weekend Adventure Package birthday party rate from $139.46 to $151.19 and the weekday Peak Package birthday rate from $85.82 to $96.55; and, directing staff to negotiate association fees. Ayes: Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, Swenson, Hovland Motion carried. IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — Mayor Hovland acknowledged the Council's receipt of various correspondence. X. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS — Received Xl. MANAGER'S COMMENTS — Received X11. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Hovland declared the meeting adjourned at 1:20 am. Respectfully submitted, Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, August 6, 2012. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the July 17, 2012, meeting available. Page 10 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/19/2012 — 7/1912012 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361318 7/1912012 124613 ABM JANITORIAL - NORTH CENTRAL 2,782.41 JULY 2012 SERVICE 292161 4059505 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,782.4.1 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 1 Business Unit CITY HALL GENERAL 361319 7/1912012 103173 ACCOUNTEMPS . 918.84 UB TEMP 292465 35887510 5910.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL (BILLING) 918.84 361320 7119/2012 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY - 14.00 292378 1588689 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING - 106.80 292591 1591526 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 'VERNON SELLING 58.80 292592 1591527 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS`SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 179.60 - 361321 711912012 V 104710 ADAMS, MARK 100.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/23112 292151 070112 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 100.00 .. 361322 7119/2012 102626 = AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES 317.47 CHEMICALS 292466 703601240 5311.6545 CHEMICALS POOL OPERATION 317.47 361323 711912.012 129630 AIAFS 170.00 TRAINING CONFERENCE 292219 070912 1400.6104 CONFERENCES 8� SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 170.00 361324 711912012 - 105262 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC_ . 112.50 COMPRESSOR, MAINTENANCE 292360 22004 1470.6180 -, CONTRACTED REPAIRS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 112.50 ' 361325 711912012 130090 .. ALLIANT ENGINEERING INC. 12,279.97 BIKE BLVD DESIGN 292326 53293 01238.1705.20 CONSULTING`DESIGN A -238 TRANSIT LIVABLE COMM TLC 12,279.97 . 361326 711912012 127365' AMERICANFLEETSUPPLY 61.18 ; ANTIFREEZE 00005398; 292278 AFS- 221920055 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 61.18 _j t 361327 711912012 126410 ANIMAL HUMANE SOCIETY 90.00 SAFETY CAMP PROGRAM 292467 080112 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES _ PLAYGROUND & THEATER r i 90.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/1812012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 2 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361326 711912012 100595 ANOKA COUNTY 200.00 OUT OF COUNTY WARRANT 292327 071012 1000.2055 DUE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET 200.00 361329 7/1912012 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 1,442.07 FOOD 292162 1763485 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 326.99 CONCESSION PRODUCT 292220 1760833 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 33.00 TOSTADA CHIPS 292221 1761192 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 1,802.06 361330 711912012 102646 AQUA LOGIC INC. 524.81 MURIATIC ACID, SOD BICARBONATE 292468 39216 5330.6545 CHEMICALS FLOWRIDER 902.31 REPAIRS TO BROKEN PIPE 292469 39235 5311.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS POOL OPERATION 3,422.86 INSTALL SWITCH OVER SYSTEM 292470 39230 5330.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS FLOWRIDER 21,739.27 FLOW RIDER CONSTRUCTION 292471 APPL NO. 5 5300.1715 LAND IMPROVEMENTS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET 26,589.25 361331 711912012 100634 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. 2,651.57 TOMMYGATE 00005456 292328 10099963 1553.6585 ACCESSORIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 18,878.40 TRUCK EQUIPMENT PACKAGE 00006138 292472 10101627 5400.1740 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENT GOLF BALANCE SHEET 21,529.97 361332 7/19/2012 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS 209.75 WASTE DISPOSAL 292222 1- 14635 4 -7812 7411.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL PSTF OCCUPANCY 209.75 361333 711912012 120995 AVR INC. 872.10 READY MIX 00005242 292206 63189 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 955.46 292207 63259 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 844.31 292208 63670 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 1,122.19 292209 63891 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 844.31 292210 64077 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 955.46 292211 64135 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 1,688.63 292212 64472 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 1,327.39 292213 64553 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 519.41 292214 64692 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 538.65 292215 64779 5932.6520 CONCRETE GENERAL STORM SEWER 9,667.91 361334 7119/2012 100638 BACHMAN'S 500.70 SHRUBS 00006255 292473 39546/1 5422.6541 PLANTINGS & TREES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 500.70 CITY OF EDINA • 7/18/2012-. 8:31:23 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 3- 7/19/2012 — 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361335 7119120.12 129624 - BARNA GUZY & STEFFEN LTD 1,536.00 CONTRACT CONSULTING -.. 292569 102092 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 1,536.00 361336 711912012. 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO. 4,978.95 WATER RESOURCES MGMT 292329 23271072.00 -24 5932.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL STORM SEWER 4,978.95,; 361337 711912012 102195, BATTERIES PLUS 36.66 EARMUFF BATTERIES 292223 020 - 249290 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE - 36.66 361338 711912012 100646 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC. 922.98 ARENA GLASS 292474 00089515 5521.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ICE MAINT 922.98 361339 7119/2012 117379 BENIEK PRO_ PERTY SERVICES INC. 675.18 LAWN CARE 292224 139482 7411.6136 SNOW & LAWN CARE PSTF OCCUPANCY 675.18 361340 7119/2012 129208 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN PLUMBING 2,760.00 SEWER/WATER REPAIR 0001083E 292330 A91506 05525.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK t 4,165.00 SEWER/WATER REPAIR 0001083E 292330 A91506 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 3,650.00 0001082E 292331 893095 05525.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION. RICHMOND HILLS PK 4,975.00 0001082E 292331 B93095 0347.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 2,335.00 0001084E 292332 A91504 05525.1705.21. CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 4,775.00 .0001084E 292332 A91504 034713705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION • RICHMOND HILLS. PK " 22,660.00 eh 361341 711912012 108670 BERNER, JIM" 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7 /26/12 292156 070112 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - ;OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 361342 7/1912012 ` 125139 BERNIMS WINE 616.00 292379 14314 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 616.00 - 361343 711912012 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 221.00 COFFEE 292475 1020287 5520.5510' COST OF GOODS SOLD ARENA CONCESSIONS 221.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 361344 711912012 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 7.89 NAME BADGES 292163 OE- 285886 -1 1550.6406 76.89 ENVELOPES 292164 WO- 781705 -1 1550.6406 86.94 CUSTOM STAMP 292165 IN -24474 1180.6406 30.19 CUSTOM STAMP 292166 IN -24473 1180.6406 275.91 KLEENEX, DIVIDERS 00003037 292225 WO- 782045 -1 1400.6513 199.41 OFFICE SUPPLIES 292226 0E- 290996 -1 7410.6513 123.81 OFFICE SUPPLIES 292361 OE- 290306 -1 1628.6513 801.04 361345 7/1912012 130470. BINNIE DC, DR MORGAN 2,978.00 BACK WELLNESS TRAINING 292570 070112 1470.6104 2,978.00 361346 711912012 102545 BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD OF MN 16,096.00 PREMIUM 292304 070212 1550.6043 163,073.00 PREMIUM 292305 11006 -7/12 1550.6040 179,169.00 361347 7/1912012 122688 BMK SOLUTIONS 6.28 OFFICE SUPPLIES 292167 77507 1495.6406 52.83 292168 77508 1495.6406 77.50 292169 78212 1495.6406 97.23 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00001437 292333 78446 1646.6406 4.76 WRITE -ON TABS 00001437 292334 78393 1552.6406 68.94 METAL KEY TAGS 00001437 292334 78393 1646.6406 179.31 OFFICE SUPPLIES 00003820 292362 78502 1470.6513 486.85 361348 711912012 119631 BONNER & BORHART LLP 18,473.45 PROSECUTING 292363 656.001M 1195.6103 18,473.45 361349 711912012 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 768.73 UNDERGROUND ENCLOSURE 00001411 292280 904184513 5913.6406 192.23 GENERATOR CABINET COVER 00001601 292335 904225257 1552.6406 960.96 361350 7119/2012 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 1,055.39 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003814 292364 80811488 1470.6510 52.50 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003814 292365 80812753 1470.6510 1,107.89 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page- 4 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL ELECTION ELECTION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PSTF ADMINISTRATION SENIOR CITIZENS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL COBRAINSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING BUILDING MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 5 7/19/2012 — 7/1912012 Check # Date Amount. Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Buslness Unit 361351 7119/2012 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 29.90 O -RING 00005034 292227 92387SAV 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 82.40 FILTERS 00005374 292279 649728 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 112.30 ' 361352 711912012 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 4,580.00 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION 00007146 292476 354375 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 4,580.00 :. 361353 711912012 125155 BRAUN, MICHAEL 600.00 PHOTOSHOOTS 292477 1131 1130.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC' SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS' 600.00 361354 711912012 104470. BRIDGESTONE GOLF INC. 96.00 GOLF BALLS 292571 1001992534 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 96.00 .. 361355 7119/2012 121118 BRUESKE, JEFF 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/24/12 292152 070112 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE ' 200.00 361356 7/1912012 104649 BRYAN, BILL 155.04 REIMBURSE FOR TROLLEY BEARINGS 292572 071212 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 155:04 361357 711912012 130579 BSECICAREER DAY - 100.00 CAREER DAY 2012 292228 2012 -07 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 100.00 361356 711912012 100144 - BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSIO - 1,920.00 MNJIS- . 292229> 00000033641 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 1,920.00 361359 711912012 121408 BURK, VERA 61.00 SR TRIP REFUND 292573 071212 1626.4392.07 SENIOR TRIPS SENIOR CITIZENS 61.00 361360 7/1912012 112843 C. R. FISCHER &'SONS INC. 2,925.00 DRIVEWAY REPAIR 292336 120304 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 2,925.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 6 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361361 711912012 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 239.22 MERCHANDISE 292306 923668363 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 185.40 292307 923656861 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 312.75 292308 923668402 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 798.00 MERCHANDISE 292574 923660441 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,535.37 361362 711912012 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 46.65 292380 124757 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 990.25 292381 124758 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,505.50 292382 124759 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 20.00- 292383 105387CR 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 197.00 292593 127227 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5,719.40 361363 711912012 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 205.17 292594 93685 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 205.17 361364 711912012 101516 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO. 433.60 CURE & SEAL 00005086 292281 1290671 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 433.60 00001593 292282 1290341 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 867.20 361365 711912012 100897 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 12.82 292230 070312 5821.6186 HEAT 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 22.57 292230 070312 5861.6186 HEAT VERNON OCCUPANCY 22.99 292230 070312 5422.6186 HEAT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 26.26 292230 070312 5841.6166 HEAT YORK OCCUPANCY 27.89 292230 070312 5430.6186 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 37.53 292230 070312 1481.6186 HEAT YORK FIRE STATION 45.96 292230 070312 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING 60.17 292230 070312 1628.6186 HEAT SENIOR CITIZENS 88.91 292230 070312 5761.6186 HEAT CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 101.77 292230 070312 5913.6186 HEAT DISTRIBUTION 114.88 292230 070312 5420.6186 HEAT CLUB HOUSE 173.73 292230 070312 5921.6186 HEAT SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT 204.55 292230 070312 5111.6186 HEAT ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT 283.13 292230 070312 1646.6186 HEAT BUILDING MAINTENANCE 992.38 292230 070312 5911.6186 HEAT WELL PUMPS 2,182.37 292230 070312 5511.6186 HEAT ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 4,397.91 1553.6585 5511.6511 5842.5514 5410.6122 5410.6122 1120.6103 1600.6107 5511.6188 5710.6105 5420.6188 ACCESSORIES CLEANING SUPPLIES 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 7 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 1,718.46 CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 361367 711912012 129845 CERTIFIED LABORATORIES Council Check Register 130.17 GLUE 00005283 292233 770917 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doe No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 711912012 361366 711912012 123898 CENTURYLINK 19.29 651 281 -1355 B001311 292170 1311 -7/01 1400.6188 TELEPHONE 122.05 952 926 -0419 292171 0419 -7/12 1646.6188 TELEPHONE 57.88 952 926 -0092 292172 0092 -7/12 5913.6188 TELEPHONE 606.52 612 E12 -6797 292231 6797 -7/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE 606.52 612 E01 -0426 292232 0426 -7/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE 201.28 952 835 -6661 292283 6661 -7/12 1552.6188 TELEPHONE 104 92 952 835 -1161 292284 1161 -7/12 5720.6188 TELEPHONE 1553.6585 5511.6511 5842.5514 5410.6122 5410.6122 1120.6103 1600.6107 5511.6188 5710.6105 5420.6188 ACCESSORIES CLEANING SUPPLIES 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 7 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE 1,718.46 361367 711912012 129845 CERTIFIED LABORATORIES 130.17 GLUE 00005283 292233 770917 130.17 361368 711912012 117187 CHEM SYSTEMS LTD 479.87 SPRAY CLEANER, DISPENSER 292478 517110 479.87 361369 711912012 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 496.45 292384 477128 496.45 361370 7119/2012 122317 CITY OF EDINA -COMMUNICATIONS 400.00 GOLF COURSE ABOUT TOWN AD 292173 COM1177 300.00 EDINA CITY MAP AD 292479 COM1169 700.00 361371 7119/2012 105693 CITYSPRINT 19.76 COURIER SERVICE 292285 26330 19.76 361372 711912012 101119 COCKRIEL, VINCE 52.17 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 292575 071312 52.17 361373 711912012 120433 COMCAST 66.95 8772 10 614 0419858 292480 419858 -7/12 90.44 8772 10 614 0220686 292481 220686 -7/12 99.80 8772 10 614 0158076 292482 158076 -7112 257.19 1553.6585 5511.6511 5842.5514 5410.6122 5410.6122 1120.6103 1600.6107 5511.6188 5710.6105 5420.6188 ACCESSORIES CLEANING SUPPLIES 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 7 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE CLUB HOUSE R55CKREG LOG20000 711912012 CITY OF F-DINA CO. Council Check Register 90,288.68 ASPHALT 00001747 7/19/2012 — 7/19/2012 063012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361374 7119/2012 120826 COMCAST SPOTLIGHT 361376 573.33 CABLE TV ADVERSTISING 292174 EDINA 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER LIQUOR -6/12 579.26 573.33 CABLE TV ADVERSTISING 292174 EDINA 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 3,809.02 UQUOR -6/12 00004324 573.34 CABLE TV ADVERSTISING 292174 EDINA 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 4,388.28 LIQUOR -6/12 361375 711912012 121066 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. 90,288.68 ASPHALT 00001747 292337 063012 1314.6518 90,288.68 361376 711912012 114283 COMPAR INC. 579.26 TOUGHBOOK FOR FIRE DEPT 00004324 292234 198295 1470.6406 3,809.02 TOUGHBOOK FOR FIRE DEPT 00004324 292235 198416 1470.6406 4,388.28 361377 711912012 123261 CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICES LL 27,573.00 CLAIM HANDLING 292576 1613966 1550.6200 27,573.00 361378 711912012 102230 COPY CHECK 129.90 TONER CARTRIDGE 00006026 292483 14400 5430.6513 129.90 361379 7/1912012 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 445.86 STAFF T- SHIRTS 292236 15102 5720.6201 445.86 361380 711912012 100699 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER 20.48 114-09855685 -4 292237 063012 7411.6406 118.57 114 - 10014090 -3 292238 6/30112 1400.6230 349.03 114 - 10014678 -5 292484 JUN302012 5311.6406 488.08 361381 711912012 104020 DALCO 393.83 FLEET CLEANER 00005441 292175 2482564 1553.6238 232.21 GRILL CLEANER, COMET BLEACH 292485 2483786 5421.6511 626.04 361382 711912012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. BLACKTOP GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES INSURANCE OFFICE SUPPLIES LAUNDRY 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page- 8 Business Unit 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING STREET RENOVATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL RICHARDS GOLF COURSE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION CAR WASH EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CLEANING SUPPLIES GRILL CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 RSSCKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 9 ` 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 3,502.30 292385 658768 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,906.60 292386 658769 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 45.30 292387 658771 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,200.00 292388 658290 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 5,618.05 292389 658770 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 12,272.25 361383 7/1912012 118063 DC MANAGEMENT & ENVIRONMENTAL 641.25 RUBBER SHEETS FOR PATCHING 292239 12 -01 -03 7412.6530 REPAIR PARTS` PSTF RANGE 641.25 361384 711912012 122135 DENFELD, SCOTT 144.30 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 292286 070512 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 144.30 361385 711912012 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 66.99 BAKERY 292176 417960 - 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 69.99 292177 417961 5421.5510 COST'OF'GOODS SOLD GRILL 97.42 292486 418223 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL. 234.40 361386 7/19/2012 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 162.25 651972955 6 651972955-6/12 5710.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION 162.25 361387 711.912012 100571 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS.:. , 793.01 PAINT 00001748 292287 802138487 1335.6532 PAINT PAVEMENT MARKINGS 793.01 361388 711912012 100737 E. H. RENNER & SONS 60,948.00 WELL #7•REHAB & UPGRADE ' 292359 000124610000 05527.1705.30. CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WELL 7 REHAB (WELL) 60,948.00 361389 7/1912012 119716 • EASTERN PACIFIC APPAREL INC.. , 52.72, MERCHANDISE 292309 .481636 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS, PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 52.72 361390 7/1912012 124503- EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC'CO. 55.80 PUMP REPAIR PARTS 00001537 292240 -09055300 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 55.80 361391 711912012 123189 EDINA LIQUOR R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 10 7/19/2012 — 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 233.20 WINE 292487 150 5421.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE GRILL REPAIR PARTS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD OFFICE SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COLLECTION SYSTEMS GRILL GOLF ADMINISTRATION ENGINEERING GENERAL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 233.20 PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 361392 7119/2012 100549 ELECTRIC PUMP INC. 249.20 CABLE KIT 00001502 292241 0047692 -IN 5921.6530 249.20 361393 711912012 117483 ENGELE, LEE 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7 /25/12 292154 070112 5760.6136 150.00 361394 7/1912012 100752 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC. 6,412.50 MH LIDS 00001668 292216 RR3291 5923.6406 6,412.50 361395 711912012 100216 FARMER BROTHERS COFFEE 512.84 COFFEE 292488 56586898 5421.5510 512.84 361396 711912012 102101 FEDEX OFFICE 50.42 SIGN 292489 062200026586 5410.6513 50.42 361397 7119/2012 120831 FIRST SCRIBE INC. 425.00 ROWAY 292338 24566 1260.6103 425.00 361398 711912012 101475 FOOTJOY 114.90 MERCHANDISE 292310 4432613 5440.5511 70.08 292311 4427392 5440.5511 1,126.51 292312 4430397 5440.5511 69.24 MERCHANDISE 292577 4440767 5440.5511 1,380.73 361399 711912012 121634 FORMS & SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA 1,154.25 THERMAL ROLLS FOR PRINTER 292242 127754 1400.6406 1,154.25 361400 7119/2012 129884 FORT DEARBORN LIFE INSURANCE C 1,958.17 AUG 2012 STD PREMIUM 292313 F018342 -7/12 1550.6200 1,958.17 REPAIR PARTS SANITARY LIFT STATION MAINT PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD OFFICE SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COLLECTION SYSTEMS GRILL GOLF ADMINISTRATION ENGINEERING GENERAL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES GENERAL SUPPLIES INSURANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page- 11 Business Unit ENGINEERING GENERAL YORK SELLING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS RICHARDS GOLF COURSE CLUB HOUSE POOL OPERATION EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS BUILDING MAINTENANCE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PSTF RANGE DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS FLOWRIDER CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 7/19/2012 - 7119/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation ` PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361401 7119/2012 106351 . FOSTER, REBECCA 46.74, CONFERENCE EXPENSE 292314 071112 1260.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 46.74 361402 711912012 125450 FRIENDS OF FIRKIN LLC • 575.00. 292595 1153 5842.5515 COST OF.GOODS SOLD MIX 575.00 / 361403 711912012 123080 GARDENVIEW GREENHOUSE 41.79 . GERANIUMS :. 00006266 292490 869304 5422.6541 PLANTINGS & TREES 41.79 - 36.1404 7119/2012 100773 GENERAL PARTS INC. 2,449.25. ICE MACHINE 00006019 292491 1312539 5430.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 2,449.25 361405 711912012 124541 GEYEN GROUP 347:34 CARPET CLEAN_ ING 00006364 292178 22078 5420.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 347.34 361406 711912012 101351 GILBERT MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS 5,672.20 BOILER REPAIRS- 292492 106469 5311.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 5,672.20 361407 711912012 101178 GOPHER 1,002.82 B BALL HOOPS 292243 8479077 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,002.82 361408 711912012 102645 GRAFFITI CONTROL SERVICES 169.93 GRAFFITI REMOVAL .00001648 292244 748 1646.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 169.93 361409 711912012 101103 GRAINGER 51.38 FANWALL, CLOCK 00002162 292245 9855857919 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 160.42 EAR PLUGS 292246 9865997366 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES, 249.84 PAINT 00001669 292247 - 9867702905 5913.6532 PAINT, ` 45.96 GLOVES 00005447-.292288 8868703290 1553.6616 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 10.90 CLEANING TOWELS ` 00002169; 292493 9863266731 5720.6511 = r. CL'•EANING, SUPPLIES _ 107.23 GLOVES 00006495 292494 9868128696 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.55 EYE WASH 00002171 292495 9867702913 5720.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 90.64 . TORQUE WRENCH -00007144 292496 9869370743 5330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 723.92 i 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page- 11 Business Unit ENGINEERING GENERAL YORK SELLING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS RICHARDS GOLF COURSE CLUB HOUSE POOL OPERATION EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS BUILDING MAINTENANCE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PSTF RANGE DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS FLOWRIDER R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7118/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 12 7/19/2012 — 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO #. Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361410 7119/2012 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 478.75 292390 141496 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 418.75 292596 141499 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 897.50 361411 7119/2012 100783 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO. INC. 265.44 STARTER 00001616 292497 961149998 5420.6530 REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE 265.44 361412 711912012 102125 GREG LESSMAN SALES 233.70 TEES 292315 47401 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 233.70 361413 711912012 130587 GROTE, DARCY 100.00 PARTIAL DEPOSIT REFUND 292578 071212 5401.4553 CLUBHOUSE GOLF REVENUES 100.00 361414 711912012 120227 HARTSHORN, BOB 332.91 EMBROIDERED SOFTBALL CAPS 292366 071212 1628.4392.03 - SENIOR SOFTBALL SENIOR CITIZENS 332.91 361416 711912012 101265 HASLER INC. 188.27 POSTAGE MACHINE RENTAL 292248 15727385 1400.6. 235 POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 188.27 361416 711912012 100797 HAWKINS INC. 2,164.37 CHLORINE, CAUSTIC SODA 292498 3357787 5311.6545 CHEMICALS POOL OPERATION 2,164.37 361417 711912012 122093 HEALTH PARTNERS 936.74 PREMIUM 292367 40854619 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 12,083.68 PREMIUM 292368 40857032 1550.6040 HOSPITALIZATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 13,020.42 361418 711912012 123072 HEALTH PARTNERS 505.63 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 292579 ANISA OSMAN 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 505.63 361419 7/1912012 101209 HEIMARK FOODS 153.12 BEEF PATTIES 292179 023977 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 153.12 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 _ R55CKREG LOG20000 - Council Check Register Page - 13 7/19/2012 — 7/1912012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account. No Subledger Account Description _ . Business Unit 361420 711912012 106436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 160.31 BUNDLED SERVICE 292180 1000017864 1190.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS ASSESSING - _ 160.31 361421 7/1912012 103838 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE 806.80 POC -PAT TESTING -r. 292369 00265147 1470.6103 PROFESSIONAL'SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL = 806.80 361422 711912012. 130.586 HENTHORN, TERRY 45.00 PARKING PERMIT REFUND 292580 071312 4090.4751 PARKING PERMITS 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 45.00 361423 711912012 116680 HEWLETT- PACKARD COMPANY 163.36 PRINTER 00004344 292249 51427874 5430.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 163.36 361424 7119/2012 103753 HILLYARD INC; MINNEAPOLIS 144.45 MOPS 00002168 292250 600288986 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 316.91 DISINFECTANT CLEANER, SCRAPERS002167 292251 600288985 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 461.36 -- 361426 7/19/2012 100805 HIRSHFIELD'S° 335.35 PAINT, BRUSHES 292252 03014728 5720.6532 PAINT EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 335.35 - 361426 711912012 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 1,605.50 292391 608160 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,605.50 361427 711912012 102044 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP INC. - . 1,394.30 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES 292499 011- 059 -16 47078.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT COUNTRYSIDE PK PLAYGROUND &PATH 1,394.30 361428 711912012 112528 ICEE COMPANY, THE . _ 111.32 CUPS AND LIDS 292253 .111416 _ 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 1,533.41 `292500 -' 1821.508 5320.5510. COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 361429 '711912012 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. - 97.53 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001649 292254 717730 1643.6530 REPAIR PARTS GENERAL TURF CARE 97.53 - R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 361430 7119/2012 124290 INTL CHEMTEX CORP 120.93 CHEMFLOC 00001310 292370 12208 1470.6406 327.14 LOOPGUARD 00001310 292370 12208 7411.6406 448.07 361431 711912012 102640 I PMA -HR 904.78 FF ENTRANCE TESTS 292371 24182069 1470.6103 904.78 361432 711912012 125031 J.S. PALUCH COMPANY INC. 87.62 ST PATRICK CHURCH AD 292501 ACCT1225394 5410.6122 87.62 361433 711912012 102157 JEFF ELLIS & ASSOCIATES INC. 825.00 JULY AUDIT 292255 20055239 5310.6103 825.00 361434 7/1912012 130585 JENSEN, PAUL 635.79 REIMBURSE FOR WINDOW 292581 070912 5430.6180 635.79 361436 7119/2012 102146 JESSEN PRESS 7,680.00 ABOUT TOWN PRINTING 292502 33349 1130.6123 7,680.00 361436 711912012 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 673.85 JULY 4TH TOILET SERVICE 00001651 292339 55117 1627.6103 673.85 361437 7/1912012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 134.20 292392 1849432 5842.5515 39.00 292393 1849433 5842.5513 9,153.15 292394 1849431 5842.5514 41.80 292395 1849421 5862.5515 140.30 292396 1819975 5822.5515 4,467.08 292397 1819990 5842.5514 115.50 292503 1854148 5421.5514 14,091.03 361438 711912012 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 502.55 ROUNDUP, SPREADER STICKER 00001532 292289 61758183 1365.6406 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 14 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PSTF OCCUPANCY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POOL ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTED REPAIRS RICHARDS GOLF COURSE MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OR GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING GRILL SIDEWALKS & PATH MAINTENANCE 361440 711912012 361441 711912012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. CITY OF EDINA 110.24 7/18/2012 8:31:23 R55CKREG LOG20000 - 3.36 292399 1341309 5862.5512 10,047.03 292400 1341326 Council Check Register 718,21 Page - 15 1341328 5862.5512 106.36 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 1341331 5862.5515 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 82.13 .IRRIGATION PARTS 00001633 292340 61904496 1643.6530 REPAIR PARTS GENERAL TURF CARE 320.63 TRACKER 00006254 292504 61826266 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE 8 GROUNDS - 1,537.97. FUNGICIDE 00006491 292505 61709737 5431.6545 CHEMICALS RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 2,443.28 292409 539313 5862.5513 1,687.98 292597 361440 711912012 361441 711912012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 110.24 292398 1341329 5862.5512. 3.36 292399 1341309 5862.5512 10,047.03 292400 1341326 5862.5512 718,21 292401 1341328 5862.5512 106.36 292402 1341331 5862.5515 264.58 292403 1341332 5862.5512 430.85 292404 1341325 5862.5512 2,251.50 292405 1341327 5862.5513 1,757.59 292406 1341330 5862.5513 2,384.76 292407 1341324 5862.5513 96.37T 292408 539312 5862.5513 33.12- 292409 539313 5862.5513 1,687.98 292597 1341314 5842.5513, 26,99 292598 1341311 .5822.5513 1,194.33 292599 1341320 5842.5513 1,440.56 .. 292600 1341307 5822.5512 84.68 - 292601 1341312 5822.5512 99.94 292602 1341303 5822.5512 '367.75 292603 1341306 5822.5512 452.00 292604 1341310 5822.5513 680:39 292605 1341305 5822.5513 428.78 292606 1341304 5822.5513 138.85 292607 1341323 5842.5514 4.86 292608 1341308 5842.5512 16,751.28 292.609 1341315 5842.5512' 1,161.20 292610 1341302- 5842.5512 99.94 292611 1341313 5842.5512 ' 35.37 292612 1341316 5842.5515 1,433.29 292613 1341318 5842.5512 110,24 292614 1341319 5842.5512 41213 292615 1341322 5842.5512 3,229.63 292616. 1341317 5842.5513 47,779.20_ 103230 JOHNSTONS SALES S SERVICE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS,SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS'SOLD LIQUOR COST,OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE . COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS_SOLD.LI000R COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE - COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST'OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY. OF LLANA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 16 7/19/2012 — 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 53.53 VACUUM BAGS 292372 2691 5862.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING 98.22 VACUUM BAGS, HOSES 292506 2695 5420.6530 REPAIR PARTS CLUB HOUSE 151.75 361442 711912012 111018 KEEPRS INC. 490.56 GLOCK TRAINING GUN 00003035 292256 191912 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 490.56 361443 7119/2012 124002 KIMLEY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 1,482.71 50TH & FRANCE RAMP DESIGN 292341 4831578 44008.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN P21 50TH &FRANCE CENTER RAMP 1,482.71 361444 7/1912012 100198 KIRCHMAN, STEVE A. 118.22 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 292316 071012 1495.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE INSPECTIONS 118.22 361445 7119/2012 130577 KUK SOOL WON 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/30/12 292158 070112 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 361446 711912012 116776 KUSTOM KARRIERS 180.56 DWI TOW 292317 071112 2340.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DWI FORFEITURE 180.56 361447 711912012 103271 LAKE RESTORATION INC. 12,160.00 WEED CONTROL IN LAKES & PONDS0001906 292257 93235 5933.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PONDS & LAKES 4,823.15 DNR PERMIT FEE, MAILINGS 00001647 292258 93236 5933.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PONDS & LAKES 16,983.15 361448 7/1912012 118660 LAKES AREA HOME IMPROVEMENT SE 198.00 FAUCET REPAIR 292342 16515 05526.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION TRACY AVE 198.00 361449 711912012 127146 LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES INC. 53.85 PLAYGROUND REPAIR PARTS 00001627 292181 CI2371 1647.6530 REPAIR PARTS PATHS & HARD SURFACE 53.85 361450 7119/2012 100854 LEITNER COMPANY 640.74 SAND 292507 207391 5422.6517 SAND GRAVEL & ROCK MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 428.14 TOPSOIL 292508 207393 5422.6543 SOD & BLACK DIRT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,068.88 R55CKREG LOG20000 263.97 AMBULANCE FEES CITY OF EDINA 361453 711912012 ADMINISTRATION 102722 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY Council Check Register GENERAL-SUPPLIES 302.30 EVIDENCE SUPPLIES 292260 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 ' Check # Date Amount- Supplier /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 361451 711912012 101792 LUBE -TECH . 624.64 OIL 00006259 292509 2069915 5422.6406 ' 624.64 361452 7119120.12 101453 LUTZ, RICHARD.M..." 26397 UNIFORM PURCHASE 292259 070912. 1400.6203 1400.6406 1553.6530 1470.4329 1120.4314 5710.6230 5410.6406 1552.6406 5422.6406 1642.6406 1550.6230 1495.6103 421495.6710 Subledger Account - Description GENERAL-SUPPLIES UNIFORM ALLOWANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 17 Business Unit MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS POLICE DEPT. GENFRAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 263.97 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 361453 711912012 ADMINISTRATION 102722 LYNN PEAVEY COMPANY EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION GENERAL-SUPPLIES 302.30 EVIDENCE SUPPLIES 292260 259551 GENERAL SUPPLIES 302.30 361454 711912012 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. 383.34 FAN ENGINE, SPACERS 00005370 292510 2123831 383.34 361465 7119/2012 123361 MAGNUSON, ANETA 1,595.50 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 292582 071212" 1,595.50 361456 711912012 123858. MCCORMICK & SCHMICK'S 5,474.06 REFUND 292290 071012 5,474.06 361457 711912012 125941. MCQUAY INTERNATIONAL - 1,504.00 INSPECTION CONTRACT 292511 55734 1,504.00` 361458 711912012 101483 -. MENARDS .. 18.40 PAINT, TRIM 00006025 292182 93295 26.71 MELAMINE 00001595 292343. 87012 42.32 TRELLIS, PERENNIALS 00006239 292512 85497 87.43 361459 711912012 101891 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY 119.59 FIELD RAKES 00001628 292344 142392 119.59 361460 7/1912012 100885 METRO SALES INC 3,841.00 COPIER USAGE 292183 466330 522.00 COPIER USAGE 292373 465067 15,372.90. RICOH COPIER 00004010 292374 17923A 1400.6406 1553.6530 1470.4329 1120.4314 5710.6230 5410.6406 1552.6406 5422.6406 1642.6406 1550.6230 1495.6103 421495.6710 Subledger Account - Description GENERAL-SUPPLIES UNIFORM ALLOWANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 17 Business Unit MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS POLICE DEPT. GENFRAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT INSPECTIONS EQUIPMENT AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL INVESTIGATION FEE ADMINISTRATION SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION GENERAL-SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES FIELD MAINTENANCE SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT INSPECTIONS EQUIPMENT R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 18 7119/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explenatlon PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 864.16 COPIER USAGE 292513 467352 5410.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF ADMINISTRATION 20,600.06 361461 7/1912012 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAI 23.25 SWITCH 00005361 292184 480761 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 23.25 361462 7119/2012 104650 MICRO CENTER 211.57 LAPTOP ACCESSORIES 00004355 292261 3962873 421260.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT 211.57 361463 711912012 101542 MILTONA TURF PRODUCTS 177.81 TURFJECTOR 00006498 292514 211018 5431.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 177.81 361464 711912012 102582 MINN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 90.00 CERTIFICATION - J SCHWEITZER 292185 070912 1495.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS INSPECTIONS 90.00 361465 7/1912012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 3,250.00 SEWER PIPE REPAIR 0001081E 292345 34120 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 4,800.00 SEWER LINE REPAIR 0001077E 292346 34116 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 8,050.00 361466 711912012 102386 MINNEAPOLIS POLICE CONCERT BAN 100.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/29/12 292157 070112 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 100.00 361467 711912012 100522 MINNESOTA AIR INC. 32.72 INSULATION TAPE, 0 -RINGS 00001612 292291 1292232 -00 1330.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TRAFFIC SIGNALS 32.72 361468 711912012 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 521.37 DT55 BODIES 00006233 292515 851181 -01 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,165.95 STEER VALVE 00006243 292516 852375 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 114.74 CARB PARTS 00006245 292517 852792 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 141.83 SEAL KIT 00006247 292518 852997 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 370.18 CYLINDER SERVICE KIT 00006244 292519 852688 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 266.83 CARB PARTS 00006246 292520 852991 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 252.95 CARB PARTS 00006245 292521 852792 -01 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 521.59 DT55 BODIES 00006233 292522 851181 -04 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 421.66 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001580 292523 853857 -00 1643.6530 REPAIR PARTS GENERAL TURF CARE CITY OF EDINA 7118/2012 8:31:23 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 19 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 22.12 HOSE 00006256 292524 854232 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,893.00 VARITIME REPAIRS 00006471 292525 631447 -00 5422.6611 IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 117.94 CYLINDER 00006258 292526 854719 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS. MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 130.38 SOLENOID 00006284 292527 856251 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 576.92 CYLINDER, BEARINGS 00006283 292528 856135 -00 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 7,517.46 361469 711912012 100922 NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS 419.32 SIGN SHEETING 00001594 292292 TI- 0250238 1325.6531 SIGNS & POSTS STREET NAME SIGNS 419.32 361470 7/1912012 130589 NIELSEN, JOYCE 55.00 SR TRIP REFUND 292583 070912 1628.4392.07 SENIOR TRIPS SENIOR CITIZENS 55.00 361471 7/1912012 100180 NORTH HENNEPIN COMMUNITY COLLE 1,452.72 REGISTRATION - CHET BOOM 292293 TRAINING 1280.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS SUPERVISION & OVERHEAD 1,452.72 361472 7119/2012 127377 NORTHERN STAR COUNCILIBSA 355.00 BASECAMP PROGRAM 292347 071012 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER 355.00 361473 711912012 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 27.62 BRUSHES 00009154 292318 42354702 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 109.87 PAPER, DRAWING PADS 00009050 292319 42449402 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 291.89 ART SUPPLIES 00009056 292320 42593500 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 429.38 361474 711912012 116114 OCE 151.32 JUNE 2012 MAINTENANCE 292186 987754434 1495.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSPECTIONS 151.32 361475 711912012 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 90.80 TONER, REGISTER PAPER 292529 1480405819 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 90.80 361476 711912012 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 222.27 CHAINS 00003810 292375 500435 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 71.69 CARABINER, ROPE 00007143 292530 500269 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL OPERATION 293.96 R55CKREG LOG20000 YORK SELLING t CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD RICHARDS GOLF COURSE Council Check Register 7/19/2012 - 7/1912012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 361477 7/1912012 115669 ON CALL SERVICES 1,111.21 SAFETY TIES, BUOY BALL 292262 2286 5720.6530 1,111.21 361478 711912012 100939 OTIS SPUNKMEYER INC. 141.10 COOKIES 292531 81533858 5320.5510 177.60 COOKIES 292532 81577112 5421.5510 318.90 361479 711912012 105332 P.F. CHANG'S CHINA BISTRO INC. 1,110.96 REFUND 292294 071012 1120.4314 1,110.96 361480 711912012 129485 PAPCO INC. 41.03 TOWELS, BOWL MOPS 292263 72217 7411.6511 41.03 361481 7/1912012 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 3,945.42 292410 8357589 -IN 5842.5513 2,039.46 292411 8357598 -IN 5862.5513 77.25 292412 8357735 -IN 5862.5513 822.82 292413 8357595 -IN 5822.5513 6,884.95 361482 711912012 130580 PEARSON, DARRELL 131.44 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 292295 5932 GRIMES AVE 5900.2015 131.44 361483 711912012 100946 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 1,239.67 292187 72666524 5421.5510 412.01 292264 72666509 5320.5510 483.46 292533 78414731 5320.5510 1,391.81 292534 72666556 5421.5510 487.27 292535 72666568 5430.5510 4,014.22 361484 7119/2012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 248.36 292414 2270203 5862.5512 254.72 292415 2270197 5862.5513 819.88 292416 2270204 5862.5513 2,008.94 292417 2270202 5862.5513 49.12- 292418 3485384 5842.5513 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 20 Subledger Account Description Business Unit REPAIR PARTS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL INVESTIGATION FEE ADMINISTRATION CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD RICHARDS GOLF COURSE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5440.5511 5440.5511 5760.6136 1553.6583 1553.6583 1553.6583 1553.6583 1628.6235' 5110.6235 5913.6103 Subledger. Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE , COST OF GOODS SOLD.LI000R COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Pege - 21 Business Unit YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING. PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TIRES & TUUBES TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES - 'POSTAGE POSTAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR CITIZENS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION C R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 36.1485 7/1912012 Council Check Register 7/1912012., - 7119/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation - PO '# Doc No Inv No Account No 12.12- 292419 3485382 5842.5513 13.33- 292420 3485383 - 5842.5513 6.00- 292421 3485387 5842.5513 58.24- 292422 3485260 5862.5513 12.97- 292423 3485385 5842.5512 11.48- 292424 3485386 5842.5512 1,127.14 292617 2270200 5842.5513 169.74, 292618 2270194 5822.5512 958.39 292619 2270195 5822.5513 1,476.99 292620 2270199 5842.5512 43.07 292621 2270201 5842.5515 - 516:00 292622 2270196 -5842.5513 1,201.13 292623 2270198 5842.5513 5440.5511 5440.5511 5760.6136 1553.6583 1553.6583 1553.6583 1553.6583 1628.6235' 5110.6235 5913.6103 Subledger. Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE , COST OF GOODS SOLD.LI000R COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Pege - 21 Business Unit YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING. PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TIRES & TUUBES TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES - 'POSTAGE POSTAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR CITIZENS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION 8,661:10 36.1485 7/1912012 100119 PING 125.95 MERCHANDISE 292584. 11351020 44.77 292585 11351021 170.72 _ 361486 711912012 104235 PLATENBERG, KATHY 100.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7 /31/12 292160 070112 100.00 361487 711912012 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 386.20 TIRES 00005238 292296 210002023 _ 65.69 TIRE REPAIRS 00005238 292297 210008491 213.22 TIRES 00005238 292298 210007699 2,077.15 TIRES, CASINGS,> 00005439 292536 210011007 2,742.26 361488 711912012 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS .325.00 NEWSLETTER POSTAGE" - 292188 : 0712121 325.00 '361489' . 711912012 100961 POSTMASTER - USPS " 2,300.00 BULK MAILING/POSTAGE 292321 070912 2,300.00 361490 7119/2012 125979 PRECISE'MRM LLC 2,351.25 WI Fl SOFTWARE 00001741 292189 304511 2,351.25 5440.5511 5440.5511 5760.6136 1553.6583 1553.6583 1553.6583 1553.6583 1628.6235' 5110.6235 5913.6103 Subledger. Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF.GOODS SOLD LIQUOR COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE , COST OF GOODS SOLD.LI000R COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Pege - 21 Business Unit YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING. PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TIRES & TUUBES TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES TIRES & TUBES - 'POSTAGE POSTAGE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SENIOR CITIZENS ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 22 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361491 711912012 100966 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 72.00 BLADE SHARPENING 292537 260180 5521.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ARENA ICE MAINT 72.00 361492 711912012 106322 PROSOURCE SUPPLY 577.21 LINERS, TOWELS, CLEANERS 00002061 292538 5679 5761.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 103.35 COLD CUPS 00002165 292539 5656 5730.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 265.22 CUTLERY SETS /NAPKINS 00002165 292540 5657 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 971.32 LINERS, GLOVES, TOWELS 00002166 292541 5655 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 552.74 TISSUE, WYPALL, LINERS 00008062 292542 5675 5511.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS 2,469.84 361493 711912012 100466 R & R PRODUCTS INC. 73.05 GRINDING WHEELS 00006240 292543 CD1575134 5422.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 73.05 361494 7/1912012 123246 RADDE, JENNIFER 272.71 NENA CONFERENCE EXPENSES 292299 070612 2310.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS E911 40.00 PARKING EXPENSE 292300 070512 2310.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS E911 312.71 361495 7119/2012 100976 RED WING SHOE STORE 135.99 SAFETY BOOTS 00005189 292348 2680000000237 5431.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 135.99 361496 711912012 123757 RIECHMANN PEDERSON DESIGN INC. 6,969.20 DESIGN/PRINT STREET MAPS 292544 612151 -4 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 6,969.20 361497 7/1912012 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED 95.31 PINTLE HOOK 00005394 292301 1382345 -01 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 95.31 361498 7119/2012 100988 SAFETY KLEEN 113.07 .RECYCLE PARTS WASHER 00005451 292190 926879098 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 113.07 361499 7119/2012 101822 SAM'S CLUB DIRECT 39.60 101= ••••••9350 292302 070412 -BAGS 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER 19.00 101 - """9350 292322 071012 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER 39.55 101: - -*9350 292322 071012 1623.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES TENNIS INSTRUCTION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check, Register Page - - 23 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount. Supplier/ Explanation. -PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger. Account Description Business Unit 71.76 101 --9350 •`292545 FRANKS 4075.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD VANVALKENBURG 76.67 101= -9350 292546 HOT DOG BUNS 4075.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD VANVALKENBURG 246.58 361560 711912012 101431 SCAN AIR FILTER INC. 86.63 FILTERS 00001597 292376. 121597' 1470.6530 REPAIR PARTS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 86.63 361501. 7/1912012 104151 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORP. 545.04 - QUARTERLY MAINTENANCE 292191 8103230048 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL ' 545.04 361502 711912012 130063 SCHWEITZER, JOHN - 50.00 BUILDING OFFICIAL TEST FEE 292192 070912 1495.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS INSPECTIONS 50.00 361503 7119/2012 - 128052" SECAP -. 54.12 POSTAGE TAPES 292193 81140092 1550.6235 POSTAGE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 54.12.. 361504 711912012 123751 SECTIONAL HOCKEY TOURNAMENTS 150.00 AD IN PROGRAM 292547 BRAEMAR HOCKEY 5410.6122. ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION 150:00 361505 711912012 103970 SEEGER, MICHAEL 88.93 K9 TRIALS EXPENSES 292349 071012 1400.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 165.90 K9 TRIALS EXPENSES 292349 071012 1400.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL - 254.83 361606: 711912012 130047 SELECT ACCOUNT 610.00 ADMIN FEES 292586 008816 -7/12 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 610.00 361507 711912012 103249 SHANNON, JIM- - 140.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7 /31/12 292159 ` 071012 -.. 5760.6136_ - PROFESSIONAL SVC'= ;OTHER' CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 140.00 3615.0_8 7/1912012_ 104098 SHLINTERNATIONAL CORD _ 1,186.31 SOFTWARE FOR CUP 00004343 292265 800673207 5760.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 20.31 SOFTWARE FOR CLP 00004343 292266 600677206 5760.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE - 1,206.62 R55CKREG LOG20000 292425 1833535 5822.5512 CITY OF EDINA 50TH ST SELLING 634.00 292426 1787687 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE Council Check Register 2,988.91 292427 1833536 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 7/1912012 - 7/19/2012 1787633 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361509 711912012 292430 101556 SHRED -IT USA INC. 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,388.62 292431 1833527 45.00 DOCUMENT SHREDDING 292269 8120008513 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 45.00 240.50 292624 1814995 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 361510 711912012 292625 120292 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 16,143.91 109.45 STAFF SHIRTS 292267 467387 5311.6201 LAUNDRY 109.45 674.36 GOLF PENCILS 292548 0000679357 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 361511 711912012 101000 SIR SPEEDY 361516 711912012 100650 STANLEY SECURITY SOLUTIONS INC 135.20 BUSINESS CARDS 292268 73141 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 135.20 364.38 361512 711912012 117685 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 106415 SKYHAWKS SPORTS ACADEMY INC. 2,706.80 MINI -HAWK PROGRAM 292194 324218223 1600.4390.22 MINI HAWKS 2,706.80 361613 711912012 122368 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY 270.00 TRAINING FEES 292270 8563 5310.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 270.00 361514 711912012 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 7/18/2uiz 8:31:23 Page- 24 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POOL OPERATION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PARK ADMIN. GENERAL POOL ADMINISTRATION 441.47 292425 1833535 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 634.00 292426 1787687 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,988.91 292427 1833536 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,392.00 292428 1787633 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,594.50 292429 1787691 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 756.00 292430 1787632 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,388.62 292431 1833527 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 451.41 292432 1833532 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 240.50 292624 1814995 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,256.50 292625 1814991 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 16,143.91 361515 711912012 102251 ST. ANDREWS PRODUCTS CO 674.36 GOLF PENCILS 292548 0000679357 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 674.36 361516 711912012 100650 STANLEY SECURITY SOLUTIONS INC 364.38 KEY CORES AND KEYS 00001554 292271 902117303 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 364.38 361517 711912012 117685 STAPLES ADVANTAGE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 25 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 - Check # Date - Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 81.98 FOLDERS,-SORTER 292195 114015522 1550.6406 - GENERAL SUPPLIES - CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 81.98 - 361518 711912012 101007 STAR TRIBUNE 3,308.00 EDINA LIQUOR ADS, 292196 1009360508 5862.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER VERNON SELLING 3,308.01 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 292196 1009360508 5822.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 50TH ST SELLING 3,308.01 EDINA LIQUOR ADS 292196 1009360508 5842.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER YORK SELLING 9,924.02 -. 361519 711912012 130061 STUDIO M ARCHITECTS INC. 1,500.00 DESIGN FEE 292549 2164 2401.4761 OTHER REVENUE - GOVT FUND BRAEMAR MEMORIAL REVENUE . 1,500.00 :. 361520 711912012 101017 SUBURBAN. CHEVROLET 327.62 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005400 292350 613020 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 327.62 - 361521 711912012 720998. SURLY BREWING CO. 684.00 292433 003564 5862.5514- COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,002.00 - 292626 003550 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,686.00 - 361522 711912012 119637 SWEENEY, J. SHAWN 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/26/12 292155 070112 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 361521 711912012, 104932 TAYLOR MADE 251.90 MERCHANDISE 292323 18273624' 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 341.68 MERCHANDISE 292587 18304378 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS := PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 610.74, 292588 18304379 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1,204.32 - 361524 711912012. 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 55.00 292434 700657 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,819.48 292435 700656 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 989.00 292550 00773474 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 2,863.48. 361525 711912012 101826 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR_CORP. 444.29 QUARTERLY MAINTENANCE. 292551. 3000189025 5511.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF LOINA Council Check Register 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 361526 711912012 127318 TIGER ATHLETICS INC. 600.00 FITNESS TRAINING 292377 INV475 1470.6104 600.00 361527 7/19/2012 120700 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC. 390.00 AD 292552 2012 -81833 5410.6122 390.00 AD 292553 2012 -81832 5410.6122 780.00 361528 711912012 103331 TILSNER, DONNA 7.00 PLAYGROUND SUPPLIES 292589 071212 1623.6406 62.70 PLANNER 292589 071212 1600.6406 69.70 361529 711912012 101038 TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY 40.68 WELDING TANKS 292554 444273 5761.6406 9.49 CO2 CYLINDERS 292555 444274 5330.6545 120.58 CO2 FOR FLOWRIDER 292556 399321 5330.6545 170.75 361530 .711912012 101693 TOTAL REGISTER SYSTEMS 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 292197 27992 5820.6160 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 292197 27992 5840.6160 14.25 MONTHLY FTP FILE 292197 27992 5860.6160 42.75 361531 711912012 123649 TOWMASTER 148.29 SOLENOID 00005392 292272 340312 1553.6530 166.62 CONTROL BUTTONS 00005396 292557 340456 1553.6530 314.91 361532 711912012 130066 TRUSIGHT 2,550.00 JOB DESCRIPTION WRITING 292351 214574 4412.6103 2,550.00 361533 711912012 116190 TURFWERKS LLC 550.91 MOWER PARTS 00001626 292352 T121925 1641.6530 95.41 FILTERS, BLADES 00005457 292353 0128197 1553.6530 141.63 BELTS 00006257 292558 0128106 5422.6530 787.95 361634 711912012 116379 U.S. BANK 7/18/k- 8:31:23 Page - 26 Subledger Account Description Business Unit CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION ADVERTISING OTHER GOLF ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES TENNIS INSTRUCTION GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CHEMICALS FLOWRIDER CHEMICALS FLOWRIDER DATA PROCESSING 50TH STREET GENERAL DATA PROCESSING LIQUOR YORK GENERAL DATA PROCESSING VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMP STUDY PROJECT REPAIR PARTS MOWING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 27 Business Unit CONTINGENCIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM RESERVE PROGRAM POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GRILL GRILL GRILL GRILL" GOLF CARS POOL OPERATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 i Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation. PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger 'Account Description. 17.90 NET ZERO 292273 070312 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 17.90 361535 711912012 125032 UNISELECT USA - 1,142.78 AUTO PARTS 292354 063012 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 1,142.78 3615.36 7/19/2012 101051 UNIFORM_ S UNLIMITED ' 190.00 UNIFORMS 292217. 063012 1401.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 615.00 UNIFORMS 292217 063012 1419.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 2,867.14 UNIFORMS 292217 063012, 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 3,672.14 361637' 7/1912012 101908 US FOODS 174.10 292198 070112 5421.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES ' 366.46 292198 070112 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 5,935.97 292198 070112 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD. 6,476.53 361538 7119/2012 101058 VAN.PAPERCO. 48.091 LIDS 292559 240429 -01 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 48.09 361539 711912012 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 1,400.00 CART LEASE 00006016 292324 62321 5423.6216 LEASE LINES 1,400.00 _ '361540 711912012, 101064 VESSCO INC. 275.35 INJECTOR KITS 00007135 292274 54378 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 275.35 361541 711912012 124543 VFW PROGRAM BOOK 160.00 PROGRAM AD 292560 13RAEMAR 5410.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER 160.00 361642 711912012 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 995.70 CONCESSION PRODUCT 292275 34053793 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 755.28 292276 34064303 _ 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,879.81 292561 34079732 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,114.01 292562 34102477 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,541.67 292563 34112434 5320.5516 COST OF GOODS SOLD 44.12 292564 34099353 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 27 Business Unit CONTINGENCIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM RESERVE PROGRAM POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GRILL GRILL GRILL GRILL" GOLF CARS POOL OPERATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS POOL CONCESSIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 4,182.38 361649 7119/2012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 85.87 4,950.16 1,193.52 25.76 13.44 FREIGHT CHARGE 109.12- 928.18 - 2,147.04 374.48 9,609.33 361550 7/1912012 117482 WINECONNECT INC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 28 Buslness Unit PLANNING SPECIAL ACTIVITIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6,330.59 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 361543 711912012 VERNON SELLING 100023 VOGEL, ROBERT C. 416078 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 292443 1,500.00 HISTORIC CONTEXT STUDY 292303 212020 1140.6103 412870 5842.5513 1,500.00 YORK SELLING 292445 58290 5862.5513 361644 711912012 292627 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 292628 416079 38.24 SHOWMOBILE LIGHTS 00001613 292355 15207123 -00 1627.6406 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 38.24 361545 711912012 102886 WAGNERS 52.35 HANGING BASKETS 00002172 292565 EDINBOR PARK 5720.6620 52.35 361546 711912012 102798 WEST PAYMENT CENTER 793.09 INFORMATION CHARGES 292356 825250205 1400.6103 793.09 361547 7/1912012 127768 WIGLEY AND ASSOCIATES 100.00 WEBSITE PLANNING 292277 0000078 1130.6124 100.00 361648 711912012 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 1,075.80 292436 304051 -00 5842.5513 2,146.58 292437 304164 -00 5862.5513 320.00 292438 304118 -00 5862.5513 640.00 292439 303929 -00 5862.5513 4,182.38 361649 7119/2012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 85.87 4,950.16 1,193.52 25.76 13.44 FREIGHT CHARGE 109.12- 928.18 - 2,147.04 374.48 9,609.33 361550 7/1912012 117482 WINECONNECT INC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES TREES, FLOWERS, SHRUBS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Page - 28 Buslness Unit PLANNING SPECIAL ACTIVITIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 292440 415496 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 292441 416080 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 292442 416078 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 292443 415239 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 292444 412870 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 292445 58290 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 292627 416077 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 292628 416079 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 292629 416076 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 29 7119/2012 - 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount _ Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 159.24 WEB - JULY 2012 292199 989 5842.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK SELLING 159:24 361551 711912012 130471 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 1,457.63 DACONIL ACTION 292633 57947014 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE &GROUNDS 690.85 CIVITAS 292634 57947012 5422.6545 CHEMICALS -- MAINT OF COURSE &GROUNDS' 5,056.00 MERIDIAN 00006253 292635 57971268 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,720.69 CIVITAS 00006496 292636 57993644 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 8,925.17 361552 711912012 124291.; WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 474.60 292446 773182 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 5,878.44 292447 772360 5842.5513 COST OF_GOODS SOLD WINE_ YORK SELLING 2,854.20 292448 768323 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,016.95 292449 772361 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 108.64 292450 772359 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 9,167.17 292451 772358 5842.5512 _ COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5,781.48 292452 772353 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 250.77 292453 772352 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX. VERNON SELLING 2,540.80 292454 772351 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,191.34 292455 772354 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING• 932.88 -, 292456 768314 -. 5862.5512 ' ' COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,954.80 292457 76812 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOL'D,LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 6,599.20 292630 768319 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 39,751.37 - 361553 711912012 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 324.10 292200 923181 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL, 134.40 292201 923124 5430.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD-BEER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 3,200.30 292458 '924352 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 192.00 292459 924353 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,242.95 - 292460 923767 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 43.00 292461 923769 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 43.20 292462 923397 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,966.94 292463 923396 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 123.20 292464 923768 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 2,369.82 292631 926639 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 11,639.91 361554 711912012 122880 WOODLAND PUPPET SHOW 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 7/24/12 292153 070112 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/18/2012 8:31:23 Council Check Register Page - 30 7119/2012 — 7/19/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361555 711912012 102228 WOOLDRIDGE, MARY 123.21 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 292590 071312 5410.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE GOLF ADMINISTRATION 123.21 361556 711912012 101726 XCEL ENERGY 3,506.23 51- 6621207 -1 292202 331223341 5913.6165 LIGHT & POWER DISTRIBUTION 712.62 51- 6137136 -8 292203 331041610 5430.6185 LIGHT & POWER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 7,866.10 51- 6824328 -7 292204 331405253 5420.6185 LIGHT & POWER CLUB HOUSE 11,927.93 51- 6644819 -9 292218 330083591 5720.6185 LIGHT & POWER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 1,169.78 51- 5107681 -4 292325 330007658 5111.6185 LIGHT & POWER ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 11,023.99 51 -6121102 -5 292357 331589465 1646.6185 LIGHT & POWER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 4,962.38 51- 5888961 -7 292566 331589829 1375.6185 LIGHT & POWER PARKING RAMP 353.58 51 -4197645 -8 292567 331567105 1322.6185 LIGHT & POWER STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 33,196.23 51- 5605640 -1 292568 331767656 5911.6185 LIGHT & POWER WELL PUMPS 74,718.84 361557 711912012 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. 19,452.55 UNLEADED FUEL 00005975 292358 499633 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 19,452.55 361558 7119/2012 120099 Z WINES USA LLC 494.00 292632 11217 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 494.00 361559 711912012 101089 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE 177.70 FIRST AID SUPPLIES 292205 54168406 1551.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL 177.70 1,015,745.91 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 1,015,745.91 Total Payments 1,015,745.91 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7118/2012 8 :32:00 Council Check Summary Page - 1 7/19/2012 - 7/19/2012 Company, Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 451,608.78 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 493.27 02400 BRAEMAR MEMORIAL FUND 1,500.00 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 17,900.41 04200 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT FUND 15,584.47 05100 ART CENTER FUND 4,103.71 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 46,087.25 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 76,670.13 05500. ICE ARENA' FUND 4,942.20 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 18,968.20 _ 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 3,303.42 _ 05800 LIQUOR FUND 196,751.72 05900 UTILITY FUND 143,891.02 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 31,630.01 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 2,311.32 Report Totals 1,015,745:91 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 °poli ias a d procedures d = 1 2; FinAn it or City R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation 361560 7/2612012 MIX 100612 A.M. LEONARD 1591930 5842.5515 53.97 SAW BLADES, RAINSUIT SOLD MIX 53.97 1591929 361561 7/26/2012 OF GOODS 100613 AAA MIX 292671 19.20 TE TABS FOR 70-294 COST OF GOODS 19.20 MIX 361562 7126/2012 5842.5515 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY OF GOODS SOLD 98.00 292990 1593301 5862.5515 118.80 OF GOODS SOLD MIX 79.20 100575 ALL SAFE INC. 30.00 1 gn An KITCHEN HOOD INSPECTION CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/26/2012 -7/2612012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 00002038 292801 0112105120 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 292912 071812 1553.6260 LICENSES & PERMITS 292668 1591531 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 292669 1591930 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 292670 1591929 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 292671 1591928 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 292989 1593307 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 292990 1593301 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 361563 7/2612012 100614 ACE SUPPLY CO. INC. 68.28 DAMPER 00001746 292913 158808 1470.6530 68.28 361564 712612012 120117 AL SWEET & THE SOMEWHAT DIXIEL - 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8 /05/12 292756 071512 5760.6136 150.00 361565 712612012 100575 ALL SAFE INC. 207.31 KITCHEN HOOD INSPECTION 292914 115115 5421.6102 207.31 361566 712612012 127366 AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY 21.10 STROBE LIGHT 00005398 292802 AFS- 221950005 1553.6530 21.10 361567 712612012 100630 ANCHOR PAPER CO. INC. 253.73 COPIER PAPER 00006028 292866 10329974 -00 5410.6513 64.27 PAPER 292915 30218579 -00 5410.6513 318.00 361568 712612012 102172 APPERrS FOODSERVICE - 812.71 FOOD. 292867 1766845 5421.5510 476.47 CONCESSION PRODUCT 292916 1768222 5730.5510 1,289.18 - REPAIR PARTS 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page- 1 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 102195 BATTERIES PLUS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING CITY OF EDINA 166.19 BATTERY 00005380 292805 .. ;018 - 273932 1553.6530 32.03 Council Check Register 292806 018 - 273530 1552.6406 198.22 COST OF, GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 7/26/2012 -7/26/2012 ,P 3_61576 712612012 Check # Date Amount Supplier /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description. 361669 7/26/2012 118491 APPLE COMPUTER INC. - 74316000 5842.5515 695.43 292674 74316200 881.03 IPAD FOR K BISEK 00004350 292917 = 9157017361 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 124.88 881.03 87043300 5862.5515 41.00 292677 361570 712612012 1,505.85 100632 AQUA ENGINEERING 292678 74315900 5862.5512 313.21 " 292679 111.20 FITTINGS 00001752 292803 48204 5932.6406 _ GENERAL SUPPLIES 5822.5515 111.20 361571 712612012 102012 ARMENIAN DANCE ENSEMBLE 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/08/12 - 292760 071512 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER 150.00 361572 7126/2012 128298 ASSOCIATION OF GOLF MERCHANDIS . 225.00 DUES 292865' 12 -3356 -' 5410.6105 DUES 8 SUBSCRIPTIONS 225.00 361573 712612012 126019 S 8 B PRODUCTS I RIGS AND SQUA 418.42 _ SQUAD REPAIRS 292762 3744 1400.6215. EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 159.24 USB HUB 292763 3747 1400.6215 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 5,343.30 E-81 LIGHTS, SIREN, SPEAKERS 292764 3745 1470.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 5,920.96 361674 7/28/2012 102603.. BAGS 8 BOWS, . 76:11 MERCHANDISE BAGS 00009058 292804 0090288769 5120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 76.11 361575 712612012 102195 BATTERIES PLUS COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 166.19 BATTERY 00005380 292805 .. ;018 - 273932 1553.6530 32.03 BATTERIES 00001767 292806 018 - 273530 1552.6406 198.22 COST OF, GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 3_61576 712612012 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 372.56 292672 87043400 5842.5515 196.10 292673 74316000 5842.5515 695.43 292674 74316200 5822.5512 2.21 292675 87043500 5822.5515 124.88 292676 87043300 5862.5515 41.00 292677 74316100 5862.5515 1,505.85 292678 74315900 5862.5512 313.21 292679 .6212500 5862.5515 228.42- 292680 672000 5822.5515 REPAIR PARTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 7/25/2u i2 7:46:47 Page- 2 Business Unit CENT SERV GEN - MIS GENERALSTORM.SEWER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GOLF ADMINISTRATION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL ART - SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENT SVC PW BUILDING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX- VERNON SELLING COST OF, GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - .3 7/26/2012 -7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,746.85 292991 74316300 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 5,769.67 361577 7/2612012 108670 BERNER, JIM 150.00 MARKET PERFORMANCE 8 /2/12 292755 FARMERS 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 150.00 361578 712612012 108670 BERNER, JIM ' 200.00 JULY 17, 2012 CONCERT 292807 071712 _ 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 200.00 361579 712612012 100648 BERTELSON OFFICE PRODUCTS 25.21 ROLLER BALL PENS 292808 OE- 290709 -1 5110.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 137.82 OFFICE SUPPLIES 293079 WO- 782511 -1 1180.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ELECTION 163.03 361580 712612012 130594 BONDE, CONSTANCE 8.50 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 292765 071712 1470.4329 AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 8.50 361581 712612012 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS . _ 324.50 292992 108882 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 938.50 292993 108886 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,263.00 36158.2_ _ 712.6.12012 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 160.11 BRACE 00005404 292918 652927 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 160.11 ' 361583 7126/2012 121118 BRUESKE, JEFF 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/07/12 292758 071512 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC -OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 200.00 " 361584 712612012 100144 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSIO 15.00 BACKGROUND CHECK 293080 072312 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 15.00 361585 ' 7126/2012 103244" BURTIS, ROBERT 175.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/02/12 282754 071512 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE - 175.00 361686 712612012 100391 - .CALL ONE INC.. R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7125/2012 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 4 7/26/2012 — 7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 175.69 DUOPRO CONVERTER 292919 319175 1400.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 175.69 361587 712612012 120935 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 19,462.95 LEGAL 292920 2851G -6/12 1195.6131 PROFESSIONAL SERV - LEGAL LEGAL SERVICES 19,462.95 361588 7/2612012 130316 CANNON VALLEY SPECIALTIES 162.50 T- SHIRTS FOR CITY COUNCIL 292921 070212 1100.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY COUNCIL 162.50 361589 712612012 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 47.85 292681 128770 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 4,440.70 292682 128771 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 420.45 292994 128769 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,909.00 361590 712612012 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 162.00 292683 93816 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 570.00 292684 93812 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 162.00 292685 93817 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 894.00 361591 712612012 129923 CAWLEY 12.08 NAME BADGES 292922 V108626 150D.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 12.08 361592 712612012 130603 CEDAR RIDGE LANDSCAPING INC. 85,731.59 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 293070 071712 01241.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS A -241 WEST 70TH LANDSCAPING 85,731.59 361593 712612012 103711 CENTERPOINT ENERGY SERVICES IN 431.33 292869 2425482 5720.6186 HEAT EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 6,733.99 292870 2425952 5311.6186 HEAT POOL OPERATION 7,165.32 361594 712612012 119661 CENTRAL ENVELOPE CORPORATION 204.00 EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER 292923 70378 1130.6575 PRINTING COMMUNICATIONS 204.00 361695 712612012 123898 CENTURYLINK - 58.80 952 9446522 292637 6522 -7/12 5511.6188 TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page- 5 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE E911 - CENT'SVC PW BUILDING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 373.33 CITY OF EDINA DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 361696 712612012 130029 CHEMPOINT.COM Council Check Register 756.32 ANTIFREEZE 00001422 7/26/2012 - 7/26/2012 NA00229699 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doe No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 151.87 952285 -2951 292638 2951 -7/12 1470.6188 TELEPHONE 57.73 952 9441841 292639 1841 -7/12 1646.6188. TELEPHONE 10493 612 E23-0652 292766 0652 -7/12 2310.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES REPAIR PARTS 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page- 5 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE E911 - CENT'SVC PW BUILDING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 373.33 50TH ST SELLING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 361696 712612012 130029 CHEMPOINT.COM 756.32 ANTIFREEZE 00001422 292809 NA00229699 1552.6530 756.32 361597 7126/2012 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 298.50 292686 477632 5842.5514 138.00 292687 477449 5822.5514 436.50 361598 712612012 101663 CITY ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION OF 60.00 DUES - BRIAN OLSON 293081 2012 1240.6105 60.00 361599 712612012 100684 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON 45,926.50 JOINT POWERS - 2ND QTR 292640 54061 1490.6103 45,926.50 361600 712612012 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 565.63 00082050- 0200650009 292810 200650009 -7/12 1551.6189 989.94. 00082050- 0200650018 292811 200650018 -7/12 1551.6189 1,555.57 361601 712612012 114639 CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 130.00 NATURALIST VISITS FOR PROGRAM 292767 071812 1624.6406 130.00 361602 712612012 100692 COCA -COLA REFRESHMENTS 194.80 292995 0168023029 5842.5515 164.20 292996 0168022910 5862.5515 359.00 361603 712612012 101345 COLOURS 240.00 ART CTR LETTERHEAD TEMPLATE 293093 10321 -02 1130.6103 240.00 361604 712612012 104928 CONCRETE CUTTING CORING INC. 500.00 TAPER EDGES OF TRENCH 00005460 292641 85142 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page- 5 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE E911 - CENT'SVC PW BUILDING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SEWER & WATER CITY HALL GENERAL SEWER & WATER CITY HALL GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMUNICATIONS REPAIR PARTS CENT SVC PW BUILDING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/26/2012 -7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES CONCRETE GENERAL SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES 7125/2012 7:46:47 Page- 6 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING GENERAL STORM SEWER DISTRIBUTION GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 500,00 GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 361605 7/26/2012 101915 COUNTRY FLAGS 369.79 FLAGS 00002052 292924 5996 5761.6406 369.79 361606 712612012 121340 CRETEX CONCRETE PRODUCTS MIDWE 243.68 PRECASTS 00001505 293082 5000026562 5932.6520 243.68 361607 712612012 104020 DALCO 58.66 TISSUE, TOWELS 00001754 292612 2485495 5913.6406 97.54 GLASS CLEANER 00006330 292925 2485836 5421.6511 156.20 361608 7/26/2012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 2,353.05 292688 659685 5842.5514 89.60 292689 659684 5842.5515 7,342.50 292997 659680 5862.5514 9,785.15 361609 712612012 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 75.62 A/C DYE 00005375 292813 708487 1553.6530 75.62 361610 712612012 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 67.76 BAKERY 292871 418419 5421.5510 99.60 292872 418745_ 5421.5510 89.43 292873 418825 5421.5510 52.00 292926 419126 5421.5510 308.79 361611 712612012 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 151.20 650487671 293083 650487671 -7/12 5511.6188 151.20 361612 712612012 123162 DISH NETWORK 52.39 8255 7070 8142 2839 292927 070412 7411.6406 52.39 361613 7126/2012 100730 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 12,605.20 SOUTHDALE DEVELOPMENT 292874 1809147 1000.1303 GENERAL SUPPLIES CONCRETE GENERAL SUPPLIES CLEANING SUPPLIES 7125/2012 7:46:47 Page- 6 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING GENERAL STORM SEWER DISTRIBUTION GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY DUE FROM HRA GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIR PARTS CAR WASH 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 7 Business Unit EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION GOLF CARS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS TRACY AVE CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS TRACY AVE CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS BA -368 TRACY AVE RECON CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT-OPERATION GEN . REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Council Check Register EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS` EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 7/26/2012 - 7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # . Doc No Inv No Account No 12,605.20- 361614 712612012 126742 DUCHARME; RICHARD 309.00 SOFTBALL OF 292906 072012 4077.6103 309.00 - 361615 7126/2012 104192 DYNAMIC BRANDS 62.95 CART PARTS 292928 789602 5423.6530 62.95 361616 712612012 106340 EDINA,CAR WASH 158.77 'JUNE2011'•WASHES 292768 5123 1553.6238 158.77 361617 7126/2012 100747 ; ELSMORE AQUATIC 194.40 292929 57930 5310.6406 194.40 361618 712612012 130604 EUREKA CONSTRUCTION 2,850:00 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 293071 072012. 04388.1705.30 77,316.22 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 293071 072012 05526.1705.30 108,150.26 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 293071 072012 01368.1705.30 188,316.48 361619 712612012 122879• - EXECS: BIG BAND - 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/01112 292753 071512 5760.6136 150.00 361620 7126/2012 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 573.62- CREDIT 292814 1- 3909353 1553.6530 208.89 HUB ASSEMBLY, BRAKE LINING KIT00005438 292815 69- 070534 1553.6530 ' 136.49 HUB ASSEMBLY 00005438 292816 1- 3931976 1553.6530 43.69 FILTERS 00005438 292817 69- 070745 1553.6530 111.21 MOTOR ASSEMBLY 00005438 292818 1- 3938063 1553.6530 59.54 _CONNECTOR -1)0005438 292819 69- 071692 1553.6530 i - 39.58 RESISTOR 00005438.. 292820 69- 071680 1553.6530 39.58 - RESISTOR 00005438 292821 1- 3943924 1553.6530 99.12 CONNECTOR, RESISTOR 00005438 292822 69- 072164 1553.6530 164.48 361621 712612012 122549 FARNER - BOCKEN COMPANY 618.09 FOOD 292930 1392406 5421.5510 Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIR PARTS CAR WASH 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 7 Business Unit EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION GOLF CARS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL SUPPLIES POOL ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS TRACY AVE CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS TRACY AVE CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS BA -368 TRACY AVE RECON PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT-OPERATION GEN . REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS` EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL R55CKREG LOG20000 MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY OF EDINA CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN Council Check Register 7/26/2012 -7126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 618.09 361622 712612012 102003 FASTSIGNS BLOOMINGTON 13.23 LETTERING 00002065 292931 190 -61769 5761.6406 100.30 LETTERING 00002065 292932 190 -61802 5761.6406 113.53 361623 7126/2012 130591 FEDERAL PUBLISHING 278.50 OSHA COMPLIANCE JOURNAL 292642 40020 1301.6103 278.50 361624 7/26/2012 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 265.76 FITTINGS, WRENCHES 00001676 292823 S01376986.001 5913.6406 4,935.61 METERS 00001676 292824 S01376550.002 5917.6530 143.01 NUTS, BOLTS 00001484 292825 S01371342.002 5913.6406 5,344.38 361625 7/2612012 106192 FLAMING RIVER INDUSTRIES INC. 558.56 SWITCHES 00005379 292826 183672 1553.6530 558.56 361626 7126/2012 102727 FORCE AMERICA 567.00 RESERVOIR 00005376 292827 01388101 1553.6530 567.00 361627 7126/2012 130596 FRONTIERSMAN SPORTS INC. 1,668.13 UPGRADE-SHOTGUNS 00003042 292769 63890 1400.6215 1,668.13 361628 712612012 101931 GEAR FOR SPORTS 33.04 MERCHANDISE 292933 40591541 5440.5511 33.04 361629 712612012 100773 GENERAL PARTS INC. 230.05 FILTER 00006019 292934 1314624 5430.6180 230.05 361630 7126/2012 100920 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY - MINNEA 58.76 AUTO PARTS 292828 063012 5422.6530 98.78 AUTO PARTS 292828 063012 5422.6406 266.61 AUTO PARTS 292828 063012 5761.6530 429.96 AUTO PARTS 292828 063012 1553.6530 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 8 Business Unit CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION REPAIR PARTS METER REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES CONTRACTED REPAIRS RICHARDS GOLF COURSE REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 9 Business Unit WM-499 RAW WATER WELL2 TO WTP6 PATHS & HARD SURFACE . BUILDING MAINTENANCE PATHS & HARD SURFACE BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 216.50 292690 141497 5822.5513 CITY OF EDINA 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 292998 141727 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 546.75 292999 141729 Council Check Register COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 861.50 712612012 —7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier /Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No. Subledger. Account Description FIRE EXTINGUISHING_ CANISTERS 00003822 292770 854.11 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 3,908.38 361631 712612012 129797 GM CONTRACTING INC. 361637 712612012 102125 GREG LESSMAN SALES' " 300,398.40 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293072 072712 05499.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP 300,398.40 339.12 361632 7/26/2012 361638 712612012 114697 GOPHER STRIPING CO. - 1,936.43 1,400.00 TRAIL AND PARKING LOT STRIOING00001661 292643 12049 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WATER TREATMENT 1,936.43 1,400.00 361633 712612012 102645 GRAFFITI CONTROL SERVICES 226.58 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 00001662 292644 751 1646.6180, CONTRACTED REPAIRS 226.58 361634 712612.012 101103 GRAINGER- " 35.57 PARK SIGNAGE 00001639 292645 9869579202 1647.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 243.68 GLOVES 00005452 292829 9870977866 1646.6610, SAFETY EQUIPMENT " 48.06 HAND SCRATCH BRUSHES. 00005371 292830 9873734892 1553.6556 TOOLS " 37.00 PAPER PLATES 00005455 292831 9873734926 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 81.16 NITRILE GLOVES 00005455 292831 9873734926 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 81.16 NITRILE GLOVES 00005455 292831 9873734926 5913.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 81.17 NITRILE GLOVES 00005455 292831 9873734926 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 607.80 361635 712612012 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 9 Business Unit WM-499 RAW WATER WELL2 TO WTP6 PATHS & HARD SURFACE . BUILDING MAINTENANCE PATHS & HARD SURFACE BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 216.50 292690 141497 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 98.25 292998 141727 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 546.75 292999 141729 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 861.50 361636 7/2612012 130597 GREAT PLAINS FIRE 3,908.38 FIRE EXTINGUISHING_ CANISTERS 00003822 292770 1676 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 3,908.38 361637 712612012 102125 GREG LESSMAN SALES' " 339.12 MERCHANDISE 292935 47528 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 339.12 361638 712612012 100797 HAWIUNS INC_ . 1,936.43 CHEMICALS 00005243 292646 3360144 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 1,936.43 R55CKREG LOG20000 292691 608554 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 7/25/2012 7:46:47 1,420.00 292692 608362 5862.5514 Council Check Register VERNON SELLING Page - 10 292693 608363 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 7/26/2012 —7/26/2012 293006 609105 Check # Date Amount Suppller / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361639 712612012 100012 HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD 156.93 CS KEY 00001672 292832 5072329 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 156.93 361640 7126/2012 101209 HEIMARK FOODS 153.12 BEEF PATTIES 292875 023988 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 153.12 361641 7126/2012 105436 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 1,068.60 RADIO ADMIN FEE 292771 120638014 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,522.16 RADIO ADMIN FEE 292772 120638015 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 546.12 RADIO ADMIN FEE 00001819 293084 120638076 1301.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 3,136.88 361642 712612012 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 374.22 HAND SANITIZER, SOAP 00002173 292936 600305519 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 374.22 361643 712612012 101271 HINDING, CHRIS 125.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/09/12 292761 071512 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 125.00 361644 7126/2012 104376 HOHENSTEINS INC. 1,331.75 292691 608554 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,420.00 292692 608362 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 56.00 292693 608363 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,889.40 293006 609105 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 4,697.15 361645 7126/2012 100808 HORWATH, THOMAS 436.79 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 292833 071812 1644.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE TREES & MAINTENANCE 436.79 361646 712612012 122565 HYSER, TIMOTHY 103.00 SOFTBALL OFFICIATING 292907 072012 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 103.00 361647 712612012 112628 ICEE COMPANY, THE 662.87 CONCESSION PRODUCT 292937 1832470 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 662.87 361648 7126/2012 105894 INDUSTRIAL FLOOR MAINTENANCE I CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 11 7/26/2012 -7126/2012 Check #. Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 357.89 SIDE BROOM, THERMOSTAT 00005372 292938_ 26540 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 357.89 361648 _712612012 105052 INNOVATIVE GRAPHICS 980.25 SAFETY CAMP T- SHIRTS 292939 35458 1600.4390.06 SAFETY CAMP PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 980.25 361650 7126/2012 119808 INTEGRA TELECOM 27.24 PHONES /INTERNET 292940 9891761 7411.6188 TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY 27.24 361651 712612012 129635 JESSE JAMES CREATIVE INC. 100.00 GOOGLE CUSTOM SEARCH J 293094 JJ5033 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATIONS 100.00 361652 712612012 102146 JESSEN PRESS 8,386.00 PRINT 2012 WATER REPORT 00001681 292834 33348 5913.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION 8,386.00 361653 712612012 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 55.04 SERVICE FOR PARADE/FIREWORKS 292773 55112 1627.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 96.19 292774 55113 1627.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 151.23 292775 55114 1627.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 206.27 292776 55115 1627.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 165.12 292777 55116 1627.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 673.85 361654 712612012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN 2,161.45 292694 1849419 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 5,508.90 292695 1849420 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 220.20 292941 1854195 _ 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 171.00 292942 1819576 5430.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 6,590.77 293001 1849468 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 38.80 293002 1849469 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS, SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 4,286.39 293003 1849460 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 11.48- 293004 - .1459252 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 18,966.03 361655 7126/2012 123551 JMS CUSTOM HOMES LLC 35.00. UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 292778 5845 BEARD AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 35.00 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 12 7/26/2012 - 7/2612012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361656 7/26/2012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 119.00 292696 1341854 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 367.26 292697 1342616 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 59.02- 292698 540319 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 93.62- 292699 539796 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,656.18 293005 1346807 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,958.12 293006 1346809 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 3,571.75 293007 1346806 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1.12 293008 1346805 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 3,125.02 293009 1346791 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,286.65 293010 1346808 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 307.01 293011 1346810 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 2,133.33 293012 1346803 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,752.89 293013 1346800 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,092.83 293014 1346789 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 31.37 293015 1346790 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 518.75 293016 1346804 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,383.50 293017 1346801 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 70.00 POPCHIPS 293069 1345000 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 27,222.14 361657 712612012 102719 JOHNSON, PHILLIP 19.95 UTILITY SOFTWARE 292876 071812 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 64.12 FOLDING TABLE 292876 071812 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 342.66 PAINT, MISC EQUIPEMNT 292876 071812 5111.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG / MAINT 426.73 361658 712612012 102113 JOHNSTONE SUPPLY 345.43 REFRIGERANT 00001620 292647 152449 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES 345.43 361659 712612012 116901 K.C. GROVES TREE EXPERTS 2,188.40 TREE REMOVAL 00001656 292648 5840 ZENITH 4088.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TREE REMOVAL 2,188.40 361660 712612012 100839 KAMAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES 379.58 BOLT FLANGES 00005393 292835 H2O9164 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 379.58 361661 7/2612012 121481 KAPLAN PROFESSIONAL SCHOOLS 1,890.00 TRAINING VOUCHERS 292649 1204046 1554.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENT SERV GEN - MIS 1,890.00 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 13 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 727.00 CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG - LOG20000 712612012 118958 LEA. DATA TECHNOLOGIES 30.00 TRAINING PROGRAM UPGRADE Council Check Register 05- 0214 -05 1400.6104 30.00 7/26/2012 -7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No . Account No Subledger Account Description 361662 7/2612012 130598. KEELER, MICKEY NUTS, CLAMPS 00005366 292650 9300937638 1553.6530 55.00 SR TRIP REFUND 292836 071812 1628.4392.07 SENIOR TRIPS 361667 55.00 101652 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA.CITIES 361663 7126/2012 111018 KEEPRS INC. ONLINE TRAINING 292651 167428 1550.6104 200.00 UNIFORMS 00003785 292779 192048 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 1550.6104 203.95 .. 00003795 292780 191180 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS 1550.6104 403.95 120.00 361664 712612012 712612012 112618 KOLLMER CONSULTANTS INC. 130699 LEONARD, RICHARD 727 00 AIRCRAFT LIGHT 00001687 293085 1589 5914.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 13 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 727.00 361665 712612012 118958 LEA. DATA TECHNOLOGIES 30.00 TRAINING PROGRAM UPGRADE 292781 05- 0214 -05 1400.6104 30.00 361666 712612012 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 231.27 NUTS, CLAMPS 00005366 292650 9300937638 1553.6530 231.27 361667 712612012 101652 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA.CITIES 60.00 ONLINE TRAINING 292651 167428 1550.6104 30.00 292943 167415 1550.6104 30.00 292944 167416 1550.6104 120.00 361668 712612012 130699 LEONARD, RICHARD 60.96 PAINT, SUPPLIES 292877 071712 5410.6406 60.96 361669 712612012 124810 LIFT BRIDGE BEER COMPANY 252.00 292700 22566 5862.5514 252.00 361670 712612012 106301 LOFFLER COMPANIES INC. 132.90 COPIER USAGE 00005463 292837 1428373 1553.6406 132.90 361671 712612012 100858 LOGIS 155.00 292652 35298 1554.6103 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 13 Business Unit SENIOR CITIZENS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL TANKS TOWERS & RESERVOIR CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 14 7/26/2012 —7126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv _No Account No Subledger Account Description - Business Unit 1,210.00 292652 35298 1554.6160 _ DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 2,569.00 292652 35298 1120.6160 DATA PROCESSING ADMINISTRATION 3,085.00. 292652 35298_ 1495.6160 DATA PROCESSING INSPECTIONS 3,172.00 292652 35298 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING CENT SERV GEN - MIS 5,174.00 292652 35298 5910.6160 _ DATA PROCESSING GENERAL (BILLING) 5,323.00 292652 35298 1190.6160 DATA PROCESSING ASSESSING 5,994.00 292652 35298 1160.6160 DATA PROCESSING FINANCE 1,595.00 VIRTUAL WEB 292878 34913 1400.6230 SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 106.88- 292879 35412,35347,353 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 77 1,824.00 292879 35412,35347,353 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 77 34,147.98 292879 35412,35347,353 4413.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CITY WIFI PROJECT 77 64,355.86 361672 712612012 112577 M. AMUNDSON LLP 1,835.17 292701 135128 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 670.50 292702 134951 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST- SELLING 2,505.67 361673 7/2612012 124874 MAIJER, CARL 494.95 VALVE REPLACEMENTS 00001677 292782 REIMBURSEMENT 5917.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS METER REPAIR 494.95 361674 7/26/2012 - 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI- 1,000.00 2011 AUDIT_ 292653 31600 5510.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV -AUDIT ARENA ADMINISTRATION 1,000.00 2011 AUDIT 292653 31600 5910.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT GENERAL (BILLING) 1,033.00 2011 AUDIT 292653;. 131600 586D.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT. VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL 5,500.00 2011 AUDIT 292653 31600 1160.6130 PROFESSIONAL SERV - AUDIT FINANCE 8,533.00 3_61675 712612012 117804 MALLOY MONTAGUE KARNOWSKI 5,723.00 2011 AUDIT 292945 31593 7410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PSTF ADMINISTRATION 5,723.00 361676 712612012 101146 MATRIX 277.33 292880 607974825 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 281.00 293086 607985775 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 558.33 361677 7/26/2012 102600 MATRIX COMMUNICATIONS INC LUMBER 712512012 7:46:47 Page - 15 Business Unit ADMINISTRATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING ENGINEERING GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 984.32 CITY OF EDINA CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS R55CKREG LOG20000 361678 7126/2012 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 101483 MENARDS Council Check Register 214.51 LUMBER, HARDWARE 00001644 292783 97557 1646.6577 7/26/2012 -- 712612012 - Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 328.10 NEW PHONE., 292881 66498 1120.6188 TELEPHONE 328.11 NEW PHONE 292881 66498 1552.6188 TELEPHONE 328.11 NEW PHONE 292881 66498 1260.6188 TELEPHONE LUMBER 712512012 7:46:47 Page - 15 Business Unit ADMINISTRATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING ENGINEERING GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 984.32 ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS VALLEY ESTATES 361678 7126/2012 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS 101483 MENARDS 214.51 LUMBER, HARDWARE 00001644 292783 97557 1646.6577 214.51 361679 712612012 104049 METRO FIRE 2,710.94 AIRBAG KIT 00003762 292784 44544 1470.6406 2,710.94 361680 712612012 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 4,682.70 JUNE 2012 SAC 292838 071712 1495.4307 _ 4,682.70 361681 7126/2012 124204 METSA, PAUL 300.00 PERFORMANCE FEE 7118 292946 071912 5410.6103 300.00 361682 712612012 104650, MICRO CENTER 58.76 COMPUTERSUPPLIES 00004348 292654 3979598 1120.6406, ` 58.76 361683 712612012 100891 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP. 31,358.55 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO.3 293073 072712 = 03470.1705.30 124,970.02- PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293073 072712 04386.1705.30 187,439.16 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293073 072712 01387.1705.30 343,767.73 361684 712612012 100891 MIDWESTASPHALT CORP., 19,969.35 DRIVEWAY.RECON 00001689 293087 22343CM 5913.6180 19,969.35 - 361685 7/2612012 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY 704.31 VACUUM, CORD . 292947 33182 1551.6406 564.63 KITCHEN/BATHROOM SUPPLIES ° .292948 33181 1551.6511 1,533.32 KITCHEN/BATHROOM SUPPLIES 292948 33181 1551.6512 2,802.26 _ 361686 712612012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & LUMBER 712512012 7:46:47 Page - 15 Business Unit ADMINISTRATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING ENGINEERING GENERAL BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL SAC CHARGES INSPECTIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GOLF ADMINISTRATION GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS VALLEY ESTATES CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS VALLEY ESTATES CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS VALLEY ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL CLEANING SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL PAPER SUPPLIES CITY HALL GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2w2 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 16 7/26/2012 - 7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 5,260.00 SEWER REPAIR 0001080E 292839 34115 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 5,260.00 361687 7/2612012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 2,000.00 WATERISEWER REPAIR 00001076 292840 34117 05525.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 4,240.00 WATER /SEWER REPAIR 00001076 292840 34117 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 6,240.00 361688 712612012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 5,210.00 SEWER REPAIR 00001074 292841 34114 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 5,210.00 361689 7126/2012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 6,325.00 SEWER REPAIR 00001072 292842 34116 03471.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 6,325.00 361690 712612012 102174 MINNEAPOLIS OXYGEN COMPANY 38.16 CYLINDERS 292949 171043650 7413.6545 CHEMICALS PSTF FIRE TOWER 38.16 361691 7/2612012 101684 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS 58.78 PERMITS TO ACQUIRE 292950 3158 1400.6575 PRINTING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 58.78 361692 7126/2012 129622 MINNESOTA OFFICE TECHNOLOGY GR 12.15 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1640.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 22.50 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1180.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ELECTION 28.19 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1553.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 29.79 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 5110.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 35.87 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1628.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR CITIZENS 64.34 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1140.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLANNING 74.34 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 5821.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 82.96 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1490.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PUBLIC HEALTH 89.55 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 5510.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 103.79 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1190.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ASSESSING 104.51 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1600.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 105.80 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY 144.62 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ADMINISTRATION 159.75 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 198.17 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1495.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES INSPECTIONS 285.88 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1160.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FINANCE 317.13 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 7/2512012 7:46:47 Page - 17 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL VERNON OCCUPANCY POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ENGINEERING GENERAL REPAIR PARTS GENERAL TURF CARE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH STREET GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WM -473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT #6 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 7/26/2012 -7126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 343.70 'PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1470.6406 364.09 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 5861.6406 ' 419.68 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1400.6406 473.76 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 5720.6406 566.43 PRINTER MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 292882 008778 1260.6406 4,027.00 361693 712612012 100908 MINNESOTA WANNER CO. 24.69 SPRAYER PARTS 00001645 292785 0095319 -IN 1643.6530 24.69 361694 712612012 101316 MMBA 1,666.66 ANNUAL DUES 293088 JULY 2012 5860.6105 1,666.67 ANNUAL DUES 293088. JULY 2012 5820.6105 1,666.67 ANNUAL DUES 293088 JULY 2012 5840.6105 5,000.00 361695 , _ 712612012 102169 MOONLIGHT SERENADERS 100.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/06/12 292757 071512 5760.6136 100.00 361696 712612012 102395 MOSE, WILLIAM 669.50 SOFTBALL OFFICIATING 292908 072012 4077.6103 669.50 361697 7/2612012 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC. 347.41 IRRIGATION HEADS 00002060 292843 857936 -00 5761.6530 347.41 361698 712612012 110522 MUNICIPAL BUILDERS INC. 66,718.78 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO: 13 292988 072712 05473.1705.30 66,718.78 ` 361699 7126/2012 106662 NET LITIN DISTRIBUTORS 38.98 RECEIPT #103546, #134250 292951 .071012 5720.6406 38.98 361700 712612012 .100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO. 531.50 293018 74797 5842.5513 105.50 293019 74796 5822.5513 607.50 293020 74795 5862.5513 1,244.50 Subledger Account Description GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES 7/2512012 7:46:47 Page - 17 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL VERNON OCCUPANCY POLICE DEPT. GENERAL EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS ENGINEERING GENERAL REPAIR PARTS GENERAL TURF CARE DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS VERNON LIQUOR GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 50TH STREET GENERAL DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LIQUOR YORK GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WM -473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT #6 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 361701 712612012 361702 7126/2012 Amount Supplier / Explanation 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPP 101369 NIBBE, MICHAEL 175.00 UNIFORM PURCHASE 175.00 STEEL 00005373 292655 104350 NIKEUSAINC. 75.18 MERCHANDISE CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/26/2012 — 7/26/2012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 292952 071812 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 292953 942169523 5440.5511 292954 942169524 5440.5511 361703 712612012 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPP 630.51 STEEL 00005373 292655 236953 1553.6530 40.29 STEEL TUBE 00005373 292844 237182 1553.6530 670.80 361704 712612012 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 608.40 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 10 293074 063012 03457.1705.30 4,042.66 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 10 293074 063012 05503.1705.30 8,085.32 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 10 293074 063012 06043.1705.30 8,691.72 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 10 293074 063012 08057.1705.30 9,904.52 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 10 293074 063012 06044.1705.30 19,809.04 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 10 293074 063012 04369.1705.30 150,993.45 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 10 293074 063012 01367.1705.30 202,133.11 361705 712612012 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC. 285.00 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293D75 072712 05523.1705.30 878.75 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293075 072712 03469.1705.30 4,866.50 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293075 072712 01402.1705.30 5,197.73 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293075 072712 01400.1705.30 30,173.03 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293075 072712 01403.1705.30 36,572.43 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293075 072712 01401.1705.30 51,433.91 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293075 072712 01386.1705.30 63,538.85 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293075 072712 04385.1705.30 192,946.20 361706 712612012 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 36.80 OFFICE SUPPLIES 293089 615351973001 5510.6513 36.80 361707 7126/2012 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 1,848.82 CHAIN REPAIRS 00003810 292786 689527 1470.6180 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS OFFICE SUPPLIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 18 Business Unit POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN SS-457 W70TH TS IMPLEMENTATION WM -503 W70TH ST TRAFFIC STUDY TS -43 W 70TH ST RECON L -57 W 70TH ST RECON TS-44 W 70TH ST RECON STS -369 W 70TH STREET BA -367 W70TH TRAFFIC IMPLEMENT VIKING HILLS VIKING HILLS POLAR CIRCLE GLACIER PLACE VERNON CT & VERNON HILLS GLEASON COURT VIKING HILLS 2ND NEIGHBORHOOD VIKING HILLS ARENA ADMINISTRATION FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page - 19 7/26/2012 —7/26/2012 _ Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation:. PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 151.43 CHAIN SLING 00003810 292787 500024 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,006.25 361708 712612012 100709 ORNING, DAN 154.70 CASH REGISTER REPAIRS 292955 072012 4075.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VANVALKENBURG 154.70 361709 - 712612012 100939 OTIS SPUNKMEYER INC. 154.23 COOKIES 292956 81577931 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 70.55 'COOKIES 292957 81615046 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 224.78 361710 7/2612012 121026 PALDA & SONS.INC. 81,295.67 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 293076 .071312 01388.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS RICHMOND HILLS PK 147,978.18 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO.2 293076 071312 03471.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS; RICHMOND HILLS PK 213,897.50 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO.2 293076 071312 04387.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS RICHMOND HILLS PK 273,712.62 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 2 293076 071312 05525.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS RICHMOND HILLS PK 716,883.97 361711 7126/2012 121026 PALDA & SONS INC. 12,084.82 : FINAL PAYMENT 293077 -072712 03443.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS SS-443 GOLF TERRACE N'HOOD 19,335.71 FINAL' PAYMENT 293077 072712 04350.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS STS -350 GOLF TERRACE N'HOOD. 39,031.41 FINAL PAYMENT 293077 072712 05485.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WM -485 GOLF TERRACE N'HOOD 52,979.09 FINAL PAYMENT 293077 072712 01355.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS BA -355 GOLF TERRACE N'HOOD 123,431.03 361712 7126/2012 121026 PALDA & SONS INC. 2,872:34, PARTIAL PAYMENT NO.3 293078 7/2012 04384.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS. COUNTRYSIDE „ 14,225.29 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3c 293078 712012 03468.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS COUNTRYSIDE 16,025.55 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 3 293078 7/2012 05522.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS COUNTRYSIDE 158,217.75' PARTIAL' PAYMENT NO. 3, 293078 7/2012 01385.1705.30 CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS COUNTRYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD 191,340.93 36.1713 7/2612012 129485 PAPCO INC. 69.92 CLEANERS 292958 72504 7411.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 69.92 361714 712612012 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS 75.62 293021 8358765 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING . 33.25 293022 8358478 -IN 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 678.36 293023 8358471 -IN 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,268.49 293024 8358462 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 20 7/26/2012 -7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 258.50 293025 8358512 -IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 371.58 293026 8358766 -IN 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,685.80 361715 712612012 110832 PC2 SOLUTIONS INC. 2,167.50, TECHNICAL SERVICES 292883 70712011 1554.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 2,167.50 361716 712612012 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 432.30 292703 75141575 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 854.56 292845 72666653 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 480.35 292846 75329531 5761.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 1,401.27 292884 72666633 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 117.33 292959 72666573 5730.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS 1,813.24 292960 72666590 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 175.90 293027 75141599 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 706.70 293028 74094166 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5,981.65 361717 7126/2012 130595 PERSONS, BILL 541.02 SALES TAX REFUND 292788 UTILITY 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 541.02 361718 7126/2012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 556.44 293029 2273705 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 394.42 293030 2273706 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 756.76 293031 2273707 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 57.12 293032 2273708 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 342.72 293093 2273699 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,023.47 293034 2273702 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 1.12 293035 2273697 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 2,589.49 293036 2273704 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,265.08 293037 2273698 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 6,986.62 361719 7/26/2012 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 257.60 292704 15854 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 257.60 361720 7/26/2012 111779 PIONEER RESEARCH CORPORATION 204.15 DEGREASER 00001494 292847 229810 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 204.15 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 21 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING POOL OPERATION EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION GENERAL MAINTENANCE CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 7126/2012 —712612012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361721 7/2612012 123726 PITNEY BOWES INC. 45.03 . PRINTER CARTRIDGE 292961 623614 5710.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES - 45.03 361722 7126/2012 101110 POLLY NORMAN PHOTOGRAPHY 65.00 PHOTOS OF MECHANICS 292962 071212 1130.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 65.00 HEALTH COMMITTEE PHOTO 292963 071812 1130.6408 PHOTOGRAPHIC SUPPLIES 130.00 361723 7126/2012 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 26.55 TAX ON INV 210002023 292789 210002023T 1553.6583 TIRES &.TUBES 14.66 TAX ON INV 210007699 292790 210007699T 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES 41.21 361724 7126/2012 102884 PRAIRIE LAWN & GARDEN 54.37 RELAY ASSEMBLY - 00002053 292964 109771 5761.6530 REPAIR.BARTS. . 63.65 IGNITION COIL 00002049 292965 109686 5761.6530 REPAIR PARTS 118.02 361725 712612012 129706. PREMIUM WATERS INC. 248.08 WATER 292966 609425 -6/12 5311.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 77.25 WATER 292967 622833 -6/12 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 325.33 361726 712612012 105690 - PRO -TEC DESIGN INC. 9,805.00 SECURITY CAMERAS 00007001 293090 60223 5300.1715 LAND IMPROVEMENTS 9,805.00 361727 7/2612012 117692 R & B CLEANING INC. 2,538.28 RAMP STAIRWELL CLEANING 00001742 292848 1161 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,538.28 361728 712612012 _ 124537 RALPH, ROBERT 643.75 SOFTBALL OFFICIATING 292909 072012 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 643.75 361729 712612012 104642 RCM SPECIALTIES INC., 1,061.40 EMULSION 06001823 293091 3463 1301.6519 ROAD OIL 1,081.40 3611730 7126/2012 130605 = REHDER & ASSOCIATES 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 21 Business Unit EDINBOROUGH ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING POOL OPERATION EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS AQUATIC CENTER BALANCE SHEET 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION GENERAL MAINTENANCE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 22 7/26/2012 - 7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,991.56 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY 00007131 293092 2155 1500.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTINGENCIES 1,991.56 361731 712612012 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 311.17 TOILET REPAIR 292968 59762 5420.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CLUB HOUSE 311.17 361732 712612012 130690 RIVIERA FINANCE 262.91 HEADSET 292656 48582 1130.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COMMUNICATIONS 262.91 361733 712612012 104602 ROAD MACHINERY & SUPPLIES CO. 62.03 ELEMENT 00005364 292849 S15102 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 62.03 361734 712612012 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. 94.01 SOFTENER SALT 00003648 292969 00270758 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 94.01 361735 712612012 102614 ROTARY CLUB OF EDINA 303.00 JULY - SEPT DUES 292970 1357 1130.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS COMMUNICATIONS 303.00 361736 712612012 117807 SAM'S CLUB 27.08 SUPPLIES 292971 003290 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 27.08 361737 712612012 118168 SANSIO 50.00 EMS FAXING 292791 INV- 07121 -2012 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 733.00 EMS SUBSCRIPTION 292792 INV- 07250 -2012 1470.6160 DATA PROCESSING FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 783.00 361738 712612012 101431 SCAN AIR FILTER INC. 371.50 FILTERS 00001597 292657 121626 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES 701.40 FILTERS 00001597 292657 121626 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 1,072.90 361739 712612012 105442 SCHERER BROS. LUMBER CO. 58.55 LUMBER 00001671 292850 41033428 5932.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL STORM SEWER 16.49 FORM 00001622 292851 41033578 1314.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET RENOVATION 75.04 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/26/2012 -7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 361740 712612012 119799 SCOTT 103.00 SOFTBALL OFFICIATING 292910 072012 4077.6103 1552.6530 1551.6530 Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS 1554.6104 103.00 1554.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 361741 712612012 GENERAL SUPPLIES 100991 SCHWAB- VOL_LHABER- LUBRATT DATA PROCESSING 1,746.00 CONTROLLER BOARD 00001745 292658 120316 -006 10.73- CREDIT ON ACCT 292793 RTN03505 1,735.27 361742 7/2612012 100574 SCIENCE MUSEUM OF MINNESOTA 278.00 TRAINING - AMANDAHOLLE 00004320 292659 C77168 278.00 TRAINING - LAURA KNOLLMAIER 00004320 292660 C77167 556.00 361743 7126/2012 164098 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP 463.43 CRYSTAL REPORTS' 00004393 292885 B00463956 2,310.71 MS.SERVER LICENSING 00004336 292886 B00683270 2,774.14 361744 712612012 120784 SIGN PRO 281.61 PARADE BANNERS 292794 5734 988.60 SIGNS FOR JULY 4TH FLOAT 292972 5733 1,270.21 361745 712612012 100999 SIGNAL SYSTEMS INC. 60.87 RIBBON 292973 63943 547.73 TIME CLOCK BADGES, LEASE FEE 292974 63886 608.60 361746 712612012 130601 SOFT TOUCH DEMOLITION 489.27 HYDRANT RENTAL REFUND 292975 .071612 489.27 361747 712612012 102935 SOUTH TOW_ N REFRIGERATION INC 165.50 FREEZER REPAIR 00006340 292976 30034 165.50 361748 7/26/2012 127.878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 1,937.22 292705 1787692 1,540.73 292706 1814993 958.43 292707 1833541 739.00 293038 1787710 1552.6530 1551.6530 Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES REPAIR PARTS REPAIR PARTS 1554.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 1554.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1554.6160 DATA PROCESSING 1627.6103 1100.6406 5410.6230 5310.6103 5901.4626 5421.6180 5842.5513 5862.5513 5822.5512 5822.5513 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 7/2512012 7:46:47 Page - 23 Business Unit EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION CENT SVC PW BUILDING CITY HALL GENERAL CENT SERV GEN - MIS CENT SERV GEN - MIS ENGINEERING GENERAL CENT SERV GEN - MIS SPECIAL ACTIVITIES CITY COUNCIL SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT GOLF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POOL ADMINISTRATION SALE OF WATER . UTILITY REVENUES CONTRACTED REPAIRS GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING c R55CKREG LOG20000 127108 STONE & STEEL DESIGN LLC CITY OF EDINA MEMORIAL STONE 00006033 292979 1986 Council Check Register YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 7/26/2012 - 7126/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 2,076.29 150.00 293039 1787714 5862.5513 1,315.50 104349 STRUCTURED NETWORK 293040 1822405 5842.5513 2,547.50 292888 293041 1787712 5842.5513 3,196.17 15464 293042 1833581 5842.5512 40.62 425.61 293043 1833582 5842.5515 522.50 EDINBOROUGH WIRING 293044 1822409 5842.5513 90.81 292893 293045 1833598 5842.5512 919.50 15657 293046 1822406 5862.5513 1,953.19 8,304.40 293047 1833584 5862.5512 17,837.46 361749 7/2612012 129745 ST LOUIS PARK DQ GRILL AND CHI 35.98 CAKES 292977 585 5720.6406 68.40 DILLY BARS 292978 586 5730.5510 104.38 361760 712612012 102251 ST. ANDREWS PRODUCTS CO 389.37 TAGS 292887 0000679648 5410.6406 389.37 361751 7126/2012 129360 STANLEY CONVERGENT SECURITY SO 216.97 SECURITY MONITORING 292661 9366343 216.97 361752 7126/2012 127108 STONE & STEEL DESIGN LLC VERNON SELLING 48.60 MEMORIAL STONE 00006033 292979 1986 48.60 YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 361753 7126/2012 102639 STROHMYER, TOM COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/07/12 292759 071512 150.00 5311.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS POOL OPERATION 361754 712612012 104349 STRUCTURED NETWORK SOLUTIONS 100.00 BRAEMAR ARENA WIRING 292888 15463 967.50 ARENA OFFICE WIRING 292889 15464 495.06 YORK LIQ REMODEL WIRING 292890 15531 425.61 BGC MAINT BLDG WIRING 292891 15462 353.76 EDINBOROUGH WIRING 292892 15465 3,758.60 CITY HALL WIRING 292893 15526 2,113.87 POOL NETWORK WIRING 292894 15657 90.00 POOL NETWORK WIRING 292895 15731 8,304.40 712512012 7:46:47 Page - 24 Subledger Account Description Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS EDINBOROUGH CONCESSIONS GOLF ADMINISTRATION 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 2401.4760 DONATIONS - GOVT FUND BRAEMAR MEMORIAL REVENUE 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 5510.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 5510.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION 5800.1720 BUILDINGS LIQUOR BALANCE SHEET 5422.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5720.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS CITY HALL GENERAL 5311.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS POOL OPERATION 5311.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS POOL OPERATION 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - ' 25 Business Unit 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 128.20 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER R55CKREG LOG20000 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 361756 712612012 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. Council Check Register 1,766.00 7/26/2012 -7/26/2012 003709 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation. PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361755 7/26/2012 121161 SUPER MEDIA LLC 5862.5514 42.73 380007460384 LISTING 292662 070412 5821.6188 TELEPHONE 42.73 380007460384. LISTING 292662 070412 5841.6188 TELEPHONE 42.74 380007460384 LISTING 292662 070412 5861.6188 TELEPHONE 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - ' 25 Business Unit 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 128.20 GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 361756 712612012 120998 SURLY BREWING CO. 1,766.00 292708 003709 5842.5514 562.00 293048 003736 5862.5514 2,328.00 361757 7/2612012 122511 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC. 720.00 MOVIES IN THE PARK 292852 DB1704087 5760.6136 720.00 361758 712612012 111616 T.D. ANDERSON INC. 40.00 BEERLINE CLEANING 292896 096544 5421.6102 40.00 361759 712612012 104932 TAYLOR MADE 272.78 MERCHANDISE 292980 18309473 5440.5511 157.34 292981 .18309472 5440.5511 430.12. 361760 712612012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 468.80 292897 701050 5421.5514 456.00 292898 00773539 5421.5514 3,807.00 293049 701979 5862.5514 227.30 293050 701980 5862.5515 4,959.10 361761 712612012 124753 TOSHIBA FINANCIAL SERVICES 233.86 COPIER USAGE 292982 207217035 7410.6575 233.86 361762 712612012 104064 TRANS UNION LLC 147.60 BACKGROUND CHECKS 292795 06220175 1400.6103 147.60 ,- 361763 712612012 129403 TRANN, MARK 103.00 SOFTBALL OFFICIATING 292911 072012 4077.6103 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - ' 25 Business Unit 50TH ST OCCUPANCY YORK OCCUPANCY VERNON OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING PRINTING PSTF ADMINISTRATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/2612012' - -7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No _ - Subledger Account Description 103.00 361764 712612012 100682 TRUGREEN - MTKA 5640 2;533.06 PEST;CONTROL 00001629 292663 CONTRACT 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 464.93 TREE/SHRUB SERVICE 00001707 292796 136119 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 400.80 TREE/SHRUB SERVICE 00001706 292797 136118 1551.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,398.79 361765 712612012 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 8.18 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS 00005458 292664 TW04512 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 754.74 HUB WHEEL, WASHERS 00005395 292853 J163358 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 169.85 SWITCH 00005464 292854 J163535 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 932.77 361766 712612012 123969 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALT - 429.00 FITNESS FOR DUTY EXAMS 292899 101941268 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL 429.00 361767. 7/2612012 101047 TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO 126.03 GARAGE DOOR REPAIR 00005459- 292665 372296... 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS 126.03 361768 712612012 101063 UNITED ELECTRIC COMPANY 76.37 PHOTO CONTROL 00001749 292855 352947 1646.6530 REPAIR PARTS 111.88 VOLT PROBE; PEN LIGHT 00001749 292855 352947 1301.6556 TOOLS- . 174.74. REPAIR_PARTS 00001749 2.92855 352947 1552.6530 REPAIR PARTS 363.00 361769 712612012 114236 USA BLUE BOOK 453.59 FITTINGS 00001675 292856 713813 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 154.27 FIRE HOSE FITTINGS 00001675.292857 714592 - 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 607.66 361770 7/2612012. 100410 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS INC. 182.80 PAGERS 292798 V0319246G 1400.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 182.80 ;361771 712612012 103560 VALLEY -RICH CO. INC. 12,107.78 HYDRANT REPAIR 00001682 292858 17927 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 12,107.78 361772 7126/2012 101068 VAN PAPER CO. 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Page - 26 Business Unit GENERAL TURF CARE GENERAL TURF CARE CITY HALL GENERAL EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING BUILDING MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE CENT SVC PW BUILDING DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL DISTRIBUTION R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47, Council Check Register Page - 27 7/26/2012 - 7/26/2012 ' Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 983.13 TOWELS, CUPS, LINERS 292900 24184400 5421.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL 983.13 ' _ 361773 7/2612012 106308 VEITH, MICHELLE 600.00 AR &LE CATALOG DESIGN 292799 2012 -2 1629.6575 PRINTING ADAPTIVE RECREATION 600.00 361774 712612012 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC. 1,815.00 GOLF CART-RENTAL 00006016- 292983 62740 5423.6216 LEASE LINES GOLF CARS - 1,815.00 361775 7/26/2012 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY 74.58 IT POWER EQUIPMENT - 00001526 .292901 6423726 1554.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SERV GEN - MIS 74.58 361776 712612012 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 271.48 CONCESSION PRODUCT 292984 34137532 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 607.40 292985 34159309 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 520.49 292986 34169074 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 551.38 292987 34196456 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 1,950.75 361777 712612012 101069 VOSS LIGHTING 53.76 BULBS 00001753 292859 15207748 -00 1322.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL 133.38 . BULBS 00001753 292859 15207748 -00 5111.6406 GENERALSUPPLIES ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 152.25 BULBS 100001753 292859 15207748 -00 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC. PW BUILDING 339.39 . 361778 712612012 106699 WALSER CHRYSLER JEEP 334.70 RADIATOR 00005401 .292860 606518 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 150.70 A/C TEST, HOSE 00005402 292861 606535 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 485.40 361779 712612012 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 1,075.80 292709 304050 -00 5822.5513 - COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 408.25 292710 304389 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 880.00 292711 304483 -00 5862.5513 COST OF.GOODS'SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 120.00- 292712 30413400 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,769.00 293051 304592 -00 5842:5513 COST OF.GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 987.80. 293052 304712 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,716.40 293053 304713 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 9,717:25 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF tuINA 7/25/k,.._ 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 28 7126/2012 - 7/26/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361780 712612012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 1,496.80 293054 416900 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 326.72 293055 416897 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 87.66 293056 416896 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,184.97 293057 416899 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 4,096.15 361781 712612012 124291 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 333.21 292713 773183 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 81.15 292714 774099 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 1,366.54 292715 772355 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,140.65 292716 768317 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 28.80 292717 772356 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 999.80 292718 772357 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 461.06 292719 774100 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 62.67- 292720 863458 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 34.89 293058 775746 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX . VERNON SELLING 3,524.05 293059 775745 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 5,325.63 293060 775744 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,832.04 293061 775749 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 5,091.61 293062 775750 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 62.63 293063 775752 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 498.65 293064 775751 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 978.90 293065 768322 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 15.70- 293066 864131 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 23,681.24 361782 712612012 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 4,456.85 292721 927593 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 21.50 292722 927594 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 1,347.25 292723 927013 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,522.90 292724 926656 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 23.50 292725 926657 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 683.46 292726 926375 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 24.00 292727 926376 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 903.30 293067 926432 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 11,182.76 361783 712612012 101082 WITTEK GOLF SUPPLY 49.56 GOLF PENCILS 00002063 292862 281427 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 303.17 MINI GOLF BALLS 00002063 292863 281080 5761.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING R55CKREG - LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation Council Check Register 352.73 Page - 29 361784 712612012 101726 XCEL ENERGY PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 3,099.37 51- 5619094 -8 292666 331767472 1552.6185 3.091.71 51- 6227619 -3 292667 331970916 5761.6185 42.41 51- 5276505 -8 292864 332457837 1330.6185 6,233.49 TRAFFIC SIGNALS 361785 7/26/2012 GENERAL SUPPLIES 130600 YOUNG WOODCRAFT 292800 071812 1624:6406 107.73 CARD HOLDER BOXES 292728 11216 5862.5513 107.73 VERNON SELLING 361786 712612012 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 129331 YOUNG, PAUL 175.00 DJ FOR FAMILY JAMBOREE 175.00 361787 712612012 120099 Z WINES USA LLC 199.50 2,946,461.63 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 2,946,461.63 Total Payments 2,946,461.63 CITY OF EDINA 7/25/2012 7:46:47 Council Check Register Page - 29 7/26/2012 — 7/26/2012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 292666 331767472 1552.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 292667 331970916 5761.6185 LIGHT & POWER CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 292864 332457837 1330.6185 LIGHT &POWER TRAFFIC SIGNALS 292902 103 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 292800 071812 1624:6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER 292728 11216 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 293068 11234 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 2,946,461.63 Total Payments 2,946,461.63 R55CKSUM LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 7/26/2012 - 7/26/2012 Company Amount 01000 GENERAL FUND 184,577.83 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 104.93 02400 BRAEMAR MEMORIAL FUND 48.60 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 1,020,692.74 05100 ART CENTER FUND 691.22 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 24,454.71 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 12,390.71 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 2,403.85 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 2,492.51 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 8,635.81 05800 LIQUOR FUND 170,381.68 05900 UTILITY FUND 1,065,728.50 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 447,686.89 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 6,171.65 Report Totals 2,946,461.63 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 policieA and[ procedures 7/25/2012 7:47:49 Page- 1 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # _ Doc No Inv No Account No 361788 712712012 100144 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSIO 75.00 BACKGROUND CHECKS 293448 072712 1550.6103 75.00 361789 81212012 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 118261. 2ND.WIND EXERCISE INC. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONSULTING INSPECTION 72.68 PEDAL AND STRAP 293449. 021034816 5720.6406 72.68 361790 81212012 103173 ACCOUNTEMPS 741.00 UB TEMP 293095 35932808 5910.6103 837.33 UB TEMP 293633 35977759 5910.6103 1,578.33 361791 81212012 102971 ACE ICE COMPANY 31.60 293146 1594193 5822.5515 50.80 _ 293147 1593302 5822.5515 _ 76.40 293148 1594194 5862.5515 74.80 293360 1594195 5842.5515 157.20 293556 1595970 5842.5515 124.40 293557 1596669 5842.5515 56.40 293558 1596667 5822.5515 144.40 293559 1595964 5862.5515 716.00 361792 81212012 129458 ACME TOOLS 272.28 TOOLS 00001685 293325 1432086 5913.6406 - 272.28 361793 81212012 100617 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL 28.00 PEST CONTROL 293197 727065 5421.6102 96.43 293198 730884 5421.6102 28.00 293199 734075 5421.6102 1,068.75 DECOMTAMINATE AMBULANCE 293498 736743 1470.6103 1,221.18 361794 81212012 129469 AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES INC. 29,329.16 PROJECT 60219168 293200 37253807 05473.1705.21 - 29,329.16 361796 81212012 105991 AL'S COFFEE COMPANY 143.95 COFFEE .293276 99718 1628.6406 143.95 Subledger Account Description PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 1 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS'SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX GENERAL (BILLING) GENERAL (BILLING) 50TH ST SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING 50TH ST SELLING VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES GRILL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CONSULTING INSPECTION GENERAL SUPPLIES WM 473 NEW TREATMENT PLANT #6 SENIOR CITIZENS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/27/2012 —8/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361796 81212012 102716 ALLEGRA EDINA 955.84 ELECTION JUDGE MANUALS 293201 94002 •1180.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES INSURANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD CHEMICALS COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 2 Business Unit ELECTION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL . GRILL FLOWRIDER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE PSTF OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES DATA PROCESSING COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PLANTINGS & TREES GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 955.84 361797 81212012 102470 AON RISK SERVICES INC. OF MN 5,837.78 PREMIUM 293499 6100000137418 1550.6200 5,837.78 361798 81212012 102172 APPERT'S FOODSERVICE 617.98 FOOD 293202 1770273 5421.5510 617.98 361799 8/212012 102646 AQUA LOGIC INC. 747.72 MURIATIC ACID, SODIUM BICARB 293450 39318 5330.6545 747.72 361800 81212012 103680 ARAMARK REFRESHMENT SRVCS 110.63 COFFEE 293277 424203 5430.5510 76.61 COFFEE 293500 1029852 7411.6406 187.24 361801 81212012 124292 ARCHER, RYAN 634.00 GOLF CLUBS 293501 1000 - 7/12 5440.5511 634.00 361802 8/212012 100256 AT &T MOBILITY 25.96 IPAD DATA 293326 287240706569X71 1130.6160 712 25.96 361803 81212012 104069 B.B. WATSON GRAPHIC DESIGN 84.81 BUSINESS CARDS 293278 486 1400.6104 84.81 361804 81212012 100638 BACHMAN'S 192.51 SHRUBS 00006270 293203 40171/1 5422.6541 192.51 361805 81212012 100638 BACHMAN'S 30.10 CUP, TESTER, STAKES 293634 072012 5422.6406 30.10 INSURANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD CHEMICALS COST OF GOODS SOLD GENERAL SUPPLIES 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 2 Business Unit ELECTION CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL . GRILL FLOWRIDER RICHARDS GOLF COURSE PSTF OCCUPANCY COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES DATA PROCESSING COMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PLANTINGS & TREES GENERAL SUPPLIES MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS Subledger Account Description CONSULTING DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 3 Business Unit LIVING STREETS GENERAL STORM SEWER COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG, LOG20000 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST -OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX Council Check Register 7127/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No _ 361806 81212012 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO.. 8,311.38 LIVING STREETS PROJECT 293204 23271243.00 -2 01391.1705.20 642.50 STORMWATER MGMT 293205 23270354.00 -191 5932.6103 8,953.88 361807 81212012 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 657.30 293560 74493600 5842.5513 r 1,031.50 293561 74493300 5842.5513 322.05 293562 87110300 5842.5515 36.55 293563 74493000 5822.5515 691.95 293564 74493100 5862.5512 569.30 293565 74493200 5862.5513 235.13 293566 87110200 5862.5515 310.26 293567 6219400 5862.5515 228.42- 293568 6172000 5822.5515 3,625.64 361606 61212012 129208 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN PLUMBING 2,550.00 REPAIR SEWER 0001089E 293635 A94621 05525.1705.21 4,800.00 REPAIR SEWER 0001089E 293635 A94621 03471.1705.21 7,350.00 - 361809- 81212012 104579 BERGFORD, BARBARA SR TRIP REFUND 293279 072312 1628.4392.07 60.00 361810 81212012 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 81.55 COFFEE 00001779 293096 1028813 1552.6406 81.55 361811 .81212012 120510 BLOOMINGTON_ CUSTOM EMBROIDERY 418.50 STAFF SHIRTS 00006039 293280 31682 5410.6406 418.50 361812 81212012 125268 BLUE COMPACTOR SERVICES 412.54 COMPACTOR RENTAL 293097 738 4095.6103 412.54 361813 81212012 105822 BLUE LINE GEAR 168.51 .HELMET 293327 103372 1400.6406 188.51 Subledger Account Description CONSULTING DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 3 Business Unit LIVING STREETS GENERAL STORM SEWER COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX _ 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST -OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION SENIOR TRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHMOND HILLS PK RICHMOND HILLS PK SENIOR CITIZENS CENT SVC PW BUILDING GOLF ADMINISTRATION 50TH STREET RUBBISH POLICE DEPT. GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 4 7/2712012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361814 81212012 130602 BOOM ISLAND BREWING COMPANY LL 326.00 293361 277 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 326.00 361815 81212012 101010 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY 698.00 CONTROL PANEL PARTS 00001673 293328 904302578 5912.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES WELL HOUSES 698.00 361816 81212012 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 341.25 AMBULANCE SUPPLIES 00003814 293502 80827096 1470.6510 FIRST AID SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 341.25 361817 81212012 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 415.50 293149 108790 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 219.00 293569 109004 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE BOTH ST SELLING 634.50 361816 81212012 100659 BOYER TRUCK PARTS 97.36 TUBING 00005410 293206 654107X1 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 440.89 MUFFLER 00005410 293207 653932 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 99.42 HOSE ASSEMBLY 00005382 293329 654825 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 637.67 361619 81212012 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC 634.75 MATERIALS TESTING 293451 355197 01385.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION COUNTRYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD 1,943.50 293453 355198 01388.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION RICHMOND HILLS PK 873.75 293454 355199 01387.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VALLEY ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 219.00 293491 355200 01386.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VIKING HILLS 2ND NEIGHBORHOOD 3,671.00 361820 81212012 104470 BRIDGESTONE GOLF INC. 537.97 GOLF BALLS 293455 1001998499 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 537.97 361821 81212012 103239 BRIN NORTHWESTERN GLASS CO. 485.74 WINDOW REPAIRS 00001663 293098 518979S 1646.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 485.74 361822 8/212012 119826 BRYANT GRAPHICS INC. 787.67 NEWSLETTER 00008275 293281 28590 1628.6575 PRINTING SENIOR CITIZENS 787.67 J 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 5 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PLAYGROUND & THEATER 181.87 M MERCHANDISE 0 00006423 293282 8 819550 5 CITY OF EDINA COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP P R55CKREG LOG20000 175.00- R RETURN 2 293283 8 837829 5 5440.5511 C COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP P PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 6.87 Council Check Register 7/2712012 -- 8/2/2012 102663 C.S. MCCROSSAN CONSTRUCTION IN Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361823 81212012 5901.4626 S 100144 BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSIO UTILITY REVENUES 490.00 - 15.00 BACKGROUND CHECK 293656 073012 1550.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 361827 81212012 1 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF - 15.00 - 361824 81212012 GOLF CLUB 2 129944 BURNS, KELSEY 923713232 5 5440.5511 C COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP P PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 101.01 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 293503 072712 1624.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE 101.01 361825 81212012 121518 BUSHNELL OUTDOOR PRODUCTS 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 5 Business Unit CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL PLAYGROUND & THEATER 181.87 M MERCHANDISE 0 00006423 293282 8 819550 5 5440.5511 C COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP P PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 175.00- R RETURN 2 293283 8 837829 5 5440.5511 C COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP P PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 6.87 361826 8/212012 1 102663 C.S. MCCROSSAN CONSTRUCTION IN 490.00 H HYDRANT USAGE REFUND 2 293330 0 072512 5 5901.4626 S SALE OF WATER U UTILITY REVENUES 490.00 361827 81212012 1 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF - - 154.48 G GOLF CLUB 2 293504 9 923713232 5 5440.5511 C COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP P PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1. 275.10 361828 81212012 119456 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES 540.80 293362 132560 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,493.90 293363 132562 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 25.30 293364 132563 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 5,060.00 361829 81212012 116683 CAT & FIDDLE BEVERAGE 608.00 293365 93873 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 326.00 293366 93950 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 270.00 293367 93938 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 540.00 293570 93933 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 270.00 293571 93937 5822.5513. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 2,014.00 361830 81212012 112561 CENTERPOINT ENERGY 17.01 5596524 -8 293208 5596524 -7/12 5430.6186 HEAT RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 119.17 8034001 -1 293332 8034001 -7/12 1552.6186 HEAT CENT SVC PW BUILDING 200.24 5546504 -1 293456 5546504 -7/12 1470.6186 HEAT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 959.12 5591458-4 293457 5591458 -7112 1551.6186 HEAT CITY HALL GENERAL R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 6 7/2712012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 136.30 5584304 -9 293506 5584304 -7/12 7411.6186 HEAT PSTF OCCUPANCY 12.82 5584310-6 293507 5584310 -7/12 7413.6186 HEAT PSTF FIRE TOWER 60.98 5590919 -6 293508 5590919 -7/12 7413.6582 FUEL OIL PSTF FIRE TOWER 1,505.64 361831 81212012 123898 CENTURYLINK 118.37 952 920 -8166 293333 8166 -7/12 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 65.35 952 922 -2444 293334 2444 -7112 1550.6188 TELEPHONE CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 41.30 952 922 -9246 293458 9246 -7112 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 57.10 952 920 -8632 293636 8632 -7/12 5913.6188 TELEPHONE DISTRIBUTION 122.47 952 831 -0024 293637 0024 -7/12 1552.6188 TELEPHONE CENT SVC PW BUILDING 404.59 361832 81212012 119725 CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBUTING CO 287.95 293368 478235 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 287.95 361833 812/2012 122084 CITY OF EDINA - UTILITIES 157.55 00082196- 0200815001 293099 200815001 -7/12 1375.6189 SEWER & WATER PARKING RAMP 20.54 00114064 - 0203502012 293100 203502012 -7/12 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 303.96 00103426- 0203158108 293101 203158108 -7112 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 50.87 00103426- 0203158000 293102 203158000 -7112 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 370.87 00103426- 0203502003 293103 203502003 -7/12 1552.6189 SEWER & WATER CENT SVC PW BUILDING 94.23 00114667- 0210000012 293104 210000012 -7/12 4090.6189 SEWER & WATER 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE 77.10 00102561 -0200862003 293105 200862003 -7/12 5821.6189 SEWER & WATER 50TH ST OCCUPANCY 167.86 00102561- 0203163003 293106 203163003 -7112 5861.6189 SEWER & WATER VERNON OCCUPANCY 1,242.98 361834 81212012 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD 468.44 % XCEL BILLING 00001693 293331 5269 5934.6185 LIGHT & POWER STORM LIFT STATION MAINT 468.44 361835 6/212012 100689 CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIP. 933.24 FIREFIGHTING SUPPLIES 00003756 293509 145442 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 933.24 361836 81212012 116304 CLAY, DON 25.00 RENTAL OF VIDEO CAMERA 293284 REIMBURSE FOR 5125.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES MEDIA STUDIO 25.00 361837 8/212012 101119 COCKRIEL, VINCE 56.61 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 293510 072712 1600.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PARK ADMIN. GENERAL 811/2012 7:52:16 Page- 7 Business Unit YORK OCCUPANCY CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GENERAL MAINTENANCE METER REPAIR ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 337.68 TOWELS, FLOOR CARE 00001454 293107 2481054 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 337.68 361846 81212012 102285 DAVANNIS 190 00 CITIZENS ACADEMY DINNER 293287 212508 -C 1400.4760 DONATIONS - GOVT FUND POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 190.00 361847 81212012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 22.40 293150 659683 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 741.90 293151 659682 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 7127/2012 —8/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier./ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 56.61 361838 81212012 129820 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL 800.80 AUG 2012 MAINTENANCE 293459 080112 5841.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 800.80 361839 81212012 120433 COMCAST 106.95 8772 10 614 0396908 293511 396908 -7/12 5760.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS 106.95 361840 81212012 121066 COMMERCIAL ASPHALT CO. 47,034.16 ASPHALT 00005469 293209 071512 1301.6518 BLACKTOP 47,034.16 361841. 81212012 114283 COMPAR INC. 2,924.58 TOUHBOOK FOR UTILITIES 00004345 293285 IN1532 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES - 2,924.58 361842 81212012 100695 CONTINENTAL CLAY CO. 253.09 ' CLAY 00009052 293286 INV000069687 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES 491.84 CLAY 00009052 293286 INV000069687 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD 744.93 361843 81212012 129550.. CUNINGHAM GROUP ARCHITECTURE 31,864.63 ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES, 293335 37934 5200.1727 GOLF DOME 3,864.63 361844 81212012 100701 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO. INC. 114.43 CABLE ASSEMBLY - 00001658 293210 157683 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 114.43 361845 81212012 104020 DALCO 811/2012 7:52:16 Page- 7 Business Unit YORK OCCUPANCY CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE GENERAL MAINTENANCE METER REPAIR ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP GOLF DOME BALANCE SHEET EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 337.68 TOWELS, FLOOR CARE 00001454 293107 2481054 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 337.68 361846 81212012 102285 DAVANNIS 190 00 CITIZENS ACADEMY DINNER 293287 212508 -C 1400.4760 DONATIONS - GOVT FUND POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 190.00 361847 81212012 102478 DAY DISTRIBUTING CO. 22.40 293150 659683 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 741.90 293151 659682 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 8 7/27/2012 -812/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 66.30 293152 659681 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,732.80 293369 660685 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 4,439.30 293370 660684 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 21.50 293371 660683 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,739.30 293372 660686 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 67.20 293373 660687 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL SURCHARGE INSPECTIONS ADVERTISING OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE LAMPS & FIXTURES BUILDING MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE GRILL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 11,830.70 361848 81212012 100718 DELEGARD TOOL CO. 81.14 WORK LIGHTS 00005289 293211 711887 1553.6556 81.14 361849 81212012 100720 DENNYS 5TH AVE. BAKERY 131.94 BAKERY 293212 419216 5421.5510 157.47 293213 419220 5421.5510 90.20 293214 419499 5421.5510 379.61 361850 81212012 100899 DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY 5,583.45 JUNE 2012 SURCHARGE 293215 14770053060 1495.4380 5,583.45 361851 81212012 102831 DEX MEDIA EAST INC. 56.30 650243624 293512 650243624 -7/12 5760.6122 56.30 361852 81212012 124503 EDEN PRAIRIE WINLECTRIC CO. 37.98 DOTTIE 00001537 293108 09055302 1301.6556 111.76 ELECTRICAL PARTS 00001756 293109 09136500 1646.6578 149.74 361863 81212012 123189 EDINA LIQUOR 238.80 WINE 293460 151 5421.5513 238.80 361854 81212012 129383 ELITE H2O 129.60 BOTTLED WATER 00006041 293513 7375 5440.5511 129.60 361855 81212012 101956 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC 1,744.90 PUMP TEST & MAINTENANCE 293514 62548 1470.6215 327.10 PUMP TEST 293515 62550 1470.6215 TOOLS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL SURCHARGE INSPECTIONS ADVERTISING OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE LAMPS & FIXTURES BUILDING MAINTENANCE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE GRILL COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page- 9 7/27/2012 - 8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 2,072.00 361856 8/212012 100146 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY 204.47 BRAKE PAD KIT,'ROTORS 00005438 293216 69- 072824 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 58.47 BRAKE PADS 00005438 293217 69- 072594 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 262.94 361857 812/2012 102003 FASTSIGNS BLOOMINGTON .214.28 SIGNS 293461 190 -61509 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 214.28 361858 8/212012 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 623.75 METER, FITTINGS 00001688 293110 S01377645.001 5917.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES METER REPAIR 98.24 PVC 00001683 293336 501378362.001 5923.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS 1,976.44 CS PARTS 00001686 293337 S01378595.001 5913.6406 GENERAL• SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 2,698.43 361859 8/212012 116492 FINANCE AND,COMMERCE 548.97 ADS FOR BID 293218 22308934 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 232,19 293219 22309364 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 781.16 361860 6/212012 119211 FIRSTLAB 117.00 DRUG SCREENINGS 293111 00546930 1550.6121 ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 117.00 361861 81212012 130624 FIX,_MADELINE - 157.62- MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 293516 072712 1624.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PLAYGROUND & THEATER 157.62 361862 81212012 101475 FOOTJOY 67.50 SHOES 293517 4398067 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 716.99 MERCHANDISE 293518 4445237 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 136.99 SHIRTS 293519 4449842 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 62.80 SHIRTS 293520 4465554 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 984.28 361863 81212012 101022 FRAME, SUSAN 355.70 CRAFT SUPPLIES REIMBURSEMENT 293521. 072712 5110.6564 CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 355.70 361864 81212012 100768 GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG IN R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation 2,158.00 TOP END VALVE OVERHAUL 2,158.00 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 361865 81212012 105508 GEMPLER'S INC. 139.94 SAFETY GLASSES 139.94 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 361866 8/212012 119936 GLOBAL OAK 37.50 CENT LAKES E- COMMERCE 75.00 PARK & REC E- COMMERCE 168.75 BRAEMAR ARENA E- COMMERCE 187.50 BRAEMAR GC E- COMMERCE 225.00 ART CTR E- COMMERCE 881.25 AQUATIC CTR E- COMMERCE 2,850.00 GENERAL WEBSITE MAINT 37.50 ADMINISTRATION E- COMMERCE 93.75 AQUATIC CTR E- COMMERCE 187.50 BRAEMAR GC E- COMMERCE 318.75 ART CTR E- COMMERCE 3,212.50 GENERAL WEBSITE MAINT 8,275.00 9876619421 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 PO # Doe No Inv No Account No 293462 39936 5521.6180 00005465 293220 1018965774 1646.6610 293463 010914 293463 010914 293463 010914 293463 010914 293463 010914 293463 010914 293463 010914 293464 010919 293464 010919 293464 010919 293464 010919 293464 010919 361867 81212012 103316 GOETSCH, SAM L. 2,700.00 INTERPRETING SERVICES 293288 072412 2,700.00 361868 81212012 102645 GRAFFITI CONTROL SERVICES 169.93 GRAFFITI REMOVAL 00001727 293112 754 169.93 Subledger Account Description CONTRACTED REPAIRS SAFETY EQUIPMENT 5761.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1627.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5510.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5310.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5310.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5410.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1130.6124 WEB DEVELOPMENT 4078.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1647.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 361869 81212012 101103 GRAINGER 175.87 HOSE REEL 00005378 293113 9874689210 1553.6556 TOOLS 54.44 WIRE WHEELS 00005378 293114 9874689194 1553.6556 TOOLS 23.27 GRINDING WHEEL 00005378 293115 9874689202 1553.6556 TOOLS 243.68 GLOVES 00005462 293116 9876619421 1646.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 243.68 GLOVES 00005462 293116 9876619421 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 288.71 TOOLS 00001678 293117 9877181660 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 86.47- CREDIT 00005220 293118 9874428171 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS 5677 SUNSCREEN WIPES 00001743 293221. 9872705315 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 20.95 CAUTION SIGNS 00005466 293222 9878819037 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 53.14 SAFETY GLOVES 00005467 293223 9878819045 1553.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 53.14 SAFETY GLOVES 00005467 293223 9878819045 1301.6610 SAFETY EQUIPMENT 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 10 Business Unit ARENA ICE MAINT BUILDING MAINTENANCE CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING SPECIAL ACTIVITIES ARENA ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION POOL ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS ADMINISTRATION POOL ADMINISTRATION GOLF ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION COMMUNICATIONS INCLUSION PROGRAM PATHS & HARD SURFACE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN BUILDING MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN ENGINEERING GENERAL CENT SVC PW BUILDING EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN GENERAL MAINTENANCE Subledger Account Description SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE BUILDINGS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR TRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES CLASS REGISTRATION 5,249.75 AUG 2012 PREMIUM 293291 5963213 -3 9900.2033.05 LIFE INSURANCE - 99 6.65 COBRA 293292 072412 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE 5,256.40 361877. 81212012 100797 HAWKINS INC. 5,830:46 CHEMICALS 00005243 293119 3363131 5915.6586 3,091.55 CHEMICALS 00005243 293120 3362513 5915.6586 3,178.65 CHEMICALS 00005243 293340 3363678 5915.6586 J 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 11 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING LIQUOR BALANCE SHEET ENGINEERING GENERAL ENGINEERING GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS' 50TH ST OCCUPANCY ART CENTER REVENUES PAYROLL CLEARING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL WATER TREATMENT-.SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 53.14 SAFETY GLOVES 00005467 293223 9878819045 5913.6610 91.87 EAR PLUGS, BITS 00001637 293338 9866372171 1301.6406 137.74 EYE PROTECTION 000016151293638 9866372213 1301.6406 426.24 BATTERIES, SPORTS DRINKS 00001615 293639 9866372197 1301.6406 1,836.17 361870 8/212012 102217 GRAPE BEGINNINGS INC 228.50 293374 141. 94.1 5842.5513 . 98.25 293375 141940 5862.5513 106.25 293572 142006 5822.5513 433.00 361871 81212012 105539 GREYSTONE CONSTRUCTION CO. 9,510.00 YORK STORE REMODEL 293640 23366 5800.1720 9,510.00 361872 8/212012 - 104459 GS DIRECT INC. 213.91 OCE CARTRIDGE 293224 289992 1260.6406 93.65 PLOTTER PAPER 293225 289886 1260.6406 307.56 361873 81212012 130610 GUTKNECHT, SHIRLEY 48.00 SR TRIP REFUND 293289 072312 1628.4392.07 48.00 361874 81212012 102320 HAMCO DATA PRODUCTS 117.46 REGISTER TAPE 00007514 293641 109801 5821.6406 117.46 361875 81212012 130615 HARMON, DANA 61.00 CLASS REFUND 293290 072512 5101.4607 61.00 361876 81212012 125270 HARTFORD - PRIORITY ACCOUNTS Subledger Account Description SAFETY EQUIPMENT GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE BUILDINGS GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES SENIOR TRIPS GENERAL SUPPLIES CLASS REGISTRATION 5,249.75 AUG 2012 PREMIUM 293291 5963213 -3 9900.2033.05 LIFE INSURANCE - 99 6.65 COBRA 293292 072412 1550.6043 COBRA INSURANCE 5,256.40 361877. 81212012 100797 HAWKINS INC. 5,830:46 CHEMICALS 00005243 293119 3363131 5915.6586 3,091.55 CHEMICALS 00005243 293120 3362513 5915.6586 3,178.65 CHEMICALS 00005243 293340 3363678 5915.6586 J 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 11 Business Unit DISTRIBUTION GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE GENERAL MAINTENANCE YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING 50TH ST SELLING LIQUOR BALANCE SHEET ENGINEERING GENERAL ENGINEERING GENERAL SENIOR CITIZENS' 50TH ST OCCUPANCY ART CENTER REVENUES PAYROLL CLEARING CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL WATER TREATMENT-.SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 12 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 1,827.79 CHEMICALS 00005243 293341 3364838 5915.6586 WATER TREATMENT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT 13,928.45 361878 81212012 116838 HAYES INSTRUMENT CO INC 142.84 STAKING SUPPLIES 00001288 293226 628866 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 235.24 00001519 293227 630609 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 378.08 361879 81212012 101209 HEIMARK FOODS 153.12 BEEF PATTIES 293228 024005 5421.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD GRILL 153.12 361880 81212012 100801 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER 7,874.26 ROOM & BOARD - 6/2012 293339 1000018535 1195.6225 BOARD & ROOM PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES 7,874.26 361881 81212012 116680 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 748.76 COMPUTER REPLACEMENTS 00004347 293229 51467578 5841.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES YORK OCCUPANCY 748.76 COMPUTER REPLACEMENTS 00004347 293229 51467578 5861.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON OCCUPANCY 2,994.44 COMPUTER REPLACEMENTS 00004347 293229 51467578 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 426.43 PRINTER 00004349 293293 51514840 1554.6710 EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS 4,918.39 361882 8/212012 103753 HILLYARD INC - MINNEAPOLIS 97.21 CLEANER PADS, VAC BAGS 00002174 293465 600312345 5720.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 97.21 361883 81212012 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC. 276.00 293153 609301 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,074.00 293154 609272 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 497.00 293155 609480 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,072.50 293376 610008 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 593.50 293377 609713 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 653.50 293573 609714 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 33.75 293574 609715 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 4,200.25 361884 812/2012 126816 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 28.59 BATTERIES, TOOLS 293642 071312 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 56.76 BATTERIES, TOOLS 293642 071312 5913.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DISTRIBUTION 375.86 BATTERIES, TOOLS 293642 071312 1646.6556 TOOLS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 461.21 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register- Page - 13 7/27/2012 —8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361885 81212012 112628 ICEE COMPANY, THE 1,293.18 CONCESSION PRODUCT 293466 1840282 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 1,293.18 361886 81212012 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORP. 21.24 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001713 293121 720339 1643.6530 REPAIR PARTS GENERAL TURF CARE 21.24 361887 81212012 128034 INDEPENDENT OFFICIALS, ASSOCIAT 77.25 SOFTBALL OFFICIATING 293294 512 4077.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 77.25 361888 81212012 103193 INTOXIMETERS INC. 268.98 INTOX METER PARTS 293295 367272 2340.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES DWI FORFEITURE 268.98' 361889 8/2/2012 130613 IVERSON, THOS 45.92 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 293296 5921 EWING AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND UTILITY BALANCE SHEET 45.92 361890 81212012 127389 JAN LASSERUD CONSTRUCTION INC. 2,500.00 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT 293522 12 -2227A 5750.1720 BUILDINGS CENTENNIAL LAKES BALANCE SHEET 2,500.00 361891 81212012 130606 JBT BLACKTOPPING 1,023.00 DRIVEWAY REPAIR 293230 631 01385.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION COUNTRYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD 1,023.00 361892 81212012 100830 JERRY'S PRINTING 88.71 UMPIRE CARDS 293643 58347 4077.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION 88.71 361893 81212012 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC. 91.86 TOILET SERVICE 00001722 293122 55689 1642.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIELD MAINTENANCE 52.56 293123 55688 1642.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIELD MAINTENANCE 52.56 293124 55687 1642.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIELD MAINTENANCE 52.56 293125 55660 1642.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FIELD MAINTENANCE 79.10 TOILET SERVICE 293297 55686 5430.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL RICHARDS GOLF COURSE 79,10 293298 55685 5422.6182 RUBBISH REMOVAL MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 407.74 R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 14 7/2712012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier! Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361894 81212012 100741 JJ TAYLOR DIST. OF MINN T 39.05 293156 1849459 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 4,402.45 293157 1849458 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 35.10 293378 1849507 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 2,763.90 293379 1849499 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 53.80 293380 1849498 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 131.75 293381 1849422 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 3,244.55 293382 1849497 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 414.60 293467 1870061 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 7,789.60 293575 1849506 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 18.00 293576 1459255 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 18,892.80 361895 81212012 124104 JOHN DEERE LANDSCAPES INC. 1,153.48 FUNGICIDE 00006157 293231 62058364 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,153.48 361898 81212012 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. 2.24 293158 1346793 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 2,391.66 293159 1346802 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 128.00 293160 1347329 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 110.21 293161 1346799 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,445.89 293162 1346797 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 110.24 293163 1346796 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 441.71 293164 1346795 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 141.56 293165 1347328 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 449.14 293166 1348060 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 818.74 293167 1346798 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 529.53 293168 1346794 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,057.17 293169 1346792 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 33.21- 293170 541076 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,400.44 293383 1351977 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,310.32 293384 1351979 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2,089.05 293385 1351975 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 530.77 293386 1351978 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 4,876.45 293387 1351973 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 99.94 293388 1351974 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 105.12 293389 1351980 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 55.17 293390 1347325 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 41.98 293391 1347326 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 12.85- 293392 541077 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 11.25- 293393 541078 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 Check # Date 361899 81212012 361900 8121 2012 361901 81212012 361902 81212012 Amount Supplier / Explanation 7.63- VERNON SELLING 41.60- VERNON SELLING 296.97 -8/212012 2,454.22 Inv No 31.37 293394 896.96 5862.5513 92.27 541080 173.84 293577 102.62 5842:5513 530.97 1351964 368.26 293579 775.21 5822.5515 4,028.65 1351951 330.63 293581 381.10 5822.5512 2,917.24 1351958 1,726.64 293583 110.24 5822.5512 .75 1351956 2,168.40 293585 386.72 5822.5513 1.12 1351959 167.12 293587 36,970.09 5842.5512 293588 100357 JOHNSON, DAN 84.77 UNIFORM PURCHASE 84.77 5842.5512 293590 100919 JOHNSON, NAOMI 35.94 PETTY CASH 41.62 PETTY CASH 133.04 PETTY CASH 193.58 PETTY CASH 404.18 111018 KEEPRS INC. 738.28 UNIFORMS 738.28 126963 KIMM,RYAN 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/9/12 293126 072412 1640.6201 293299 071912, 293299 071912 293299 071912 293299 071912 00003785 293523 192048 -01 293492 073012 5111.6406 5110.6564 5110.6406 5111.6406 1470.6558 5760.6136 8/112012 7:52:16 Page - 15 Subledger Account, Description CITY OF EDINA VERNON SELLING Council Check Register VERNON SELLING 7/2712012 -8/212012 PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 293394 541079 5862.5513 293395 541080 5862.5513 293577 1351953 5842:5513 293578 1351964 5842.5513 293579 1351952 5822.5515 293580 1351951 5822.5512 293581 1351955 5822.5512 293582 1351958 5822.5512 293583 1351961 5822.5512 293584 1351956 5822.5513 293585 1351957 5822.5513 293586 1351959 5822.5513 293587 1351962 5842.5512 293588 1352297 5842.5512 293589 1351972 5842.5512 293590 1351969 5842.5513 293591 1351971 5842.5513 293592 1351954 5842.5512 293593 1351963 5842.5515 293594 1351965 5842.5512 293595 1351967 5842.5512 293596 1351968 5842.5512 293597 1347327 5842.5512 293126 072412 1640.6201 293299 071912, 293299 071912 293299 071912 293299 071912 00003785 293523 192048 -01 293492 073012 5111.6406 5110.6564 5110.6406 5111.6406 1470.6558 5760.6136 8/112012 7:52:16 Page - 15 Subledger Account, Description Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK,SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST;SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS.SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING LAUNDRY GENERAL SUPPLIES CRAFT SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES GENERAL SUPPLIES DEPT UNIFORMS PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7127/2012 —8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 150.00 361903 81212012 130623 KLISE, JENNIFER 1,241.40 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 293524 4614 ARDEN AVE 5900.2015 CUSTOMER REFUND GENERAL SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SAND GRAVEL & ROCK CUSTOMER REFUND SALE OF WATER CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION REPAIR PARTS 8/112012 7:52:16 Page - 16 Business Unit UTILITY BALANCE SHEET PLAYGROUND & THEATER SENIOR CITIZENS DISTRIBUTION UTILITY BALANCE SHEET UTILITY REVENUES TRACY AVE TRACY AVE TRACY AVE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE - 1,241.40 361904 81212012 130612 KNUDSON, TOM 150.00 BOUNCE HOUSE RENTAL 293300 072512 1624.6406 150.00 361905 8/212012 105887 KOESSLER, JOE 336.00 JUNEOLILY SERVICE 293301 072512 1628.6103 336.00 361906 81212012 119947 KRAEMER MINING & MATERIALS INC 296.01 GRAVEL 00001674 293127 224978 5913.6517 296.01 361907 812/2012 130611 KRUEMPELSTAEDTER, ROBERT 69.97 UTILITY OVERPAYMENT REFUND 293302 5023 LINCOLN 5900.2015 CIR 69.97 361908 8/212012 130620 L & L UNDERGROUND 478.10 HYDRANT DEPOSIT REFUND 293525 072612 5901.4626 478.10 361909 8/212012 118660 LAKES AREA HOME IMPROVEMENT SE 167.00 CLEAN & CHECK WATER SOFTENER 293232 1677 05526.1705.21 198.00 REMOVE WATER SOFTENER RESIN 293233 1679 05526.1705.21 198.00 REMOVE WATER SOFTENER RESIN 293234 1680 05526.1705.21 563.00 361910 81212012 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC. 405.94 BITS, SCREWS, CLAMPS 00005379 293235 9300976504 1553.6530 405.94 361911 81212012 121152 LEA, STEVE 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/15/12 293497 073012 5760.6136 150.00 361912 8/212012 113952 LEICA GEOSYSTEMS INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SAND GRAVEL & ROCK CUSTOMER REFUND SALE OF WATER CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION CONSULTING INSPECTION REPAIR PARTS 8/112012 7:52:16 Page - 16 Business Unit UTILITY BALANCE SHEET PLAYGROUND & THEATER SENIOR CITIZENS DISTRIBUTION UTILITY BALANCE SHEET UTILITY REVENUES TRACY AVE TRACY AVE TRACY AVE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 13:10:05 R55CKREG LOG20000 ' Council Check Register Page - 17 7/27/2012 - 8/212012 Check # Date_ Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 101.81 CHARGER 00001763 293468 93292517 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 101.81 361913 81212012 124810 LIFT BRIDGE,BEER COMPANY 56.00 293598 22683 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 56.00 361914 81212012 101792 LUBE -TECH 1,200.49 DIESEL 00006143 293236 2076105 5422.6581 GASOLINE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,017.75 GAS 00006142 293237 2076106 5422.6581 GASOLINE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 781.35 GAS 00006146 293238 2076107 5424.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES RANGE 2,999.59 361915 8/212012 - 122472 M & I BANK 11.60 TRAINING FACILITY. EXPENSES 293526 071612 7410.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS PSTF ADMINISTRATION 46.56 TRAINING FACILITY EXPENSES 293526 071612 7411.6511 CLEANING SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 177.55 TRAINING FACILITY EXPENSES 293526 071612 7411.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF OCCUPANCY 311.04 TRAINING FACILITY EXPENSES 293526 071612 7412.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES PSTF RANGE 546.75 361916 81212012 112677 M. AMUNDSON LLP 293171 135673 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 1,073.19 1,073.19 361917 81212012 101361 M.IA.M.A. 600.00 2012 FALL CONFERENCE 293471 2053 5510.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS . ARENA ADMINISTRATION 600.00 361918 81212012 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC. 91.05 HINGES 00005471 293342 2123939 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 91.05 d - 361919 81212012 126.892 MARECK, KATHY 445.67 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 293527 072712 1624.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PLAYGROUND & THEATER 445.67 361920 81212012 101928 MCKEN7JE, THOMAS 364.94 UNIFORM PURCHASE 293644 073012 1400.6203 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 364.94 t 361921 81212012 130293 MDA w 423.87 SUNGLASSES 293528 95944 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 13:10:05 Council Check Register Page - 1 B 7127/2012 -8/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 423.87 361922 81212012 103720 MEOTECH 250.75 FLOWRIDER WRISTBANDS 293469 IN000382039 5330.6408 GENERAL SUPPLIES FLOWRIDER 250.75 361923 81212012 101483 MENARDS 21.47 HARDWARE 00001702 293128 1554 1646.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE 35.56 BOARDS 00006251 293239 89451 5422.6577 LUMBER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 39.23 GRAVEL, RIVER ROCK 00002177 293470 5192 5720.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 95.72 HAMMER, MEASURING TAPES 00001611 293645 91612 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 17.47 EMT CONDUIT 00001611 293646 91642 1301.6556 TOOLS GENERAL MAINTENANCE 209.45 361924 812/2012 100885 METRO SALES INC 1,386.61 COPIER USAGE 293240 467750 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 143.21 COPIER USAGE 293303 466649 5110.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 369.19 COPIER USAGE - MEDIA CTR 293304 466767 5110.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1,899.01 361925 8/212012 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD OF EDEN PRAT 202.34 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00001821 293129 204462 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 202.34 361926 81212012 104650 MICRO CENTER 87.59 DVDS 00003050 293647 3995643 1400.6160 DATA PROCESSING POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 87.59 361927 81212012 100891 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP. 420.00 DRIVEWAY REPAIRS - SCANDIA RD 293305 727033 01387.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VALLEY ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 630.00 DRIVEWAY REPAIRS - NORDIC DR 293306 727032 01387.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VALLEY ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 876.00 DRIVEWAY REPAIRS - NORDIC CIR 293307 727028 01387.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION VALLEY ESTATES NEIGHBORHOOD 1,926.00 361928 8/212012 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY - 559.34 PAPER PRODUCTS, DETERGENT 00003816 293529 33183 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 559.34 361929 8/212012 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & 2,082.50 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001694 293343 34127 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 1,715.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001695 293344 34128 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 2,695.00 REPLACE WATER SERVICE 00001696 293345 34131 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 19 Subledger Account Description Business Unit CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION CONSULTING DESIGN WM -501 RAW WATER WELL9 TO WTP6 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS GENERAL SUPPLIES CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 GENERAL$UPPLIES YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION Council Check Register 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 1,102.50 REPLACE STANDPIPE 00001697 293346 34132 5913.6180 7,595.00 361930 8/212012 127062 MINNEHAHA BLDG. MAINT. INC. 5.34 WINDOW WASHING 293648 928000031 5821.6180 16.09 293649. 928000030 5861.6180 21.38- 293650 928000029 5841.6180 42.81 361931 81212012 101591 MINNESOTA CERAMIC SUPPLY 30.30 PIGMENTS 00009057 293308 35229 5110.6564 30.30 361932 8/212012 101638 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 150.00 PLAN REVIEW FEE 293530 WATERMAINS 05501.1705.20 150.00 361933 81212012 103240 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL 547.11 DEFENSIVE DRIVING CLASS 293309 18980 1628.6103 547.11 361934 81212012 128914 MINUTEMAN PRESS 184.77. ` EFD PULSE NEWSLETTER 293531 11612 1470.6406 184.77 361935 81212012 101316 MMBA 50.00 ALCOHOL TRAININGS 293130 2012 -70 5822.6406 50.00- ALCOHOL TRAININGS 293130 2012 -70 5842.6406 50.00 ALCOHOL TRAININGS 293130 2012 -70 5862.6406 150.00 ALCOHOL TRAININGS 293130 2012 -70 5410.6104 300.00 361936 81212012 115082 MOLDOW, GAY 149.00 CLASS REFUND 293310 072512 5101.4607 149.00 361937 81212012 100906 MTf DISTRIBUTING INC. 278.17 IRRIGATION PARTS 00001657 293131 858280 -00 1643.6530 367.46 PULL FRAMES 00006267 293241 856855 -00 5422.6530 589.36 CYLINDER ASSEMBLY 00006272 293242 857751 -00 5422.6530 208.12 SPOUT 00006267 293243 856901 -00 5422.6530 388.63 SPREADER KIT 00006267 293244 856855 -01 5422.6530 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 19 Subledger Account Description Business Unit CONTRACTED REPAIRS DISTRIBUTION CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50TH ST OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS VERNON OCCUPANCY CONTRACTED REPAIRS YORK OCCUPANCY CRAFT SUPPLIES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION CONSULTING DESIGN WM -501 RAW WATER WELL9 TO WTP6 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES SENIOR CITIZENS GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES 50TH ST SELLING . GENERAL$UPPLIES YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES VERNON SELLING CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS GOLF ADMINISTRATION CLASS-REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES REPAIR PARTS GENERAL TURF CARE REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 20 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 977.38 CONTROL BOX 00002072 293532 861727 -00 5761.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 187.14 CONTROLLER MOTHERBOARD 00002072 293533 861721 -00 5761.6530 REPAIR PARTS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 2,996.26 ` 361938 81212012 101390 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES 1 273.75 NOZZLES 00003830 293534 00330619 SNV 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 273.75 361939 81212012 130453 NATIONAL CINEMEDIA LLC 250.00 SOUTHDALE COMMERCIAL PROD 293472 NCM182173 5310.6122 ADVERTISING OTHER POOL ADMINISTRATION 250.00 361940 81212012 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC. 69.00 UNIFORM 00005604 293245 NIA5776 1553.6201 LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 69.00 361941 61212012 101620 NORTH SECOND STREET STEEL SUPP 93.88 STEEL 00005408 293473 237813 1553.6630 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 93.88 361942 81212012 100933 NORTHWEST GRAPHIC SUPPLY CO. 365.19 POTTERY TOOLS KITS 00009056 293535 42593501 5120.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 365.19 361943 81212012 102557 NTOA 150.00 MEMBERSHIP - JEFF ELASKY 293311 34109-2012 1400.6105 DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 150.00 361944 81212012 130607 NUTRIGREEN LAWN CARE 1,023.65 FUNGICIDE 293246 27060 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1,023.65 361945 81212012 116114 OCE 94.15 JULY MAINTENANCE 00001229 293247 987784585 1552.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 94.15 361946 8/212012 130141 DENO DISTRIBUTION LLC 128.00 293172 725 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 128.00 361947 81212012 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 43.98 STAPLER, SORTER, PENS 293248 1485308216 5410.6513 OFFICE SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 8/112012 7:52:16 Page- 21 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PLAYGROUND & THEATER CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 361952 81212012 71.93 100060 PALAY DISPLAY IN DISPLAY UNIT 00006030 293250 CITY OF EDINA 5440.6406 R55CKREG LOG20000 PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 71.93 Council Check Register 361953 81212012 105164 PARAGON INDUSTRIES INC. 7/27/2012 —8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation - PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description REPAIR PARTS ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 43.98 104.00 361948 81212012 100936 OLSEN COMPANIES 361954 81212012. 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS , 293173 22.85 VITALIFE . 00005287 293347 501176 1553.6584 LUBRICANTS 513.68 22.85 293396 8359437 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 361949 81212012 130617 OMB GUNS 293397 71N 8359430 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE- 2,535.00 AMMO 293348 500 - 401361 1400.6551 AMMUNITION 293398 8359426 -IN 2,535.00 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 361950 81212012 293399 102520 .ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY INC. 5842.5513 COST -.OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 332.63 FAMILY JAMBOREE PRIZES 00007147 293249 652098574 -01 1624.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 332.63 3,969.84 361951 81212012 100940 OWENS COMPANIES INC. 361955 81212012 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY 852.72 HVAC REPAIRS 00002073 293651 45241 5761.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 1,025.79 852.72 DUSTRIES Mr. 72666715 5421.5510' COST OF GOODS SOLD 8/112012 7:52:16 Page- 21 Business Unit EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN POLICE DEPT. GENERAL PLAYGROUND & THEATER CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 361952 81212012 71.93 100060 PALAY DISPLAY IN DISPLAY UNIT 00006030 293250 293741 5440.6406 - GENERAL SUPPLIES PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 71.93 361953 81212012 105164 PARAGON INDUSTRIES INC. 104.00 KILN PARTS 00009061 293312 247146 5111.6530 REPAIR PARTS ART CENTER BLDG /MAINT 104.00 361954 81212012. 100347 PAUSTIS & SONS , 293173 8358464 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 513.68 293396 8359437 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,128.75 293397 71N 8359430 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE- 50TH ST SELLING 1,380.57 293398 8359426 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 957.50 293399 8358354 -CM 5842.5513 COST -.OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 10.66- 3,969.84 361955 81212012 100945 PEPSI -COLA COMPANY GRILL 1,025.79 293.313 72666715 5421.5510' COST OF GOODS SOLD 1,025.79 361956 81212012 125978 PETSMART#459 GENERAL SUPPLIES EDINA CRIME FUND K9 DONATION 85.80 K9 FOOD 00003045" 293314 T -2938 4607.6406 85.80 i R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 22 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361958 81212012 100743 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 1,020.39 293174 2273703 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 789.50 293175 2273701 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 362.71 293176 2273700 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 533.84 293400 2277091 5862.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING 324.04 293401 2277092 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 491.63 293402 2277081 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,609.71 293403 2277090 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,334.52 293599 2277086 5842.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING 490.09 293600 2277080 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 1,050.59 293601 2277084 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 57.12 293602 2277085 5842.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING 660.49 293603 2277087 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 154.75 293604 2277089 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 1,052.32 293605 2278015 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 564.18 293606 2277082 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 255.30 293607 2277083 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,480.39 293608 2277079 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 6.69- 293609 3486765 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 25.32- 293610 3486690 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 10.00- 293611 3486688 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 9.23- 293612 3486689 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 12,200.13 361959 81212012 124176 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING 256.00 293404 15959 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 256.00 361960 81212012 102748 PIRTEK PLYMOUTH 226.62 HOSE REPAIR 00006364 293252 S1647733.001 5431.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE 226.62 361961 81212012 123092 PLAYPOWER LT FARMINGTON INC 654.08 PLAY EQUIPMENT PARTS 00001581 293132 1400166147 1647.6530 REPAIR PARTS PATHS & HARD SURFACE 654.08 361962 81212012 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC. 130.00 SCRAP DISPOSAL FEE 00005439 293251 210011251 1553.6583 TIRES & TUBES EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 130.00 361963 81212012 130614 PORTER, ALEX DAVID 143.50 MAINTENANCE 293315 072312 5111.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER BLDG/MAINT 25.00 361968 81212012 125936 REINDERS INC. 5 262 82 FUNGICIDE 00006499 293253 3015957 -00 5422.6545 ARENA ICE MAINT 5,262.82 CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SVC -OTHER CITY OF EDINA 81212012 R55CKREG LOG20000 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. ART CENTER REVENUES 619.88 SOFTENER SALT 00008063 293475 00271146 - 619.88 Council Check Register 361970 81212012 11693 ROGERS, RUSS 7/27/2012 —8/212012 CL PERFORMANCE 8/14/12 293496 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 113372 RONNING, TED 143.50 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8113112 293494 073012 - 361964 81212012 124741 POYTHRESS, MATT 361972 812/2012 126409 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS INC. 29.97 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 293652 073012 5919.6106 MEETING EXPENSE 171.00 29.97 0233 SCHAUB HANS 361965 81212012 117692 R & B CLEANING INC. 2,030.63 CLEAN RAMP STAIRWELLS 293653 1168 4090.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,030.63 361966 81212012 100974 RAYMOND HAEG PLUMBING 175.50 SILLCOCK REPLACEMENT 00001608 293474 14168 5913.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 175.50 361967 81212012 130082 REALTY HOUSE, THE 2500 OVERPAYMENT FOR ALARM 293536 072612 1400.4332 FALSE ALARMS - POLICE 25.00 361968 81212012 125936 REINDERS INC. 5 262 82 FUNGICIDE 00006499 293253 3015957 -00 5422.6545 5521.6406 5760.6136 5760.6136 4402.1705.21 361973 81212012 13 149.00 CLASS REFUND 293316 072512 5101.4607 149.00 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 23 Business Unit TRAINING 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ICE MAINT 5,262.82 CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SVC -OTHER 361969 81212012 PW BUILDING 100980 ROBERT B. HILL CO. ART CENTER REVENUES 619.88 SOFTENER SALT 00008063 293475 00271146 - 619.88 361970 81212012 11693 ROGERS, RUSS 200.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/14/12 293496 073012 200.00 361971 81212012 113372 RONNING, TED 150.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8113112 293494 073012 - 150.00 361972 812/2012 126409 S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS INC. 171.00 MOVE CABINETS 293476 01PH2183 171.00 0233 SCHAUB HANS 5521.6406 5760.6136 5760.6136 4402.1705.21 361973 81212012 13 149.00 CLASS REFUND 293316 072512 5101.4607 149.00 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 23 Business Unit TRAINING 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE DISTRIBUTION POLICE DEPT. GENERAL CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL SUPPLIES ARENA ICE MAINT PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE PROFESSIONAL SVC -OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE CONSULTING INSPECTION PW BUILDING CLASS REGISTRATION ART CENTER REVENUES R55CKREG LOG20000 140.00 CITY OF EDINA 293495 072912 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE Council Check Register 140.00 7127/2012 -8/2/2012 81212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 361974 81212012 PARADE T- SHIRTS 101577 SCHMOLL, RUTH 22189 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 289.44 PETTY CASH 293537 072612 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 289.44 729.25 361975 8/212012 361980 100991 SCHWAS- VOLLHABER- LUBRATT 125980 SIR SPEEDY 2,916.32 HVAC CONTROLLER, MOTOR 00001626 293538 INV074888 1551.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS 293133 62853 2,916.32 GENERAL SUPPLIES FINANCE 395.07 361976 8/212012 100995 SEH 361981 81212012 130622 SJOBLOM, DAN 6,566.46 GALLAGHER DR STREET RECON 293254 258011 01382.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 75.00 2,465.77 70TH ST LANDSCAPING 293255 258193 01241.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 689.88 RAW WATERMAIN PROJ 293477 258680 05501.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN 361982 1,048.95 MINNEHAHA WOODS RECON 293478 258681 01334.1705.21 CONSULTING INSPECTION 10,771.06 245.37 293177 1833593 5822.5512 361977 8/212012 103249 SHANNON, JIM 2,267.43 293178 1833583 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 24 Business Unit FIRE DEPT. GENERAL CITY HALL GENERAL BA -382 GALLAGHER DRIVE A -241 WEST 70TH LANDSCAPING WM -501 RAW WATER WELL9 TO WTP6 BA -334 MINNEHAHA WOODS RECON 140.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/12112 293493 073012 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 140.00 361978 81212012 103249 SHANNON, JIM 140.00 CL PERFORMANCE 8/14/12 293495 072912 5760.6136 PROFESSIONAL SVC - OTHER CENTENNIAL LAKES ADMIN EXPENSE 140.00 361979 81212012 120997 SHIRTYSOMETHING 342.00 PARADE T- SHIRTS 00003831 293539 22189 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 387.25 UNIFORM SHIRTS 00003831 293539 22189 1470.6558 DEPT UNIFORMS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 729.25 361980 81212012 125980 SIR SPEEDY 395.07 CHECK REQUEST PADS 293133 62853 1160.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FINANCE 395.07 361981 81212012 130622 SJOBLOM, DAN 75.00 REIMBURSEMENT FOR STEELTOE 293540 BOOTS 1260.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ENGINEERING GENERAL 75.00 361982 81212012 127878 SOUTHERN WINE AND SPIRITS 245.37 293177 1833593 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 2,267.43 293178 1833583 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 40.62 293179 1833585 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING 405.00 293180 1822404 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 72.50 293181 1622553 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 361983 81212012 361984 81212012 i 361986 81212012 130616 SPOOR, WILLIAM 100.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 293317 072612 100.00 7122456 SPRING LAKE ENGINEERING 4,411.00 SCADA PROGRAMMING 00001843 293349 1210 4,411.00 1470.4329 5913.6103 -104672 SPRINT' Business Unit CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 293324 873184124 -116 1628.6188 4.50 293324 Council Check Register 5511.6188 5.25 7/2712012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 2,138.43 - 293405 1859232 5842.5512 2,893.33 293406_- 1846213 5842.5513 233.00 293407 1880406. 5842.5513 1,160.81 293408 1859231 5822.5512_ 2,208.40 293409 1846212 5862.5513 390.00 293410 1880405 5862.5513 2,401.32 293411 1859230 5862.5512 3,000.00- 293412 1820958 5842.5512 1,839.00- 293412 1820958 5862:5512 1,000.00= - 293412 1820958 5822.5512 427,97- 293413 1738489 5842.5512 592.50 293613 1828113 5842:5513 197.50 293614 1838097 5842.5513 228.00- 293615 1880411 5842.5513 192.00- 293616 1838096 5842.5513 8,759.24 361983 81212012 361984 81212012 i 361986 81212012 130616 SPOOR, WILLIAM 100.00 AMBULANCE OVERPAYMENT 293317 072612 100.00 7122456 SPRING LAKE ENGINEERING 4,411.00 SCADA PROGRAMMING 00001843 293349 1210 4,411.00 1470.4329 5913.6103 -104672 SPRINT' Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING. 3.25 293324 873184124 -116 1628.6188 4.50 293324 873184124 -116 5511.6188 5.25 .293324 873184124 -116 1470.6188 17.26 293324 873184124 -116 1180.6103 29.00 293324 873184124 -116 5720.6188 31.25 293324 873184124 -116 4090.6188 33.25 293324 873184124 -116 7411.6188 51.25 293324 873184124 -116 1490.6188 60.96 293324 873184124 -116 - 1190.6188 66.52 293324 873184124 -116 1554.6230 76.75 293324 873184124 -116 1240.6188 80.75 293324 873184124 -116 1553.6188 83.75 293324 873184124 -116 5422.6168 174.42 293324 873184124 -116 1322.6188 180.82 293324 873184124 -116 1301.6188 184.50 293324- 873184124 -116 1495.6188 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page - 25 Subledger Account Description Business Unit COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING. COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON'SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING - COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE ' . YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE, YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING AMBULANCE FEES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DISTRIBUTION TELEPHONE SENIOR CITIZENS TELEPHONE ARENA BLDG/GROUNDS TELEPHONE FIRE DEPT. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ELECTION TELEPHONE EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS TELEPHONE 50TH &FRANCE MAINTENANCE TELEPHONE PSTF OCCUPANCY TELEPHONE PUBLIC HEALTH TELEPHONE ASSESSING SERVICE CONTRACTS EQUIPMENT CENT SERV GEN - MIS TELEPHONE PUBLIC WORKS ADMIN GENERAL TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN TELEPHONE MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS TELEPHONE STREET LIGHTING ORNAMENTAL TELEPHONE GENERAL MAINTENANCE TELEPHONE INSPECTIONS R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 26 7/27/2012 -8/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 295.24 293324 873184124 -116 1260.6188 TELEPHONE ENGINEERING GENERAL 419.48 293324 873184124 -116 5910.6188 TELEPHONE GENERAL (BILLING) 484.75 293324 873184124 -116 1640.6188 TELEPHONE PARK MAINTENANCE GENERAL 719.82 293324 873184124 -116 1470.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1,851.59 293324 873184124 -116 1400.6188 TELEPHONE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL 4,854.36 361986 81212012 101004 SPS COMPANIES 14.40 SINK WASHERS 00001765 293134 S2577533.001 1552.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING 14.40 361987 81212012 129360 STANLEY CONVERGENT SECURITY SO 589.92 ALARM MAINTENANCE 00002074 293541 9400991 5761.6250 ALARM SERVICE CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING 589.92 361988 81212012 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 9.35 KNOB 00005417 293350 411566 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 18.90 HANDLES 00005411 293351 410692 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 28.25 361989 81212012 100593 SULLIVAN, JOSEPH F 300.00 HISTORICAL COLUMN 293352 319 1130.6123 MAGAZINE/NEWSLETTER EXPENSE COMMUNICATIONS 300.00 361990 81212012 100900 SUN NEWSPAPERS 803.33 FINANCIAL REPORT 293256 1385393 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 41.97 PUBLISH NOTICE 293257 1386477 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 53.94 PUBLISH NOTICE 293258 1386475 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 41.97 PUBLISH NOTICE 293259 1386476 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 95.92 PRIMARY ELECTION NOTICE 293260 1387761 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 35.97 CANDIDATE FILING NOTICE 293261 1387760 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 113.91 AD FOR BID 293262 1388736 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 251.79 AD FOR BID 293263 1388737 1120.6120 ADVERTISING LEGAL ADMINISTRATION 1,438.80 361991 812/2012 102925 SUPERIOR TECH PRODUCTS 2,746.89 LIQUID FERTILIZER 293264 5201 -RGR 5422.6540 FERTILIZER MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 2,746.89 361992 81212012 121492 SUPERIOR TURF SERVICES INC. 3,414.89 FUNGICIDE 00006271 293265 8262 5422.6545 CHEMICALS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 3,414.89 5440.5511 361997 81212012 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 101029 TESSMAN COMPANY, THE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX CITY OF EDINA, COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 811/2012 7:52:16 R55CKREG LOG20000 1,532.22 WETTING AGENT 293267 S162728 -IN 5431.6406 1,532.22 Council Check Register 81212012 Page - 27 121253 THAYER, LARRY - 7127/2012 — 8/2/2012 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 293135 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO #. , Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 361993 81212012 120998 'SURLY BREWING CO. 464.35 1,574.40 702351 293182 003909 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 293319 00773606 - 1,574.40 293183 003910 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5862.5515 1,574.40 4,814.10 293184 003908 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 6,055.10 488.00 293414 003961 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD.BEER YORK SELLING 117042 THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT 5,211.20 228.00 HYLAND LAKE PARK TRIP 293320 361994 81212012 130355 SUTTON & ASSOCIATES INC. - 7,000.00 ART CTR CONSULTING. SERVICES 293353 2388 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 7,000.00 361995 812/2012 101027_ TARGET..BANK - 131.50 X- XXX =XX9 -840 SUPPLIES 293266 071812 5410.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES GOLF ADMINISTRATION 131.50 361996 81212012 104932 TAYLOR MADE 876.09 MERCHANDISE 293542 18272469 5440:5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO.SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 158,22 293543 18288045 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 411.50 293544 18346016 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP - PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 139.65 293545 18063586 5440.5511 - COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1It a a-1� 293546 187t1703 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 361997 81212012 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 101029 TESSMAN COMPANY, THE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 1,532.22 WETTING AGENT 293267 S162728 -IN 5431.6406 1,532.22 361998 81212012 121253 THAYER, LARRY - 105.45 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT 293135 072012 1652.6107 105.45 361999 61212012 101035 THORPE DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 464.35 293318 702351 5421.5514 724.00 293319 00773606 - 5421.5514 52.65 293415 703282 5862.5515 4,814.10 293416 703283 5862.5514 6,055.10 362000 61212012 117042 THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT 228.00 HYLAND LAKE PARK TRIP 293320 30477 1624.6406 COST OF -GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES GENERAL SUPPLIES RICHARDS GC MAINTENANCE MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE WEED MOWING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES PLAYGROUND & THEATER R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Register 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier/ Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description 8/1/2D12 7:52:16 Page - 28 Business Unit 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1495.4113 ELECTRICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 228.00 362001 81212012 127318 TIGER ATHLETICS INC. 880.00 FITNESS MATS & ROPES 00003829 293548 INV479 750.00 FITNESS TRAINING 293549 INV478 1,630.00 362002 8/212012 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL 325.00 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES 6/19 293268 M19170 157.50 BOARD MEETING MINUTES 6/28 293321 M19179 482.50 362003 8/212012 103277 TITAN MACHINERY 76.91 TERMINALS 00001822 293136 9C07081 17.65 DIODE 00006252 293269 9C06786 19.97 KEYS 00006247 293270 UC03785 114.53 362004 812/2012 101474 TITLEIST 749.46 GOLF BALLS 293550 0800624 1,773.30 GOLF BALLS 293551 0820725 '1 2,522.76 . 362005 81212012 129507 TORVUND, DOUGLAS ' 795.00 ELECTRICAL INSEPCTIONS 293137 072412 795.00 362006 8/212012 123649 TOWMASTER 619.50 SPINNER HUBS, ADAPTOR DRIVES 00005396 293138 340639 619.50 I 362007 812/2012 100682 TRUGREEN - MTKA 5640 614.56 INSECT CONTROL 00001629 293139 070912 454.24 293140 7/2012 1,068.80 362008 812/2012 118190 TURFWERKS LLC 230.11 BLADES 00006269 293271 M102254 404.03 TIE ROD, BUSHINGS 00005403 293479 0128333 I 634.14 362009 8/2/2012 123969 TWIN CITIES OCCUPATIONAL HEALT 8/1/2D12 7:52:16 Page - 28 Business Unit 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1470.6104 CONFERENCES & SCHOOLS FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 1120.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 5110.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ART CENTER ADMINISTRATION 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 5440.5511 COST OF GOODS - PRO SHOP PRO SHOP RETAIL SALES 1495.4113 ELECTRICAL PERMITS INSPECTIONS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 1643.6103 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES GENERAL TURF CARE 5422.6530 REPAIR PARTS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS 1553.6530 REPAIR PARTS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 29 Subledger Account Description Business Unit ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SEED FIELD MAINTENANCE SEED FIELD MAINTENANCE SOD & BLACK DIRT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL. SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE PAPER SUPPLIES YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL GENERAL SUPPLIES. GRANDVIEW MAINTENANCE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF.GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR RECYCLING COMMUNICATIONS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No 549.00 PRE - EMPLOYMENT PHYSICAL 293480 101943879 1550.6121 549.00 362010 81212012 102150 TWIN CITY SEED CO. 80.16 GRASS SEED 06001653 293141 28164 1642.6547 240.47 GRASS SEED 00001703 293142 28193 1642.6547 609.19 SEED 00006159 293272 28205 5422.6543 929.82 362011 8/212012 114236 USA BLUE BOOK 1,074.89 MH LID EXTRACTORS, DEODORANID0001679 293354 718676 5923.6406 . 1,074.89 362012 81212012 100050 USPS- HASLER 1,000.00 TMS - 202739 293481 072612 1400.6235 1,000.00 362013 81212012 101058 VAN PAPER CO. 102.71. CAN LINERS 00001777 293143 242278 -00 1552.6406 433.16 CAN LINERS 00001705 293144 242796 -00 1646.6406 614.99 LIQUOR BAGS 00007512 293355 242877 -00 5842.6512 48.09 LIDS 293482 24184401 5421.6406 1,198.95 362014 812/2012 116869 VANCE BROTHERS INC.. 418.52 WIRE WHEELS 00005453 293483 23045 4091.6406 418.52 r 362015 81212012 102970 VERIZON WIRELESS 32.78 293145 2770347372 5952.6188 40.01 293145 2770347372 1130.6188 102.33 293145 2770347372 1600.6188 286.78 293145 2770347372 1470.6188 91.78 DISPATCH PHONES 293322 2769685357 1400.6188 553.68 362016 81212012 119464 VINOCOPIA 492.50 293417 0059451 -IN 5842.5513 572.50- 293418 00592117 -IN 5842.5513 609.00 293419 0060332 -IN 5862.5513 108.75 293420 0060330 -IN 5862.5515 149.26 293421 0060331 -IN 5862.5512 r 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Page- 29 Subledger Account Description Business Unit ADVERTISING PERSONNEL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL SEED FIELD MAINTENANCE SEED FIELD MAINTENANCE SOD & BLACK DIRT MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS GENERAL. SUPPLIES COLLECTION SYSTEMS POSTAGE POLICE DEPT. GENERAL GENERAL SUPPLIES CENT SVC PW BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES BUILDING MAINTENANCE PAPER SUPPLIES YORK SELLING GENERAL SUPPLIES GRILL GENERAL SUPPLIES. GRANDVIEW MAINTENANCE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE TELEPHONE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF.GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR RECYCLING COMMUNICATIONS PARK ADMIN. GENERAL FIRE DEPT. GENERAL POLICE DEPT. GENERAL YORK SELLING YORK SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 30 7/27/2012 -8/2/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 89.50 293617 0060432 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 149.00 293618 0060433 -IN 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 185.50 293619 0060329 -IN 5822.5512 COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING 529.00 293620 0060328 -IN 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,740.01 362017 8/212012 120627 VISTAR CORPORATION 602.25 CONCESSION FOOD 293484 34219023 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 375.69 293485 34229181 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 1,001.74 293486 34256142 5320.5510 COST OF GOODS SOLD POOL CONCESSIONS 1,979.68 362018 812/2012 102542 WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS INC 13,140.87 FEASIBILITY STUDY 293273 21380800006 44008.1705.20 CONSULTING DESIGN P21 50TH &FRANCE CENTER RAMP 13,140.87 362019 81212012 121042 WALLACE CARLSON PRINTING 86.26 GIFT TAG LABELS 293323 50901 5120.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES ART SUPPLY GIFT GALLERY SHOP 86.26 362020 81212012 120725 WARNERS STELLIAN 1,089.04 DISHWASHER 00003828 293552 0628206AYJDA 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 2,734.91 ICE MAKER 00003828 293553 0628206AYJD 1470.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES FIRE DEPT. GENERAL 3,823.95 362021 81212012 101973 WILMOT, SOLVEI 86.03 MAY 2012 MILEAGE 293487 053012 1490.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PUBLIC HEALTH 62.16 JUNE 2012 MILEAGE 293488 063012 1490.6107 MILEAGE OR ALLOWANCE PUBLIC HEALTH 148.19 362022 812/2012 101033 WINE COMPANY, THE 3,376.35 293185 304598 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 1,512.05 293422 305270 -00 5842.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING 3,368.35 293423 305283 -00 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 1,507.70 293621 305267 -00 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 9,764.45 362023 812/2012 101312 WINE MERCHANTS 393.23 293186 416898 5822.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING 3,774.88 293424 417657 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 2.80 293425 417655 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING 49.12- 293426 58451 5862.5513 COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CHEMICALS CHEMICALS FERTILIZER 8/112012 7:52:16 Page- 31 Business Unit SOTH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING CITY OF EDINA R55CKREG LOG20000 VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE . YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING Council Check Register 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 7/27/2012 -812/2012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # - Doc No Inv No Account No VERNON SELLING 91,87- VERNON SELLING 293427 58450 5822.5513 VERNON SELLING 201,12 VERNON SELLING 293622 417654 5842.5513 YORK SELLING 317.23 50TH ST SELLING 293623 417656 5842.5513 4,548.27. 362024 8/212012 130471 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 1,376.55 CIVITAS 00006493 293274 57990366 5422.6545 2,753.10 CIVITAS 00006261 293275 57989962 5422.6545 1,044.66 HERBICIDE 00002071 293554 58023645 5761.6540' 5,174.31 362026 81212012 124291 WIRTZ_BEVERAGE MINNESOTA 1,747.27 293187 775747 5822.5513 1,783.33 293188 775748 5822.5512 14.70- 293189 808467 5862.5515 15.70- 293190 795985 5862.5515 32.94 293191 864292 5822.5512 140.50- 293192 864398 5842.5513 4,315.66 293428 779060 5862.5512 6,162.83 293429 779059 5862.5513 1,344.18 293430 779063 5822.5512 1,15 293431 775678 5822.5512 1,076.42- 293432 779062 5822.5513 2,978.52 293433 779066 5842.5512 5,937.68 293434 779064 5842.5513 57.10 293435 779065 5842.5515 50.27- 293436 864397 5862.5513 59.64 293437 864718 5862.5512" 162.20- 293438 864293 5842.5513 583.45 293624 780719 5862.5513 65.55 293625 779061 5862.5515 526.83 293626 780722 5842.5512 1,777.00 293627 780721 5842.5513 174.10- 293628 864944 5822.5512 27,706.92 362027 81212012 124529 WIRTZ BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 24.00 293193 929585 5822.5514 21.50 293194 929584 5822.5515 94.00 293195 929819 5842.5514 4,842.10 293196 929818 5842.5514 72.00 293439 930215 5862.5514 Subledger Account Description COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE CHEMICALS CHEMICALS FERTILIZER 8/112012 7:52:16 Page- 31 Business Unit SOTH ST SELLING YORK SELLING YORK SELLING MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS MAINT OF COURSE & GROUNDS CENTENNIAL LAKES OPERATING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE . YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF, GOODS SOLD LIQUOR VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD WINE YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD LIQUOR 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX 50TH ST SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING R55CKREG LOG20000 CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 Council Check Register Page - 32 7/27/2012 -8/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier / Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description Business Unit 192.00 293440 930214 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 64.50 293441 929836 5862.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX VERNON SELLING 2,302.15 293442 930213 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 5,372.60 293443 929835 5862.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER VERNON SELLING 3,933.00 293444 930795 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 240.00 293445 930796 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 3,807.05 293446 929583 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 793.30 293447 929637 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 679.50 293489 932291 5421.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER GRILL 1,310:54 293629 933054 5842.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER YORK SELLING 21.50 293630 932810 5822.5515 COST OF GOODS SOLD MIX BOTH ST SELLING 24.00 293631 932811 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 1,515.25 293632 932809 5822.5514 COST OF GOODS SOLD BEER 50TH ST SELLING 25,308.99 362028 81212012 101726 XCEL ENERGY 15,532.98 51- 6644819 -9 293490 333500342 5720.6185 LIGHT & POWER EDINBOROUGH OPERATIONS 15,532.98 362029 81212012 100568 XEROX CORPORATION 234.08 CANCELLATION INVOICE 00004322 293356 062769513 1550.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL CENTRAL SERVICES GENERAL 234.08 362030 81212012 103564 XPEDX 1,497.90 LETTERHEAD STOCK 293357 9014612839 1550.6406 GENERAL SUPPLIES CENTRAL. SERVICES GENERAL 1,497.90 362031 81212012 130621 YMCA 150.00 RENTAL REFUND 293555 072612 5501.4556 ICE RENTAL ICE ARENA REVENUES 150.00 362032 8/212012 119647 YOCUM OIL COMPANY INC. 12,610.31 DIESEL FUEL 00005975 293358 501574 1553.6581 GASOLINE EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 12,610.31 362033 812/2012 130618 YOUNGSTEDTS COLLISION CENTER 1,320.32 VEHICLE REPAIRS 00005470 293359 10279 1553.6180 CONTRACTED REPAIRS EQUIPMENT OPERATION GEN 1,320.32 362034 8/2/2012 101091 ZIEGLER INC 6,000.00 EQUIPMENT LEASE 00001840 293654 K2415202 1301.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE 6,000.00 EQUIPMENT LEASE 00001840 293655 K2415201 1301.6151 EQUIPMENT RENTAL GENERAL MAINTENANCE CITY OF EDINA 8/1/2012 7:52:16 R55CKREG LOG20000 Council Check Register Page -. 33 7/2712012 —8/212012 Check # Date Amount Supplier I Explanation PO # Doc No Inv No Account No Subledger Account Description. Business Unit 12,000.00 362035 8/212012 126004 FERGUSON WATERWORKS 179,538.87 PARTIAL PAYMENT NO. 1 293658 080312 05536.1705.30. CONTRACTOR PAYMENTS WATER METER REPLACEMENT 179,538.87 747,953.49 Grand Total Payment Instrument Totals Check Total 747,953.49 Total Payments 747,953.49 R55CKSUM LOG20000 Company 01000 GENERALFUND 02300 POLICE SPECIAL REVENUE 04000 WORKING CAPITAL FUND 04800 CONSTRUCTION FUND 05100 ART CENTER FUND 05200 GOLF DOME FUND 05300 AQUATIC CENTER FUND 05400 GOLF COURSE FUND 05500 ICE ARENA FUND 05700 EDINBOROUGH PARK FUND 05750 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK FUND 05800 LIQUOR FUND 05900 UTILITY FUND 05930 STORM SEWER FUND 05950 RECYCLING FUND 07400 PSTF AGENCY FUND 09900 PAYROLLFUND Amount 152,814.20 268.98 43,214.41 1,048.95 10,831.71 3.864.63 5,496.33 38,010.03 3,701.13 15,985.38 7,282.57 201,671.06 256,503.93 1,110.94 32.78 866.71 5,249.75 Report Totals 747,953.49 CITY OF EDINA Council Check Summary 7/27/2012 - 8/212012 8/1/2012 7:53:16 Page- 1 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 po�liciesTnd nrnnnrly trop rho J CITY OF EDINA CITY. COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 5/26/12- 6/25/12 Number Name Date Amount Description , Merchant Name City State Account * *5144 MATT SISTERMAN 2012/06/15 $385.67 MONITORS MONOPRICE INC 909- 989 -6887 CA 5410.6409 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2012/05/24 $69.57 MEETING D BRIAN'S DELI - #6 MINNEAPOLIS MN 1470.6106 -7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2012/05/31 $68.00 PERSONAL - REPAID AMAZON MKTPLACE PMTS AMZN.COM /BILL WA 1470.6406 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2012/06/01 $115.29 GLOW STICKS GLOWWITHUS.COM 847 -348 -8145 IL 1470.6406 **7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2012/06/18 $208.02 DEHUMIDIFIER TARGET 00023135 EDINA MN 1470.6406 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2012/06/18 $187.99 GPS UNIT GARMIN INTERNATIONAL 9133978200 KS 1470.6406 * *7693 MARTY SCHEERER 2012/Q6/21 $58.98 FLOWERS ARTISTIC FLORAL 952 - 920 -4772 MN 1470.6406 **0127 KAREN KURT 2012/06/14 $48.00 CONFERENCE SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITI 612 - 7207667 MN 1120.6105 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2012/05/29 $46.08 MEETING ROMANOS 1171 EDINA MN 1120.6106 **0168 SCOTT NEAL 2012/06/06 $0.85 MEETING MPLS METERS MULTI MINNEAPOLIS MN 1120.6106 **0168 SCOTT NEAL 2012/06/06 $121.90 MEETING SPOONRIVER MINNEAPOLIS MN 1120.6106 **0168 SCOTT NEAL 2012/06/07 $25.92 MEETING EDEN AVENUE GRILL EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2012/06/19 $93.91 CELL PHONE SPRINT *WIRELESS 800 -639 -6111 KS 1120.6188 * *0168 SCOTT NEAL 2012/06/19 $35.77 MEETING EDEN AVENUE GRILL EDINA MN 1120.6106 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/05 $232.63 MEETING D'AMICO & SONS /EDINA EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/06 $275.00 CONFERENCE PAYPAL *NAPC 402- 935 -7733 CA 1140.6104 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/08 $45.00 MEETING PATISSERIE MARGIO EDINA 952 - 9260548 MN 1140.6106 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/09 $125.00 MEMBERSHIP INT'L CODE COUNCIL INC 888 -422 -7233 IL 1495.6105 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/12 $50.05 TRANSACTION FEE PAY FLOW PRO 888 - 883 -9770 NE 1550.6155 **0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/08 $38.00 CONFERENCE SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITI 612 - 7207667 MN 1140.6104 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/12 $19.95 TRANSACTION FEE PAY FLOW PRO 888 - 883 -9770 NE 1550.6155 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/12 $805.98 MONITORS WWW.NEWEGG.COM 800 - 390 -1119 CA 5410.6406 * *0176 JOHN WALLIN 2012/06/19 $108.22 MEETING D'AMICO & SONS /EDINA EDINA MN 1100.6106 * *0143 DEB MANGEN 2012/05/26 $980.88 LODGING RED LION HOTEL CONV CTR PORTLAND OR 1180.6104 **0143 DEB MANGEN 2012/05/25 $2.40 TRAIN TRIMVET TVM PORTLAND OR 1180.6104 * *0143 DEB MANGEN 2012/06/15 $358.56 TOWER FAN TARGET.COM * 877 - 848 -4483 MN 1180.6406 * *0184 ROBERT WILSON 2012/05/24 $95.46 LODGING HOLIDAY INN SAINT CLOUD MN 1190.6104 * *0184 ROBERT WILSON 2012/05/24 $89.85 LODGING HOLIDAY INN SAINT CLOUD MN 1190.6104 **0184 ROBERT WILSON 2012/05/24 $95.46 LODGING HOLIDAY INN SAINT CLOUD MN 1190.6104 * *0184 ROBERT WILSON 2012/05/24 $95.46 LODGING HOLIDAY INN SAINT CLOUD MN 1190.6104 **0184 ROBERT WILSON 2012/06/01 $500.00 REGISTRATION IAAO ORG 816- 7018100 MO 1190.6104 * *0184 ROBERT WILSON 2012106/20 $32.12 PLANNER FRAN KLI NCOVEYPRODUCTS 800 - 819 -1812 UT 1190.6406 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2012105/31 $9.42 VEHICLE EXPENSE SUPERAMERICA 4554 ST MICHAEL MN 1552.6406 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2012/06/05 $650.00 REGISTRATION AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS 816 -472 -6100 MO 1240.6104 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2012/06/05 $10.71 HANDLE ACME TOOLS #220 PLYMOUTH MN 1301.6406 G: \Purchasing cards\2012 USB Purchasing Card Register.xlsx 7/30/2012 CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 5/26/12- 6/25/12 Number Name Date Amount Description Merchant Name City State Account **0101 WAYNE HOULE 2012/06/04 $226.00 PIPE THREADER TOTAL TOOL SUPPLY INC 651 -647 -3024 MN 1301.6556 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2012106/19 $99.99 CAR DETAIL MISTER CAR WASH 601 EDINA MN 1553.6238 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2012/06/19 $135.50 DUES BOARD OF AELSLAGID 651- 2962388 MN 1240.6105 * *0101 WAYNE HOULE 2012/06/21 $118.13 SPIN SCREED SPIN SCREED INC 217 - 2222378 IL 1301.6556 -4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/06 $57.90 PROPANE SUPERAMERICA 4047 EDINA MN 1301.6406 * *4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/06 $26.81 PROPANE SUPERAMERICA 4047 EDINA MN 1301.6406 **4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/06 $32.17 PROPANE SUPERAMERICA 4047 EDINA MN 1301.6406 * *4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/09 $72.83 PERSONAL - REPAID COBORN'S #2038 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 * *4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/09 $13.25 PERSONAL - REPAID COBORN'S #2038 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 * *4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/09 $101.96 PERSONAL - REPAID COBORN'S #2038 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 **4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06109 $7.35 PERSONAL - REPAID COBORN'S #2038 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 **4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/10 $45.57 PERSONAL - REPAID COBORN'S #2038 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 **4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/16 $11.33 PERSONAL- REPAID SUBWAY 03127081 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 * *4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/15 $38.70 PERSONAL - REPAID COBORN'S #2038 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 * *4882 ANDERSON SHAWN 2012/06/15 $17.27 PERSONAL - REPAID COBORN'S #2038 NEW PRAGUE MN 1301.6406 **0135 JEFF LONG 2012/05/31 $820.00 CONFERENCE HTE USER'S GROUP 951 - 7807997 CA 2310.6104 **0135 JEFF LONG 2012/05/31 $200.08 RENTAL CAR AVIS.COM PREPAY 800- 352 -7900 NJ 2310.6104 **0135 JEFF LONG 2012/05/30 $54.61 BOOKS MINNESOTA BOOKSTORE 651- 2968233 MN 1400.6405 **0135 JEFF LONG 2012/06/06 $64.02 PERMITS MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLIC 651 - 4570677 MN 1400.6405 **0135 JEFF LONG 2012/06/07 $300.00 REGISTRATION ZAPEVENT 612 - 548 -5648 MN 2310.6104 **0135 JEFF LONG 2012/06/07 $339.12 REGISTRATION ZAPEVENT 612 - 548 -5648 MN 1400.6104 * *0135 JEFF LONG 2012/06/08 $625.00 CONFERENCE APCO -INTL 386 -944 -2422 FL 2310.6104 **0135 JEFF LONG 2012/06114 $805.48 LODGING HILTON HOTELS LONG BEACH LONG BEACH CA 2310.6104 "0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/05/25 $455.92 SOCKS VISR V1MM.VISR.NET NC 5720.5510 *"0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/05/30 $20.00 DUES UST *USTA MEMBERSHIP 800 - 9908782 NY 1600.4390.02 **0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/01 $209.70 DIVE RINGS WAYFAIR*WAYFAIR 877 - 9293247 MA 5311.6406 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/01 $30.35 BADGE HOLDERS FUN EXPRESS 800 - 2280122 NE 1624.6406 "0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/04 $195.21 RADIOS BEST BUY MHT 00002816 RICHFIELD MN 5311.6406 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06104 $870.13 CLOTHING SEI *EUROSPORT 800- 934 -3876 NC 5311.6201 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/05 $62.93 DIAPERS TARGET 00023135 EDINA MN 5311.6406 **0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/05 $35.61 POSTAGE PB METER RENTAL 800 - 228 -1071 CT 5710.6235 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/09 $321.40 MEETING NELSON MEAT COMPAN HOPKINS MN 1623.6406 "0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/07 $84.33 SAUCER SUPERIOR GROWERS SUPPLY, 517 - 8872007 MI 1624.6406 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/13 $174.34 MEETING DAVANNI'S #15 EDINA MN 1624.6406 **0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012106/18 $108.95 SUPPLIES TARGET 00002600 ST. LOUIS PAR MN 1624.6406 G: \Purchasing cards\2012 USB Purchasing Card Register.xlsx 7/30/2012 CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 5/26/12- 6/25/12 Number Name Date Amount Description Merchant Name City State . Account * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/18 $112.00 REGISTRATION ACT *USTA TEAMTNS 877- 243 -8107 CA 1623.6406 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012106/18 $130.00 OTHER CROWD CONTROL WAREHOUSE 847- 9919900 IL 5521.6406 **0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/18 $15.00 OTHER CROWD CONTROL WAREHOUSE 847 - 9919900 IL 5521.6406 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/19 $234.70 MEETING. PINSTRIPES EDINA MN 1624.6406 **0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/19 $5.31 SUPPLIES LAKESHORE LEARNING #23 ST LOUIS PARK MN 1624.6406 "*0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/20 $330.33 SOCKS VISR WWW.VISR.NEf -NC 5720.5510 * *0119 JOHN KEPRIOS 2012/06/20 $77.00 SUPPLIES WM SUPERCENTER #1855 -. EDEN PRAIRIE MN 1624:6406 * *0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/05/25 $55.00 AWARD ENTRY NTA UPPER MIDWEST 952 - 381 -7494 MN 1130.6104 **0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/05/28 $5.00 SPAM BLOCKER AKSMT.COM 877- 273 -8550 CA 1130.6124 **0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/05/29 $110.00 AWARD ENTRY NTA UPPER MIDWEST 952- 381 -7494 CA 1130.6104 **0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/06/04 $1.95 TEST TRANSACTION PP *4827CODE 402- 935 -7733 CA 1130.6103 * *0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/06/04 $150.00 WORKSHOP MAGC 651 - 6754434 MN 1130.6104 **0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE . 2012/06/07 $49.00 SUBSCRIPTION CTO *GOTOMEETING.COM 800- 263 -6317 CA 1495.6103 **0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/06/15 $209.60 AIRFARE UNITED AIR 0162330814662 HOUSTON TX 1130.6104 *"0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/06/16 $358.64 LODGING HOTELS.COM US 800- 219 -4606 WA 1130.6104 **0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/06/15 $175.00 REGISTRATION PRSA MIDWEST DISTRICT 847 - 5262010 IL 1130.6104 * *0085 JENNIFER BENNEROTTE 2012/06/19 $42.87 BATTERIES MICRO CENTER #045 RETAIL ST LOUIS PARK MN 1130.6406 * *5821 AMY SMITH 2012/06/08 $217.19 POSTERS POSTERS ON BOARD 612- 8617274 MN 5420.6406 * *5821 AMY SMITH 2012/06/08 $8.68 SUPPLIES XPEDX PAPER & GRAPHICS BLOOMINGTON MN 5410.6513 * *5821 AMY SMITH 2012/06111. $106.25 ADVERTISING THE MINNESOTA- DAILY 612- 6274080 MN 5410.6122 **5821 AMY SMITH 2012/06/13 $5.48 CLUB REPAIR GOLFSMITH GOLF'CTR #68 RICHFIELD MN 5440.6406 **5821 AMY SMITH 2012/06/18 $106.25 ADVERTISING THE MINNESOTA DAILY 612- 6274080 MN 5410.6122 **0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/05/25 $111.95 SUPPLIES MENARDS 3021 BURNSVILLE MN 5761.6406 **0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/01 $1,479.91 MULCH MENARDS 3268 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5761.6540 **0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/04 $389.12 SUPPLIES MENARDS 3021 BURNSVILLE MN 5761.6406 **0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/05 $159.60 SUPPLIES MENARDS 3268 EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5761.6406 "0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/07; $467.26 SUPPLIES MENARDS 3021 BURNSVILLE MN 5761.6406 * *0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06111 $125.09 SUPPLIES MENARDS 3021 BURNSVILLE MN 5761.6406 **0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2612/06/12 $401.64, SIGNS FEDEXOFFICE 00006221 EDINA MN 5761.6406 **0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/14 $166.85 DECKING MENARDS 3021 BURNSVILLE MN 5761.6532 * *0667 TOM SHIRLEY - 2012/06/18 $23.49 TACKLE GANDER MOUNTAIN. EDEN PRAIRIE MN 5761.6406 * *0667 TOM SHIRLEY - 2012/06/20 $85.81 SUPPLIES DICK'S CLOTH ING &SPORTING RICHFIELD MN 5761.6406 * *0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06114 $25.37 PARTS WW GRAINGER 877- 2022594 MN 5761.6406 * *0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/14 $12.68 PARTS WW GRAINGER 877- 2022594. MN 5761.6406 * *0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/14 $12.68 PARTS WW GRAINGER 877 - 2022594 MN 5761.6406 G:\Purchasing-cards\2012 USB Purchasing Card Register.xlsx 7/30/2012 CITY OF EDINA CITY COUNCIL CREDIT CARD PAYMENT REGISTER 5/26/12- 6/25/12 Number Name Date Amount Description Merchant Name City State Account *"'0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/22 $269.00 PRINTER OFFICE MAX EDINA MN 5760.6513 '*0667 TOM SHIRLEY 2012/06/22 $421.25 SUPPLIES THE HOME DEPOT 2805 BLOOMINGTON MN 5761.6406 "0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2012106/07 $30.00 COMPLIANCE EDINA LIQUOR 50TH EDINA MN 5822.6406 "*0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2012/06/07 $30.00 COMPLIANCE EDINA LIQUOR 50TH EDINA MN 5862.6406 "0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2012/06/08 $15.00 BATTERIES CUB FOODS #3128 EDINA MN 5840.6406 **0093 STEVEN GRAUSAM 2012/06/16 $32.17 TRAY BED BATH & BEYOND #165 BLOOMINGTON MN 5840.6406 $19,632.16 We confirm to the best of our knowledge and belief, that these claims comply in all material respects with the requirements of the City of Edina purchasing poll ie and nrn#%0r41 vr,ft0 r-4— c ( 1 G:1Purchasing cards\2012 USB Purchasing Card Register.xlsx 7/30/2012 o� e '� •tyroRPQR�`� • 114 J896 REPORPRECOMMEN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item # IV. C. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering ® Action Discussion Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Engineering Services For Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Project Recommendation: Authorize City Manager to approve attached agreement with Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. for the Feasibility Study and Bid Documents for the Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project. Info /Background: The agreement is for the feasibility study and bid documents for the Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction project. Normandale Neighborhood is bounded by TH 100 on the west, TH62 on the north, West Shore Drive on the east, and West 66th Street on the south and includes West 64th Street, West 65th Street, Sherwood Avenue, Ryan Avenue, Parnell Avenue, and West Shore drive. The estimated fee for this work is $241,806, which is approximately 6.9% of the estimated reconstruction cost. SEH has successfully conducted engineering services for many Edina neighborhood roadway reconstruction projects. ATTACHMENTS: Engineering Agreement for Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, July 30, 2012 g: \pw \central svcs \eng div \projects \impr nos \bo394 normandale 2013 \admin \1ega1\Item Iv._. engineering services - normandale neighborhood improvements.docx 0 S�F� SUPPLEMENTAL LETTER AGREEMENT July 30, 2012 RE: City of Edina Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Improvements SEH No. EDINA 121105 10.00 Mr. Wayne Houle, PE City Engineer City of Edina 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina MN 55439 -3037 Dear Wayne: Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.® (SEH) sincerely thanks you for the opportunity to assist the City of Edina (City) with the Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Improvements Project (Project). We will provide our services as described by our task hour budget (THB) enclosed with this Supplemental Letter Agreement to our Agreement for Professional Engineering Services dated July 25, 1988, herein called the Agreement. Based on bid tabs for similar projects adjusted to 2013 dollars, the estimated reconstruction cost is $3.5 million. Our proposed not to exceed fee of $241,806 reported by our THB is approximately 6.9% of the estimated reconstruction cost. Our not -to- exceed fee includes reimbursable expenses. If the City accepts this Supplemental Letter Agreement, we will bill the City monthly on an hourly basis for services, expenses, and equipment to complete our work in the project area described by the enclosed map labeled Figure 1. Our anticipated project production schedule. is given in the table below. Work Item Work Work Item Description Work Item Key Item No. Milestone Date 1 Begin work on the Feasibility Study August 7, 2012 2 Contact CenterPoint Energy about Reconstructing their August 15, 2012 Gas Main Trunk and Service Pipes in the Project Area 3 Neighborhood Meeting September 5, 2012 4 Deliver the Draft Report to City Staff for Review September 14, 2012 5 Edina Transportation Commission Meeting — Present Draft September 20, 2012 Stud 6 Edina Transportation Commission Meeting — Recommend October 18, 2012 Study for A pproval by the Council Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10901 Red Circle Drive, Suite 300, Minnetonka, MN 55343 -9302 SEH is an equal opportunity employer www.sehinc.com 1 952:912.2600. 1, 800.734.6757 952.912.2601 fax Mr. Wayne Houle, PE July 30, 2012 Page 2 Work Item Work Item No. Work Item Description Work Item Key Milestone Date 7 Public Improvement Hearing December 11, 2012 8 Begin Advertising for Bids January 31, 2013 9 Open Bids February 19, 2013 10 CenterPoint Energy Begins Field Work to Reconstruct Gas Main Trunk and Service Pipes in the Project Area April 8, 2013 11 Begin Construction Mav 6, 2013 This Supplemental Letter Agreement, Figure 1, the TUB, and the Agreement represent the entire understanding between the City and SEH in respect to the project and may only be modified in writing if signed by both parties. Thanks again for considering using SEH for this project. As always, please contact me with questions or comments at 952.912.2611 or ppasko @sehinc.com. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. JjV�e4 rde Paul J. ,Pasko III, PE Project Manager tm Enclosures c: Toby Muse, SEH (without Enclosures by e-mail only) Brent Theroux, SEH (without Enclosures by e-mail only) Justin Klabo, SEH (without Enclosures by e-mail only) p:\ae\e\edina \121105 \1- genfl10- contracts \proposal\fs_bid docs \prop Itr normandale 073012 final.docx Accepted on this _day of , 2012 City of Edina, Minnesota By: Name w, bti` s�ii 3 qr, � ",� �,' A yt r 5 [R ' - r. " , rK r 'fi'� s a � t" {�l ytr ` ' f' �-' ' t !E ` r °. 4w +~ / i a k �+,�� M, i x� "' °';8-.'l�{ t x� a•,� ,`tr as �. ,�. , � � _ '- fit �'rt;,_ '+n- a r � '!, � S ssx �qC , frqF y t lt1j<ri Q�C�>� J Tl !.. � � "Y +s � j �,�1 si �', .�GGl - 336q 013x .,!.,53 r0 Y N� r ( ! - 1 +1r# 'd 4(� ° �61 6 r. . 3301is� 02 '4 _ - 0 1,J�3���, }y}}f� ' > ���z i 5 j i�i 6 3- 333 F0,t11- 1-3 7(I 1 � � ' 6t G33000 631 r G300 63 G3014 305 W 63 0'630 �609 9 ms " ' 8 2 � ' f.` Ov "1 6316 s x ir� ry ! z Q o J . . ! 'I r I ' i . . ir'r"lF11 i ' r t s � � `�r r r 1j t t� .Y z t k t 1 ,F l} s 'r' ' ` , �r- t, . F 5' ` �� l ._ ` � ��r { . "�_ t:^ � r= g.,, r ?t - }' ;:yy ; J ' y ' , , 'a 6 - r f t r J` "t .�� rSE , �sr� ' �fS t �' (r y d �- 9 � a� ��, Y1r 1 ��j 1 { y ' S Y "1� ,`, 1 ti' �i t,` '� y�P jf j rji I t 1 rti k 1 ! r �aa 't , . a ...r` e — � ,+R 1 "� S ' , ) 1 � ! , yi 3 ' l - 1 ; _1 "6. -u, A� ��� �. 66666J l , s 5' ! .5 544 441"r � . .K,20L2`01��. ' ?+ �`� s 4 . 8 : '. 4, 6 t2 8° �� '� i , : ' a � E. ' W _ F.w o O ij { rM � + :' µ , a - ; 7R �r # d F s ii a✓� t J3 # i ef ! l t � r ; � ' 't Xa Y � '-kP �4 f V T6 5 , S p 4° / T � j �!.>ry &h�r: I_ ',E °1cy: , . � _ ,`z(. �' .' 7j , t ' w i "- a 6+ e - 4 ra ��9r5 66I{ � + a,, j - 4.41.' yw7• f r t rA a +rAi 1� C 7r . 1 3� � .t � r� 'l Ff w } 7 t ? 0 ,_ fi- jt .i ,S ] . r-i . -a r "_ t:# " "'!t ' ; ' _ -. _ :' . € ' . - - t t F " 4 - -------- +t - -`F .�x5r 1 r ! r t , t ,Ge i 6gyl _,� - `r 4Y •5`4, " p , 3+ a- —firka . � <-1'�x 21,.A -,�2t ' ��5t' ".r;{:6 � - 1 .� :6 i:r- a e q i' ��-. 1 ; k- � ,.: ' . J ' ' r ..-,7� � d W J L I ' • � p _ Wj� �.1 � t� .di- � - L ' � t ` �' �� .,� � G ` ." " - �� r. . _P, .{�g� .'.�.\:I a, �' �,., ' 6. �y3y � - a 17 t r� � '1 � 1 . r b' � + ', a ;dsj A 6t , ` i e�C y .3Pr . { 43" � i •S `� . aa , t j,-' i 2, r ": 9,• ` :' % ; > ' �. .- s66 . . . 4 0 aa i�j� 6 !) 4= J 4!+ r� ' 7r rz5/r 11:c `t - r2i;j t f `' '3 2 6 - s -�x ' ; 0 te' i 2 , / A� �� ~ i 1 ev - ' r ^ Y r � �K , i .N, i ; • e 'i Y1 ) f ✓tt+! , if � t ta r 1 a r � h � r t �+ fiJ�x d' +' £4 y �{' 6 L i ' r , "L z �7 '� y!i � r��� f i , , ' } �` ir' M r � $4'r- � x ,t ' � ,t �, S � t 9 t F ;r - , r : `F #i� o1i - . �y ! - t Eu �` � - [ �a 2* �� t !` � r ,, .r � r � Y4 s e n ' i`�+!t }` t . = r L J i t ��t Up ' , p' o v� ���, . , t ��L � ' �i wr 22^ jr 2 , •t' _ =✓, s 4 4 v5 r y `fr• : F r � ` S y 2` . i� Fr ` x � x 4 % r ,,� � ��c L.�u .� 1 fr y• rj yl 1 l. am` 1Ir FF� JYz'r .r ' .�i r� yt Y f�,r kai % l 'x , y6t6,L L r{t 3. ,M 2t � r t 4 s0 � 6325 !632 632 m631 2 r6333 `4850 3 6325' F $t 64TH ST W 4841 6401 a' 640 6401 4717 00 401 24 409 6404 8 Q t 641 40 i .1 Of O ';j64 17 42 642 1'J{/6-425 f <` {{6 424 jN 6425 ° W 32 432 i CI"y i643 64 r W F 6501 6500 6 66500 Q 501 6500 O 6509 4 6508 ° s 69 j-'6508 650 W 6516 512 t 24 12 5 6524 65 66525 p 6526 6529 r r48 2 65 65� 65 8 33 4 NMI- 6 � 166TH ST u .• .. '2t� ' �`,t•� ,,, ' . ' k t . 4 r - �•. y . I - , .4 .S i R rr,E�• , r.±'.,r , 'r i '�.�_�_�> r �� `� `� 3 •il 6601 ryr�a tt t ?v 6601 4905���660 '48091 r. t # / S � � r 24; r�'°'�� 16608' O�.^ 1i -A SEH City of Edina Normandale Neighborhood Roadway Improvements (63) July 30, 2012 Page 1 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT TASKS FEASIBILITY STUDY PHASE 1.0 Data Collection 1.1 Collect & Verify Data from the City 1.1.1 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Tapes/Disks and Logs (1) 1.1.2 Verify Utility as- builts from City (98 1.1.3 Digital parcel mapping from the City 1.1.4 List of working water main gate valves (88) 1.1.5 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan dated 7/03 prepared by BARR Engineering for the project area. 1.1.6 List of property owner information (5 1.1.7 Locations of sanitary sewer blockages 1.1.8 Sanitary sewer manhole structure survey data (91) 1.1.9 Previous soil boring logs and/or test results 1.1.10 Trunk water main pipe repair type and locations (90) 1.1.11 Topographic survey completed by City staff 1.1.11.1 3D base drawing file 1.1.11.2 3D topographic survey point files 1.1.12 Investigate with City staff available sites for a contractor storage yard (6) 1.1.13 Aerial mapping 1.1.13.1 Photograph 61 1.1.13.2 Contours 62 1.1.14 Latest versions of proposal form, instructions to bidders, general conditions, special conditions, City of Edina standard specifications and standard plates for inclusion in the project manual 1.1.15 Existing driveway photographs Page 1 of 14 Page 2 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT TASKS 1.2 Gopher State One Call 1.2.1 Obtain Ticket No. 1.2.2 Collect atlases from private utility companies in the project area 1.3 Supplemental Topographic Survey 92 Subtotal Labor Cost $5,871 2.0 Geotechnical Investigation 4 2.1 Review City Subsurface Investigation Program 3 2.2 Assist Geotechnical Drilling/Testing Services (19) 2.3 Develop soil stratigra hy/ rofile 2.4 Assess trench excavation and backfill 2.5 Assess road subgrade (including intermixing of trench backfill soils) 2.6 Assess feasibility of HDD for installation of storm sewer and drainage features 2.7 Evaluate proposed roadway typical section 2.8 Evaluate the feasibility of utilizing existing pavement section as a reclaimed aggregate base product into the proposed street section 2.9 Prepare Draft Geotechnical Technical Memorandum 2.10 Prepare Final Geotechnical Technical Memorandum 2.11 Comment on final geotechnical details during bid document preparation (103) Subtotal Labor Cost $9,821 3.0 Kick -off Newsletter & Questionnaire (7)(94)(95) Subtotal Labor Cost 4.0 Field Inspection (69) 4.1 Inspect storm sewer manholes and storm sewer catch basins (8) (9) 4.2 Inspect existing curb and gutter for reincorporation into the project (57)(96) 4.3 Inspect existing pavement for limits of alligator cracking to indicate presence of subgrade soils needing repair (58) 4.4 Observe storm water runoff during a rain event Subtotal Labor Cost $2,192 5.0 Street / Pavement Design (64)(65)(66)(84) 5.1 Develop street pavement sections (2)(60) 5.2 Evaluate raising Ryan Ave cul -de -sac and associated driveway impacts (55) Page 2 of 14 Page 3 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT TASKS 5.3 Determine the locations and depths of subgrade repairs (2)(58) 5.4 Neighborhood Sidewalk Investigation 93) 5.5 Prepare 30% complete tabulation of removals and miscellaneous restoration Subtotal Labor Cost $8,273 6.0 Drainage / Storm Sewer Design (14)(45)(97) 6.1 Prepare layout of proposed storm sewer extensions /new systems 11 6.2 Identify tributary areas 12 6.3 Calculate runoff coefficient "C" factor 12) 6.4 Determine time of concentration "Tc" for tributary areas 6.5 Size proposed storm sewer pipes (13) 6.6 Evaluate West Shore Drive outlet pipes (29) 6.7 Prepare approximate layout for proposed sump pump drain pipe network (15) (5 9)(110) 6.8 Design layout of draintile network based on recommended subcuts 6.9 Size storm water runoff treatment manholes (10) 6.10 Identify existing manholes, trunk pipes, and catch basins needing reconstruction in the project area (33) 6.11 Investigate adjustments to the street profile in select locations to improve the flow of storm water runoff to existing and proposed catch basins Subtotal Labor Cost $8,479 7.0 Sanitary Sewer Design (70) 7.1 Study location of reported blockages in the trunk pipe network (36) 7.1.1 Based on study, identify location of trunk pipe repairs by open cut methods (68) 7.1.2 Based on study, identify location of trunk pipe repairs by trenchless methods 7.2 Service Pipe 7.2.1 Reconstruction Plan (39 7.3 Identify existing manholes needing reconstruction in the project area (37) Subtotal Labor Cost $2,928 8.0 Water Main Design 67) 8.1 Develop Suggested Staging Plan (5 1) Page 3 of 14 Page 4 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT TASKS 8.1.1 Evaluate Locations of Existing and Proposed Valves and Fire Hydrants 8.1.2 Evaluate Layout of Temporary Water Main and Water Services (50) 8.2 Trunk Pipe 8.2.1 Reconstruction Plan (52) 8.2.2 Relocate Fire Hydrant (38) 8.3 Service Pipe 8.3.1 Reconstruction Plan (99) Subtotal Labor Cost $15,939 9.0 Street Lighting 16 Subtotal Labor Cost 10.0 Calculate Quantities 78 10.1 Streets 10.2 Storm Sewer 10.3 Sanitary sewer 10.4 Water Main Subtotal Labor Cost $5,719 11.0 Prepare Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost 11.1 Prepare Engineer's Opinion of Probable Cost (17) (18) Subtotal Labor Cost $4,167 12.0 Preliminary Assessment Roll 20 21 22 12.1 Count single family parcels 12.2 Input parcel information data into XLSX spreadsheet 12.3 Prepare preliminary roll 12.4 Account for special corner lots that received 1/3 or 2/3 rate assessments as part of a previous or future reconstruction project 12.5 Review reliminary roll with City staff 12.6 Use roll to generate public improvement hearing notices Subtotal Labor Cost $3,504 13.0 Prepare Feasibility Stud 13.1 Write draft feasibility study (23) 13.2 Prepare project area location map figure 13.3 Prepare preliminary assessment role figure 13.4 Review draft study with City staff (86) 13.5 Prepare final study 13.6 Prepare and submit hard copies of the study 13.7 jPrepare and submit PDF file of the study Subtotal Labor Cost $14,124 Page 4 of 14 Page 5 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT TASKS 14.6 Meetin s _.. 14.1 Kick -off meeting with City staff (56) 14.2 Letter to CenterPoint Energy (24) 14.3 Letter to other Private Utilities (106) 14.4 Review results of soils borings and draft geotechnical memo with City staff by conference call 14.5 Water Main Analysis 100 14.6 Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) Meeting (108) 14.6.1 Prepare for and attend the ETC meeting (109) 14.7 Neighborhood Meeting 81 14.7.1 Prepare invitation to Neighborhood Meeting (25) (26) 14.7.2 Prepare preliminary assessment role graphic 72 14.7.3 Prepare hard copy of 30% complete tabulation of removals and miscellaneous restoration (87) 14.7.4 Prepare plots summarizing improvements for use at the meeting (27) 14.7.5 Prepare attendance roster sheets and attend Neighborhood Meeting (71)' 14.8 Public Improvement Hearing 14.8.1 Prepare invitations for Public Improvement Hearing and send via US Mail and place ad in Newspaper (25) (26) 14.8.2 Prepare for Public Improvement Hearing 14.8.3 Attend Public Improvement Hearing (28) 82 14.9 Private Licensed Plumber Informational Meeting (107) 14.10 Private Sanitary Sewer Service Pipe Reconstruction Meeting for Property Owners (107) ,.. $ubtotal Labor Cost ; .. $15,481 BID DOCUMENTS TRA S E 15.0 finalize. Street /.Pavement Design 15.1 Finalize design (30) (31) (73) (74) (75) Subtotal Labor Cost , ` . :. $16;886 16.0:. Finalize Draina a / :Storm Sewer, Desi n 16.1 Storm Sewer Extensions and New System Design (32) (33) (35) (101) Subtotal Ub-ot Cost-,­ Page 5 of 14 Page 6 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT TASKS 17.0 Finalize Sanitary Sewer Design 17.1 Finalize Design (102 Subtotal Labor Cost $4,952 18.0 Finalize Water Main Design 18.1 Finalize Design (104) Subtotal Labor Cost $11,716 19.0 Bid Document Preparation 19.1 Plan sheets 19.1.1 Title Sheet 19.1.2 General Layout 19.1.3 Suggested Water Main Staging Plan 105) 19.1.4 Tabulation of earthwork 19.1.5 Tabulation of existing sanitary and storm sewer structure reconstruction or adjustment 19.1.6 Tabulation of existing sanitary sewer trunk pipe joint or spot repairs 19.1.7 Tabulation of removals and miscellaneous restoration 19.1.8 Typical pavement sections & List of Standard Plates 19.1.9 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan 46) 19.1.10 Plan and Profile sheets (40 )(76 (77 19.1.11 Cross Section sheets (42) 19.2 Project Manual 19.2.1 Front End 43 19.2.2 Bidding Requirements (79) 19.2.3 Conditions of Contract (85 19.2.4 Specifications 19.2.5 Special Provisions 19.2.6 Appendix 44 Subtotal Labor Cost $70,476 20.0 Quantities and Opinion of Probable Cost 20.1 Refine Opinion of Probable Cost and Proposal Form from Feasibility Study (41) 20.1.1 Streets 20.1.2 Storm Sewer 20.1.3 Sanitary sewer 20.1.4 Water Main Subtotal Labor Cost $7,985 21.0 Agency Review / Submittals 111 21.1 City of Edina 48 Page 6 of 14 P:\NE \E \Edina\ 121105\ 1 - genl \10 - contracts \Proposal \FS_Bid Docs\ SEH THB Normandale Council.xlsx]THB Page 7 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT COST SUMMARY PROJECT TASKS FEASIBILITY STUDY PHASE 21.2 Subtotal Hours Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 47) 89 Subtotal Labor Cost $96,497.18 21.2.1 Subtotal SEH Expenses 53 Grading and Earthmoving Permit (80) Subtotal 21.3 BID DOCUMENTS PHASE Private Utility Companies Subtotal Hours 1,161 21.4 Subtotal Labor Cost $141,272.37 MPCA Subtotal SEH Expenses 53 $ 2,535.63 21.4.1 $143,808.00 NPDES Permit/SWPPP (34) $241,806.00 Subtotal Labor Cost $6,935 22.0 Meetings 22.1 With City Staff 22.1.1 Review 90% Plan set Meeting 22.2 Letter to CenterPoint Energy (24) Subtotal Labor Cost $2,575 23.0 Bidding Assistance 54 23.1 Prepare Ad for Bids 23.2 Prepare Electronic Bid Documents 83) 23.2.1 Plans 23.2.2 Project Manual 23.3 Respond to Bid Inquires 23.4 Prepare necessary Addenda 23.5 Attend Bid Opening 23.6 Prepare Tabulation of Bids 23.7 Print paper copies of plans and project manual 49 Subtotal Labor Cost $10,594 P:\NE \E \Edina\ 121105\ 1 - genl \10 - contracts \Proposal \FS_Bid Docs\ SEH THB Normandale Council.xlsx]THB Page 7 of 14 ESTIMATED COST PROJECT COST SUMMARY FEASIBILITY STUDY PHASE Subtotal Hours 774 Subtotal Labor Cost $96,497.18 Subtotal SEH Expenses 53 $ 1,500.82 Subtotal $97,998.00 BID DOCUMENTS PHASE Subtotal Hours 1,161 Subtotal Labor Cost $141,272.37 Subtotal SEH Expenses 53 $ 2,535.63 Subtotal $143,808.00 TOTAL COST ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPOSAL: $241,806.00 P:\NE \E \Edina\ 121105\ 1 - genl \10 - contracts \Proposal \FS_Bid Docs\ SEH THB Normandale Council.xlsx]THB Page 7 of 14 NOTES 1 For the inspection of the trunk sanitary sewer pipes in the project area. 2 Typical sections and subcut locations will be per the geotechnical memorandum prepared for the feasibility study. 3 Task includes reviewing City's Request For Proposal (RFP) for geotechnical drilling and testing. services. RFP, including final boring locations, to be developed by City with input from SEH. Official RFP to be distributed by the City to contract geotechnical services. 4' Task assumes that a materials testing firm will enter_into a contract directly with the City for the.. geotechnical field work and testing. 5 List will be an XLSX file containing at a minimum property address, property owner name, property owner address, and PID number. .6 Includes investigating sites to stock pile pipe and reclaimed aggregate base materials produced on -site. 7 We assume the City will coordinate preparation of the newsletter text, map, questionnaire and mailing labels and send to residents. 8 We will inspect only structures with insufficient data gathered from the City's storm sewer structure survey project. We will only inspect structures within the street rights -of- -ways. 9 If additional inspection is needed, inspection results will be compiled on paper structure survey forms. Whenever possible, City supplied manhole and cat&basin numbers will be used for identification purposes. 10 Based on a field visit, a storm water runoff treatment manhole is likely not feasible along West'Shore Drive due to the existing water elevation of the pond east of the project area. This task involves evaluation and design of City approved style of storm water treatment structures at the intersection(s) .of either or both Parnell Avenue and 65th Street and /or Parnall Avenue and 64th Street. 1 l Scope of this task includes the evaluating the existing storm sewer system and determining if storm sewer extensions along Sherwood Avenue, Ryan Avenue, and Parnell Avenue are necessary. Includes upsizing the existing system if deemed necessary. The scope of the extensions will be determined based on resident questionnaires and a field visit during a rain event. 12 Consult Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan dated 12/11 for the City of Edina prepared by BARR Engineering. Back check against existing air flow "n contour mapping of the project area. - 13 Based on a 10 -year design storm. 14 As,was the case for the Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvements Project,'no ,storm sewer design review by BARR will be required as part of this project. 15 Where existing curb and gutter. is removed and replaced, the sump pump drain pipe will be trenched into, place behind the proposed curb. and gutter. Where there is existing curb and gutter, the sump pump drain pipe may be horizontal directional drilled (HDD) into place behind the existing curb and gutter. 16 Residents will be asked about the desire to install a street lighting network in the questionnaire. We assume street lighting will not be included in the scope of this project. If the neighborhood does request this system, SEH and the City will negotiate a8upplemental Agreement for these services. Page 8 of 14 17 Costs will feature a 15% contingency factor. 18 Costs will be computed in 2013 dollars. 19 Includes a site visit to observe existing conditions, assistance with questions during drilling and testing, a review of collected soil samples, and recommendations for laboratory testing. Does not include staking borings in field. 20 Justification for assessments is attributed to properties receiving benefit from the new roadway and is established in accordance with the City's Special Assessment Policy. City staff will review the assessment graphic to ensure accuracy with the City's Special Assessment Policy. 21 Utility reconstruction costs will not be assessed to residents in the project area. 22 The assessable lot is based on a detached single family home or REU. 23 Study's scope and format will follow the example set by the Feasibility Study for the Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvements project dated January 3, 2012. 24 Identify with CenterPoint Energy gas main and service pipe reconstruction work within the project area that needs to be done prior to beginning street reconstruction activities. No meeting needed at this time. CenterPoint Energy will be notified of the project during the feasibility phase of this project and instructed to plan for existing facility re- locations. During the design phase, 90% complete plansheets will be submitted to assist CenterPoint Energy in their re- location planning. 25 Task includes preparation of an invitation/letter /questionnaire; printing, folding, and delivering invitations to Public Works; and the preparation of mailing labels. 26 City staff will insert letters /invitations /questionnaires into envelopes, apply postage and mail the letters /invitations from Public Works. 27 SEH will provide three (3) plots at a scale of 1 " =30'. Each plot will have as a base the aerial photo of the project area with 1. existing sanitary and storm sewer trunk pipes line work 2. existing watermain trunk pipe line work 3. topographic survey line work 4. property and right -of -way lines 5. street names and addresses, and 6.30% complete proposed improvements for curb and gutter, storm sewer, drain tile, sanitary sewer, water main and fire hydrant relocations and replacements. The plots will be taped to the wall during the meeting. These plots will become the basis for the bidding document plan set. 28 SEH will present a 10- minute long PPT file to the Council describing the project and answer resident and Council questions. 29 Includes determining if upsizing is required and what impacts will occur on the Lake Cornelia Nature Trail if storm sewer work is required, including development of a trail detour route, if necessary. 30 Horizontal centerline alignments and stationing will be assigned to all streets in the project area utilizing the existing concrete curb and gutter alignments where feasible. 31 Vertical alignments will be assigned to all streets in the project area. Wherever possible, the profile of the existing pavement seam will be held constant. 32 Complete the detailed design of both storm sewer extensions and/or new systems shown in the feasibility study. 33 Repairs or replacements of existing storm sewer structures and pipes are based on recommendations from City staff and the structure condition surveys completed by SEH staff during its field inspection operations. Page 9 of 14 34 Includes having SEH water resources staff review the SWPPP for any recent rule changes prior to submitting to the MPCA. 35 Complete the detailed design of the sump pump drain pipe shown in the feasibility study. Place the sump pump drain pipe behind the concrete curb and gutter using open cut or HDD. methods. Sump pump drain pipe may need to be proposed in a position in front of the curb and gutter at select locations. 36 Study is based on recommendations from City staff, results of the City supplied map showing recent blockage locations, and SEH's review of the CCTV inspection of the trunk pipes in the project area. 37 Sanitary sewer manhole reconstruction will be based on recommendations from City,,and SEH staff. Recommendations will be based on information gathered from the manhole inspection program. 38 All existing fire hydrants in the project area will be removed and replaced. Hydrants in front of residences will be relocated within the boulevard to be adjacent to the nearest common side -yard property line. Fire hydrants will be inserted to keep the spacing between fire hydrants under 400 -feet. 39 Includes, determining the type of sanitary sewer service reconstruction technique used between the right - of- -way line and the wye. Techniques will include open cut, CIPP lining, or pipe bursting. Techniques will be chosen to minimize impacts to existing landscaping features. 40 Task includes adding the private utility line work to the base mapping. 41 We will use the same applicable cost splits shown in the Feasibility Study. 42 Cross section plan sheets will be created for streets where curb and gutter is proposed or existing curb and gutter slopes need modification to improve drainage. . 43 Contains title sheet, certification sheet, table of contents, contact sheet, instructions to bidders, and advertisement for bids. 44 Contains soil boring data, City standard plates, and SEH construction details. 45 We assume no storm water modeling of the ponds east of West Shore Drive will be required due to the existing water level elevation of the pond relative to the existing elevations of the storm sewer outlet pipes. It is anticipated that no new storm water will be introduced to the ponds. Task assumes we will evaluate outlet configurations for upsizing and/or erosion control since the proposed storm sewer extensions will likely increase the volume and velocity of the storm water. 46 Contains information similar to that shown on the plan for Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvement Project dated 3/5/12. 47 Assumes no wetland permitting or storniwater management relative to the pond east of West Shore Drive will be required since the project's outlet pipe will not be extended or introduce any additional flow. 48 Includes one (1) submittal of draft final bidding documents to the City in 11x17 format. 49 Print only enough copies for appropriate City and SEH. staff. 50 Plan assumes that each house contains an operable shut -off valve just upstream of the water meter. 51 We will evaluate water main reconstruction and its staging plan since this will likely drive the overall phasing of the project. Page 10 of 14 52 We will evaluate water main rehabilitation techniques including open cut vs. cured in place pipe (CIPP) lining vs. pipe bursting as part of the feasibility report and suggest a preferred method or methods to the City. 53 Reimbursable expenses during study and bid document bidding assistance phase includes mileage, permit fees and printing costs. 54 Does not include a pre -bid meeting. 55 Task will evaluate raising the elevation of the Ryan Avenue cul -de -sac to improve existing driveway grades and drainage. The proposed change, if deemed feasible, will be presented to the property owners at the Neighborhood Meeting. 56 This task was already completed on 6/12/12 with Pasko, Muse, Houle and Millner in attendance. 57 Using City supplied inspection criteria, we will visually field inspect the condition of the existing curb and gutter to quantify existing curb and gutter removal and reconstruction incorporated into the project. 58 We will visually field inspect the cracked conditions of the existing streets to estimate the amount of subgrade repair needed. 59 Sump pump drain pipe network will be a combination of HDPE, PVC, and C900 PVC sump drain pipe that contain service pipe stubs at each home for existing or future sump pump discharge connections. 60 Includes evaluating the feasibility of producing reclaim aggregate base and reincorporating it into the proposed street section. 61 City/Hennepin County will supply SEH the latest aerial photograph of the project area. 62 The City will supply SEH with the latest airflown contours. We understand that the contours are not to be exclusively trusted. Contours will be checked for accuracy against the City supplied topographic survey. 63 Tree removal shall only become necessary in extreme circumstances of reconstruction where no other feasible option exists to mitigate damage caused by reconstruction activities. 64 Residential area safety improvements are not included in the scope of this project. 65 Addressing and accommodating bicycle traffic within the neighborhood is not included in the scope of this project. 66 We assume street name signage is included in the scope of this project. SEH recommends City staff review the condition of the street sign poles to determine if replacement should be included. 67 Based on preliminary discussions with the City, we understand the entire existing water main trunk and service pipe network (up to and including existing curb stops) should be replaced in the project area. SEH will evaluate the extent of water main repair locations utilizing existing water main break information, further discussion with City staff and review of existing water main as -built drawings. 68 Type of rehabilitation will be a "spot" repair(s). 69 SEH assumes we will not inspect sanitary sewer manholes because the City has already done this work as part of their on -going sanitary sewer manhole inspection program. Page 11 of 14 70 Assumes reconstruction of private sanitary sewer service pipes between the right -of -way line and the wye is included in the scope of this project. Assumes homeowners will be given the opportunity to reconstruct their sanitary sewer service pipe from the right -of -way line to the wye prior to street reconstruction activities at the own cost. If necessary, we assume development of a new City policy relative to sanitary sewer service re construction, will be completed.by City - staff. If the City does request SEH's assistance, the City can define 'SEH's role and scope of work. The City and SEH will negotiate a Supplemental Agreement for these services. 71 Preparations include creating a -10- minute long PPT file for presentation to the'residents made by SEH staff. Homeowner comments4ill be recorded on the 1 "=30'.-summary plots. A'hard copy of the XLSX file 'summarizing resident responses to_,the kick -off questionnaire will be brought to this meeting as a reference document. 72 SEH will provide three (3) plots of the assessment role graphic taped to. the -wall next to one (1) 1 " =30' plot outlining proposed improvements. See footnote 27. The assessment role graphic will;be a parcel map with addresses and street names and each parcel shaded in a color explaining the amount of their estimated assessment. 73 Create intersection grading plans. These plans will not appear in the bid document plan set. Instead they will be utilized in the field by SEH surveyors staking the reconstruction. 74 Tabulation of removals and miscellaneous restoration arranged and sorted in order of ascending house number and street name. Subtotaled per street name. Totaled by neighborhood. Tabulation includes sawcutting; boulevard removal and replacement; sanitary sewer wye repairs; tree removal; pet .containment, irrigation, any special driveway system repairs; and hand forming curb and gutter near sensitive boulevard feature quantities. Notes for these1tems will not:appear in,the plan and profile sheets. 75 Tabulation of earthwork for insertion into the bid documents. Includes information on a per street basis regarding gross common excavation, reclaim aggregate base production and placement, imported class 5 aggregate base, subgrade repairs,, paving, topsoil borrow, and sodding. 76 Include street centerline profiles for all streets where existing curb and gutter will be replaced due to utility work. In areas where curb and gutter will remain, plan/plan sheets may be used. Include profiles of existing public utilities only when proposed public utility work can interfere with the existing utilities. This may result in some sheets being plan/plan view rather than plan/profile view. 77 Plan view base mapping is based on line work from City topographic surveying. No aerial photos will be included on the bidding documents. 78 Quantity calculations will be captured in a,;XLSX file that will be incorporated into the proposal form As part of the bidding document project manual and monthly pay applications utilized during reconstruction to track quantities and costs for each City funding source allocated for the project. 79 Includes proposal forms instructions to bidders, and advertisement for bids 80 SEH will prepare one (1) submittal letter transmitting review documents to. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. 81 Tentatively scheduled for 9/5/12. 82 Tentatively scheduled for 12/11/12. Page 12 of 14 83 Bid documents will be available for purchase via Quest CDN on the City's web site. 84 Where existing curb and gutter is present and can be reincorporated into the project, the street width will not change. 85 Contains a Contractor Questionnaire similar to that shown on the bid documents for Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvement Project dated 3/5/12. 86 SEH will collect City's review comments via conference call after SEH sends the draft study via PDF file attached to an email. 87 Hard copy tabulation shall be 3 copies on 11x17 paper for resident reference while they look at the plot summarizing the improvements to be undertaken. 88 We will use this list during preparation of the suggested staging plan. 89 We assume the entire project area is located in the Nine Mile Creek Watershed.District and that the project will not require stormwater management or treatment facilities. 90 Data provided in a tabular format as either a XLSX or DOCX file. Repairs located by address and arranged on a per street basis. If necessary, this information will appear in the Appendix of the project manual to assist bid preparation of pipe bursting or CIPP lining contractors, if determined a viable water main rehabilitation technique. 91 City will provide data as either a XLSX or DOCX file. If SEH determines the data to be insufficient, the scope of the additional surveys needed will be negotiated between the City and SEH and added as a Supplemental Agreement. 92 During the course of the feasibility study and bid document preparation, additional topographic survey may be needed to supplement the City supplied survey. This task serves as a placeholder to collect additional survey data that may include driveways and boulevards. Assuming the City cannot do this supplemental surveying itself, actual hours based on the scope of the supplemental survey will be negotiated between the City and SEH and added as a Supplemental Agreement. 93 We assume no sidewalk investigations will be included during the feasibility or bidding document phase of the project. 94 XLSX spreadsheet containing tabulated results of the questionnaire sent by the City to SEH. 95 Questionnaires for residents to complete and return to City for tabulation of results. Questionnaire will be sent to all residents of the project area and will cover presence of local drainage problems, pet containment systems and the interest in street lighting. 96 We will account for the existing concrete curb and gutter present throughout the project area and will attempt to salvage as much as possible during design of the project, where feasible. 97 Assumes no storm sewer lift station improvements are necessary at the intersection of West Shore Drive and 65th Street. 98 Includes verification of storm sewer lift station as- builts at the intersection of West Shore Drive and 65th Street and the sanitary sewer lift station located mid -block on 65th Street between Pamall Avenue and West Shore Drive. 99 Includes removing and replacing existing water service pipes from the trunk water main pipe up to and including the existing curb stop. 100 Meet with City staff to discuss water main repair techniques including open cut vs. CIPP vs. pipe bursting. Outcome of this meeting is the decision on which reconstruction method(s) to use. Page 13 of 14 E 101 Tabulate existing manhole or catch basin reconstruction or adjustment for inclusion in the bid document plan set. 102 Tabulate trunk pipe joint or spot repairs and manhole reconstruction/adjustments for insertion in bid document plan set. 103 Includes unit price estimates during development of engineer's opinion of probable cost. 104 Includes incorporation. of recommended trunk water main rehabilitation techniques including open -cut, pipe bursting, and CIPP or combination thereof. 105 While the plan will consider sanitary sewer; storm sewer;.flatwork; grading and base; and topsoil and sodding operations; we anticipate water main reconstruction to be the work element that drives the plan. 106 Task will notify Xcel Energy, Comcast, and CenturyLink of the potential project to inquire whether or not they have any facilities in need of updating. If so, the private utility companies will be instructed to coordinate with the City the timing of this work prior to the start of the improvement project. 107 Assumes this meeting will not be necessary consistent with the Richmond Hills Park Neighborhood Roadway Improvement project. 108 Tentatively scheduled for 9/20/12. 109 Preparations include creating a 10- minute long PPT file for presentation to the ETC made by SEH staff. ETC comments will be recorded and included into the project's feasibility study, if approved by City staff. 110 Sump pump drain pipe and sump pump drain service pipe design and quantities will be tabulated under the storm sewer improvement number. 111 Assumes the construction limits of this project will remain within the City's right of way adjacent to the State of Minnesota's Highway 62 and Highway 100 and that no permitting or coordination with MNDOT will be required. Page 14 of 14 o Le. 0 \��R�s 'Sw9 • REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.D. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering ® Action F-1 Discussion 0 Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -100 Bike Lane Designations ACTION REQUESTED: Ap�rove attached Resolution No. 2012 -100, establishing Cahill Road from West 78th Street to West 70' Street; West 701h Street from Antrim Road to Normandale Road; Antrim Road from West 70th Street to Valley View Road; and Valley View Road from Antrim Road to TH62 as Bike Routes and designating certain areas as bike lanes. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: At the January 3, 2012, City Council meeting, the City Council accepted the Edina Transportation Commission's recommendation of West 70th Street, Cahill Road, Antrim Road, and Valley View Road as corridors to establish as bike routes and designate and stripe as bike lanes. Staff prepared the attached plans for these corridors. State Statute provides that the City may by resolution designate these corridors as bike routes and establish bike lanes where the bike lanes can be striped. The width of the roadways do not allow bike lanes to be established the entire length of each corridor; therefore, "Share the Road" signs and pavement markings will be placed in the areas where bike lanes cannot be accommodated. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2012 -100 Proposed Bike Routes Plan — Sheets 1 through 27, dated August 3, 2012 Staff Report of January 3, 2012 G:\PW\CENTRALSVCS\STREETS DIV \SIDEWALKS N BIKEWAYS \Bike Routes \Item VI.D. Resolution No. 2012 -100 Bike Lane Designations.docx RESOLUTIO 0.2012 -100 ESTABLISHING CAHILL ROAD FROM WEST 78TH STREET TO WEST 70TH STREET; WEST 70TH STREET FROM ANTRIM ROAD TO NORMANDALE ROAD; ANTRIM ROAD FROM WEST 70TH STREET TO VALLEY VIEW ROAD; AND VALLEY VIEW ROAD ,FROM ANTRIM ROAD TO TH62 AS BIKE ROUTES AND DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS AS BIKE LANES WHEREAS, on December 15, 2011, the Edina Transportation Commission recommended to the City' Council striping and signing the following streets as bike routes - West 70th Street, Cahill Road, Antrim Road, and Valley View Road; and WHEREAS, on January 3, 2012, the City Council accepted the Edina Transportation Commission's recommendation; and WHEREAS, State Statute 160.263 provides that the City Council may by resolution designate all bike routes and lanes; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina: 1. The following corridors are established as bike routes: a. Cahill Road from West 78`h Street to West 70th Street b. West 70th Street;from Antrim Road to Normandale Road c. Antrim Road from West 70th Street to Valley View Road d:: Valley View Road from Antrim Road to TH62 2. The following areas shown in the attached plans pages 1 through 27 are designated as bike lanes. ADOPTED this 6th day of August, 2012. 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 August 6, 2012, and as recorded in. the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 20_ City Clerk ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 G y � � y �`1�* "�• 'p, � �` � y 4 + ^;«r: rrJ+ •�y` ,� r. ms " y� �` k �kf{. � " .H •' i ` EDINA ° + �'� a da '`• 1w4 c Aim r `$7y l r , + �� �nIJTE : 4, NORMANDALE ROAD � � f J N 4 I ' I �D 1 � r 5 p 1 JJ �D • fe 111' • ,4ar { y ..t � : %e '' ,r � j�+,ld _a � �'� �:e ,i�1�� �/ !-tom �i •a -' ,,.� ♦ ...� s °f,a; - - ,yTJ� Ar F' I �r imp T3 I Aw Aw Yfi . ., f • .y '� E.,1 UWA a IrM I N EDINA - ;,' r x'�" • a. .a J SHARES THE ROAD ..M t r< ._ . .... ... m • - w w d 1s' II � Y v _ .�'. � I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN UNDER WMY DIRECT SUPERVISION R PROPOSED CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING m AND THAT I AM A DULY �o`r��ti "i r p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE 4 �(��� 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND CD cw THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 a j n ; ��' ax 952- 826 -0371 Fax: 952 - 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMARKS N = K —4 DATE UC. NO, 43970 REVISIONS • t k. ap O t* • ' W RABUN DR 4N lb r i 0 ® GOA N " _r '+ N 0 c� I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS =� .�'�. LAN UNDERWMY DIRECT SUPERVISION PROPOSED ^M, CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING m .. 4 AND THAT I AM A DULY a�rr ao • °• REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE Ir/ \J e o 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND Z�t THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Edina, MN 55439 -3037 N ° a ;;a p' Ph: 952 -626 -0371 Fax: 952 -826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMARKS I DATE UC. N0. REVISIONS ry = M - 1 Mr o 0 0) pmw 4 OVO2 3Hl S VNIO3 T CD R r . t ; Jul .I, y • � a� ry a V J /� . xi A. - M '. r ,t • r� s Z y¢"P a) • i�Y' iw NJ �a N '4 ss r At • } B4 r ' aria. s r .z I .o x o \e • HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS D A PROPOSED PROPOSED STRIPING Zia F C7 D UNDERWAY DIRECT SUPERVISION N m AND THAT AM A DULY 4,p\�� %Y CITY OF EDIITA .. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL CA co • °• ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE r1/ e 1Jo 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND c.{ THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �\ /dam Edina, MN 55439 -3037 � Ph: 952 -826 -0371 ° 10 =d a - Fax: 952 - 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE i—RrMARKS N _ K � nATF• UC. N0. 43970 orincinuc -,! _ 'u k: m�gt . r ""t.. _W .r ff ,: --- . , kg, , -Y. No 2 fib « �Y , � � °�• �, �♦.y�_ — rte. +�r M t i }}. �•; . .k' � � �, � � - o° � it �. n: P. 1 { t f(J l • _ Z Z m G) •. ..�° w_ ` - .` r� yr. R W a ' - m 0 F. r 4 Tw ,�a t (n 1 ' • rx m a nrt x. C S •fir 7 F � y M Z .x Jii r i . ,�k r y *• a m -+ p Za a A !'�. n p I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS UNDERWMY D RECTR SUPERVMSIONR PROPOSED CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING ° M 00 AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE @ 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Edina, MN 55439 -3037 ° co Ph: 952 - 826 -0371 Fax: 952 -826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT NO. DATE BY � REMARKS nATF. U� No. alq,n , ^�z � rte- � .��� ,5• ` 1 �� �' t - .�► . / rye /� : I Q * - �,•, .. 1 yn *Y f t � pti M now AOr - m i yl r 1 +1► 4 ::o f i4 : 'j r t - . r r !1 ,TRH, IV 4. r, s w 1Ry ' r ,ti x ti • J �O n > _ 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS n > UNDER DIRECT SUPER VISION o >< PROPOSED N M, CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING m • • AND THAT I AM A DULY �,o��ti REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL BIKE ROUTE 2 co ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF �(e 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND c+ THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �\ /a° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 iV o No n m "�••°' Ph: 952- 826 -0371 N a: > --- DATE UC. NO. 43970 Fax: 952 - 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT NO. DATE BY REMARKS REVISIONS ter. a -.� 31no6 3inob 3N18 3118 1-2 ,.N 47 +00 lV V O O AiJ --1 iv o s U) f *1 m ♦ 3 r� fir : 1 t. m co s r• pD SS^ O I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS Or1ti CITY OF EDINA PREPARED BY ME C-U 2' LAN UNDERWMY DIRECT SUPERVISIONR PROPOSED �NaM� PROPOSED STRIPING mo .. AND THAT AM A DULY 4. �*7 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL e 2`" 7450 METRO BOULEVARD 1'11rD co ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE Y o THE STATE OF MINNESOTA a� Edina, MN 55439 -3037 SR o w Ph: 952 - 826 -0371 1 N 5 - A DATE ��. N0. X3970 Fax: 952 -826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMSIONS KS m ML 1 P-46%r*r _ r AhL- a g 0 m m J O t 8 T 0 t' r d F: „•= F c 1 rrl M Amr- r + j31 • � ri .. ,r BIKE ROUTE ,r,' �. A � 1. IT HILLSIDE LA o 1u y O D 2 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS LAN 0 UNDERWMY DRECTRSUPER ISIONR PROPOSED �NA•M, CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING m • • AND THAT[ AM A DULY 4 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ��T co cn � ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE � e �" 7450 METRO BOULEVARD 1]l�D c.+ THE STATE OF MINNESOTA >� db a° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 • m' Ph: 952- 826 -0371 :11 ; Fox: 952 - 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMARKS iv 2 M DATE UC. N0. 43970 REVISIONS 1 r r I N Oj y r a BIKE ar bl5 ROUTE •` } , y r m TRACY AVENUE w � o m � o d G[7 , ��3 • � STOP � r r> 31i 18 4 �• / r* L � w �y 7 .+^ :-tom ✓r ,. ;�f' a cn m m O 0 T 8 a m 0 1 Y D a m tl EDINA fi SHARES THE ROAD, q t t mki;i- Air ' 9 f o D v= C2 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS "LAN BY ME =+ ZZ !m. p UNDER WAS DIRECT SUUPERVISI NR PROPOSED o CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING m • • AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL / \Z m BIKE ROUTE �I) 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND 0o ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF y. THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 p' Ph: 952 -826 -0371 .3 N ° D � Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. JDA7EBY REMARKS w 1.s = m -+ DATE UC. NO. 43970 1 REVISIONS ro *-A + ol ws Ti Age ik' r 10 A17 vK A 7 0 4 1 I IJ4 J O A, *4 4 10 47 Z 4 X > # 0 CD riq 0 + .411, 14 . 4 - 3inaj jsfel' CIV%f 3H1 S38V IL 7 VNIGI wo I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS LAN AS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDERWAY DIRECT SUPERVISION PROPOSED CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING AND THAT AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL co ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND c"" m THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Edina, MIN 55439-3037 48Y��REM Ph: 952-826-0371 m c� @ ENT To DATE 12 >. ;a Fax: 952-826-0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT ARKS I� :r 3-- ­4 1 DATE: UC. NO. I i I qs 118 +00 i----- -- D� m C + W ANTRIM F119 +00 om rn � � r 31f102� . �, � :I 118 +00 i----- -- •ry� , fi VIM .0 L ~ � _�', _•� � �V ' "31noa ', », o [o " 3N18r0 — _ _..p. - 8 , oor t ~ + BIKE ! ! Y c ROUTE .. r A t - a„ r. ` ,fir. f ,.,w t• N, :,r+� `f .. a, � -x, ,n rrii f y � r s • SS ow vm 70 4k ;r Z m 4 + f t D t kid gr gj a,, , IF•j r 1 r . +t a� 1S HA9 �r +� � {` i:"'.+ . �. x •�`f � � �.r � t°K. aft Y� O D am HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS m LAN BY ME z A n D UNDERWMY DIRECT PREPARED PROPOSED PROPOSED STRIPING m AND THAT I AM A DULY �0����1, CITY OF EDINA REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL i N co ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE �(e m 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �\ /d° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 o zv o m "*q®� Ph: 952- 826 -0371 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DA BY REMARKS = n m Fax: 952- 826 -0392 ry x DATE; Uc. NO. 43970 REVISIONS *4 Of ,Ol 9 !, j" I f- 0 < m Z* Z 70 K 70 Q LL J, ig i On 4-< 4 -1 , c' >z W. IF OM4 SOON L ......... . . . . . . . . . pp- lm= %0 o z 0 + > 0z (A m Jll > X z m itwap 0 P-v tI 4- CHAPEL DR c� 'll 3�7 '0 io will f D- C-) C7 IPHEREBY CERTIFY THAT Th" C) LAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR a M > UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION PROPOSED CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING ;7�0 cm"' AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND I.- co F? ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE W I- THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Edina, MN 55439-3037 S; C:> Ph: 952-826-0371 ENT To �7 S. S. ;;a Fax: 952-826-0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT ATE -Ly- REMARKS --� I DATE: UC. NO. 43970 1 REVISIONS .4 WX S I ®r, co +' co Furl f t Ff I i 4 +� A :..r.. O ilk t yw ; r r.� m n law- r M Cn Z 4 ,v. 1 - it ..r ` II �I n U I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS D _ PROPOSED PROPOSED STRIPING D UNDER D RECTRSUPERVISIONR o,µaM CITY OF EDINA M AND THAT I AM A DULY ���ti REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL �/ e ~ c BIKE ROUTE) ^ 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND Co ao •• ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF > C.+ THE STATE OF MINNESOTA a� Edina, MN 55439 -3037 o ro q�m' Ph: 952 -826 -0371 N A DATE No. 43970 Fax: 952 - 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. tDATEHY REVISIONS KS i r ak: " 4 _ v �� 1 � � w•... Yw \ • _ ., .FEW � ' •• yy � ice' r 7 .. .,. �- nww °wtw.e• z "IMP , f ++ 'lw.... ... .. w .. +I% t., _ m lj � +.iii Ln 3 /^)..J �+A iw �� �0 / }I a. w /f/ if on- x Z � .w .� r� w. � .• J� m # r � � 1 , _ s l s*G M r t + _.. :. _. ..'::•. -_ .._ _.... ._ .. ....,,_. r..,,Bxs_,....w.'e'..,nel"�w. _r.:�a..w..� A .y .r ._.r+nd.v a,::.�a�._., .. `.....�,. y n- -o z o a c) v D V = A A n > ;E I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS WAS DIRECT SDUPERVASIONR UNDER PROPOSED NA CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING � m THAT I AM A DULY M, P m REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE @ �' �° 7450 METRO BOULEVARD �*T li.l`ID THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �� •'' Edina, MN 55439 -3037 N o p n m n pp Ph: 952 -826 -0371 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMARKS N 2 � -a PATE. UC. ND. 4397Q� REVISIONS T. - r y a i w qw Ys rn u k s. f.. s .. •IV1fkh t Clir , �I cb Aw r � m 1 .� m W �i to y y p. ♦ .. '..? + S� n t7 ➢ n ➢ I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS UNDER WMY DIRECT SUPERVISION R PROPOSED CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING O m AND THAT I AM A DULY 4.0\���,yZ rSTI Q m p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE fl/ e 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND CD THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �\ /a° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 LBY w • co n �' Ph: 952 -826 -0371 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. �DATE REMARKS N _ M -f DATE Uc. No. a— REVISIONS • -- _ -- •1+ r Y s s , + ' yr •6- '�,wy„��IY....pYU r:M""I;IM4. Jw- �Y ^i.� _ ♦ � _ R ., -- � '� s� �_« . O.r fK� '•`arm/, � r `� " r m *s _ m� low Ir lb CA cl e v, ,^A _ r , i , s f � J D Q ° I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS °� n = PROPOSED PROPOSED STRIPING 0 � UNDERWAY D M A DULY �NaM, CITY OF EDINA m • • AND THAT I PR A DULY �a��tii AND ° REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL BIKE ROUTE E " 7450 METRO BOULEVARD ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF � l c.+ THE STATE OF MINNESOTA /d° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 • �' Ph: 952 - 626 -0371 ° �°, a Fax: 952 -826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMARKS nA 2 K —4 DATE UC. N0. 43970 REVISIONS Ir r s 1 k � r c1l 151 +0a all m z m D PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR [�. n UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION m • • AND THAT I AM A DULY r�* p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL GD ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF CA THE STATE OF MINNESOTA � o iV o n m N s DATE: UC. NO. 43970 O X52 +oo i y AVE , iR AMY ,, 4* PROPOSED NaMi CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING BIKE ROUTE ( )d� Edina, METRO 55439- 3037 AND .e,®.p Ph: 952- 826 -0371 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT T� � Y Y ♦ ♦ 1I Imo'.. J J �{gq�yy } }• y�� Aq VIM � V .. r ow ter' ` � . .r•�k �c:3� I I� � Y� . .. r t ` T `�y` � � Y ....r J L-0 '.; - . ., 9 1 k � r c1l 151 +0a all m z m D PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR [�. n UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION m • • AND THAT I AM A DULY r�* p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL GD ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF CA THE STATE OF MINNESOTA � o iV o n m N s DATE: UC. NO. 43970 O X52 +oo i y AVE , iR AMY ,, 4* PROPOSED NaMi CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING BIKE ROUTE ( )d� Edina, METRO 55439- 3037 AND .e,®.p Ph: 952- 826 -0371 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT T� � r c1l 151 +0a all m z m D PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR [�. n UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION m • • AND THAT I AM A DULY r�* p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL GD ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF CA THE STATE OF MINNESOTA � o iV o n m N s DATE: UC. NO. 43970 O X52 +oo i y AVE , iR AMY ,, 4* PROPOSED NaMi CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING BIKE ROUTE ( )d� Edina, METRO 55439- 3037 AND .e,®.p Ph: 952- 826 -0371 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT T� O X52 +oo i y AVE , iR AMY ,, 4* PROPOSED NaMi CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING BIKE ROUTE ( )d� Edina, METRO 55439- 3037 AND .e,®.p Ph: 952- 826 -0371 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT T� 4 0$r vo, 14 'g- m y' ls� m UA16 + 0 JKAL + bt 0 C) 0 L + m + > 01 m fi t z n e I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS m > LAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERIVISION PROPOSED CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING AND THAT I AM A DULY m p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL 7450 METRO BOULEVARD co ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE AND I— THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Edina, MN 55439-3037 54 • Ph: 952-826-0371 r1a n co REMARK _Q S! > 35 Fax: 952-826-0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT DATE BY I w c::, @ NT -- I I N> K DATE Jc. NO, 43970 REVISIONS 75+00 •--1 I �- 4 70TH STREET Ir , •vM Y A �^ • t •►�" . ' w w ► -- 6' • O y 6, m. IL Sots t 1 � Y - F t + _ >: f y� 0 ME U I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PROPOSED PROPOSED STRIPING y z C) n D UNDER DIRECT SDUPERVISIONR X AND THAT I AM A DULY �,o����ti CITY OF EDINA p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL Z �*7 O Co • °• ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE �l /@ N 7450 METRO BOULEVARD til�D c.+ THE STATE OF MINNESOTA \� >do Edina, MN 55439 -3037 �' Ph: 952- 826 -0371 Q C3 a �1 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT NO. DATE BY REMARKS !v 2 = -+ DATE UC. NO. 43970 REVISIONS 6' w. " ',. 'L. Y� r a r 1 P7 c�♦ t .♦ _ 9 n • y r T :. • •`' ` rte .. 1 t w el, rT• D A f O ,, E t' `• 4. AMUNDSON AVE % . •. • --7 Y 6 �.#� !� —. %. , tR • • Y -7- a t 4 s a ou 4 g' i. .. Ae •if�'r 1. .�'rF� x. I --�w-ryg'•� N n— o> n o a o Co 4 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS UNDERWMY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT 1 AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF PROPOSED BIKE ROUTE Q�N °°M, CITY OF EDINA 4, \1, t �(t: 7450 METRO BOULEVARD PROPOSED STRIPING AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA �\ /a° Edina. MN 55439 -3037 ° N N = �' Ph: 952- 826 -0371 Fax: 952 -826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT NO DATE BY REMARKS DATE UC. NO. REVISIONS Z+ ♦ y , i 3 A � 8 k'r -. :�. .:m, .,; , .. sib �, _ I �• `� r A -' a e t 61 W �• 1 , Zian ;°�, -•° _ mil_ '+' _ „� �. � .. .•.. � c � + Alm ✓N `1 '.' .. '•"ir ,,,IFS f ` x.41 + r N ar ! - ' � • : F' O ; D a 2� > a m m � 4 OD I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF PROPOSED BIKE ROUTE NaM, CITY OF EDINA �OT�ti Z a �" 7450 METRO BOULEVARD PROPOSED STRIPING AND w THE STATE OF MINNESOTA ,� Edina, MN 55439 -3037 ° Iv x K ­4 �' Ph: 952- 826 -0371 Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT O BY REMARKS DATE: 0C. NO. 43970 REVISIONS s r.. 6, AIL W DIG �� f{ -�" 6' -�— � - � s ♦ ♦ s 0VVO8(3Hi SS32{1V-H-SyY ' + Z y - CO ! m D Z fa j m N cD c can I fl, T y N .. 4w (p .• s N K # rn i 4:: «y 0 O, " n — o n n O I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS �� a PROPOSED PROPOSED STRIPING Zaa n > UNDER WMY D RECT SUPER VISIONR Na M, CITY OF EDINA m AND THAT I AM A DULY �o�1ti2 AND o REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL BIKE ROUTE F? �r }� 7450 METRO BOULEVARD N ao •• ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF r / CW , THE STATE OF MINNESOTA a Edina, MN 55439 -3037 C) �' Ph: 952 -826 -0371 o n A Fax: 952 - 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMARKS Iv x K -+ DATE UC. NO. 4397Q REVISIONS +n ., "4 _ • I t tY.f i , 4. r 4L 4 0 A 41 i >r 4 r y _ 5 r M 1 ti s w w 4 Air t 4 t t tom_ -' 6� ,-• ,_ A. 9 y %N� t n * y r W4' •� * f _Y nw I fo 9' e { {♦� Y a i #. • i ,. _� ale l . Ido C) o D (") Q7 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS m • Y _ —, z Q UNDER WMY DIRECT SUPERVISION PROPOSED PROPOSED STRIPING m AND THAT I AM A DULY ^ti CITY OF EDINA p REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ��T oo • °• ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE �(e 7450 METRO BOULEVARD 1.11�D cb c.+ THE STATE OF MINNESOTA \/� Edina, MN 55439 -3037 N p Ph: 952 -826 -0371 w o Q ° n m Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DATE BY REMARKS 2 = -I DATE UC, NO. 43970 REVISIONS ��..; .. Y.F%,;"*1`G•�. ,g� �':.I . � ,�r � •fit xP lw • 1�_ y. �..-Y rr�.� a mom. i '6f: tit 3 � + t _ o t 3H1 Oeoa i S3a yys S � m ..., . VN10.3 » Z - 6, D m ,.. + ►. r 1� x x r iZ .> nly + • +� ,4 �.. µ { ,� �• • ' ' III'." , D 4 � `� � Z ` x s1t- �:;.• m tom... - x • =as I ny + 114' .. 15':. g *. o t - x a 12' \VY f NA WIT fie " "r .•F �� ". ',`�`, •- � V � ORES rME 0� Q P O -,. o, Ssn n o D n o 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS o Dvx� o WAS PREPARED BY DIRECT SUPERVISION PROPOSED a, CITY OF EDINA PROPOSED STRIPING ED N A Ax m • • AND THAT I AM A DULY �, r�tiZ REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL co o ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF BIKE ROUTE ( )'^ 7450 METRO BOULEVARD AND �„i THE STATE OF MINNESOTA a° Edina, MN 55439 -3037 °' Ph: 952 -826 -0371 12 a Fax: 952- 826 -0392 NEW SIGN PLACEMENT N0. DA BY REMARKS N = 9-- -1 DATE Uc. NO. 43970 REVISIONS - •100RF6R1-�- Jess i REPO RURECO M M E N RATIO N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.O. From: Jack Sullivan, PE Assistant City Engineer Action Discussion Information Date: January 3, 2011 Subject: 2012 Bike Routes Recommendation ACTION REQUESTED: Staff is preparing striping /signage plans and cost estimates for the proposed bike routes as recommended by the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC). If Council does not object, staff will plan for the bike route improvements in 2012 provided Public Works maintenance funds are available. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The ETC was presented with ,a recommendation from the Edina Bike Task Force (BETF) for the Public Works Department to sign and stripe four segments of bike routes in 2012: 1. 70th Street — Antrim to Hwy 100 2. Cahill Road — 70th to 78th Street 3. Valley View Road — Antrim Road to Hwy 62 4. 50th Street — Wooddale Avenue to Halifax Avenue The ETC reviewed the recommendation of the BET F and commented that 50th Street will be the most difficult bike route to install. The ETC suggested that Public Works efforts focus in the southwest corner of the City to extend the bike network that was recently started with the completion of 70th Street. Their recommendation included the following streets: 1. 70th Street — Antrim to Hwy 100 2. Cahill Road — 70th to 78th Street i 3. Antrim Road — 70th Street to Valley View Road 4. Valley View Road — Antrim Road to Hwy 62 I: \Admin \Council Packets 2012 \2012 -01-03 \Item IV. 0.2012 Bike Routes Recommendation.docx The ETC added Antrim Road as the logical connection between 70th Street and Valley View Road. All the suggested routes are State Aid roads and designated as primary bike routes in the 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update Figure 7.11. The routes., will be analyzed for compliance with State Aid standards, possible revised parking' restrictions and the possibility of lowering the speed limit to 25 mph per State Statue 160:263. If revisions t6,the parking or speed limit are suggested staff will bring these recommendations to Council for approval,,prior to ,implementation. ATTACHMENTS: ETC 2012 Bike,Route Graphic Draft ETC.Meeting Minutes — December. 15, 2011 ETC — Bike Edina-Task Force Bike Routes Report/Recommendation 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update - Bicycle Facilities Figure 7.1 -1 I: \Admin \Council Packets 2012 \2012 -01-03 \Item IV. 0.2012 Bike Routes Recommendaiion.docx 01 Vu ,eee REPORURECOM M EN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.E. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE ® Action Director of Engineering ❑ Discussion D Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -101 Designating No Parking on Antrim Road from West 70th Street to Valley View Road and on Cahill Road from Dewey Hill Road to West 78th Street ACTION REQUESTED: Approve attached Resolution No. 2012 -101, Designating No Parking on Antrim Road from West 70th Street to Valley View Road and on Cahill Road from Dewey Hill Road to West 78th Street. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND : At the January 3, 2012, City Council meeting, the City Council accepted the Edina Transportation Commission's recommendation of West 70th Street, Cahill Road, Antrim Road, and Valley View Road as corridors to establish as bike routes and designate and stripe as bike lanes. No Parking regulations will need to be established in the following two areas to designate bike lanes along these roadways: 1. Antrim Road — easterly side of roadway from West 70th Street to Valley View Road 2. Cahill Road — westerly side from Dewey Hill Road to West 78th Street. . ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2012 -101 G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \STREETS DIV \SIDEWALKS N BIKEWAYS \Bike Routes \Item VI.E. Resolution No. 2012 -101 Designating No Parking on Antrim Road from West 70th Street to Valley View Road and on Cahill Road from Dewey Hill Road to West 78th Street.docx 9 RESOLUTION -NO. 2012 -101 FOR PARKING RESTRICTION ON ANTRIM ROAD FROM WEST 70TH STREET TO VALLEY VIEW ROAD AND CAHILL ROAD FROM DEWEY HILL ROAD TO WEST 78TH STREET WHEREAS, THE City of Edina has planned bike improvements along Antrim Road and along Cahill Road; and WHEREAS,.this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both sides of the street; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the. City of Edina, Minnesota, that the City Council hereby bans the parking of motor vehicles on the following portions of Antrim Road and Cahill Road: 1. The east side of Antrim Road from West 70th Street to Valley View Road. 2. The west side of Cahill Road from Dewey Hill Road to West 78th Street. ADOPTED this 6th day of August, 2012. Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF EDINA ) SS James B. Hovland, Mayor CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City.of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting =of August-6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 20_ GAPW\CENTRAL SVCS\STREETS DIV\SIDEWALKS N BIKEWAYS \Bike Routes \Resolution No. 2012- 100.docx ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard . Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952 7826 -0371 ..Fax 952- 826 -0392 City Clerk us o Le t4` cn �y • fNcO,Rese ' �� REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item # IV. F. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering ® Action F-1 Discussion Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Elimination of 2005 Edina Transportation Commission Policy and the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan Recommendation: Recommend elimination of the 2005 Edina Transportation Commission Policy and the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan. Info /Background: The Edina Transportation Commission is requesting that the City Council eliminate the 2005 Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) Policy and the Neighborhood. Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) as per the attached ETC Report to the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: ETC Report to the City Council dated July 5, 2012 ETC Minutes regarding ETC policy and NTMP dated June 21, 2012 Memo from Jennifer Janovy to ETC, dated June 21, 2012 g: \engineering \infrastructure \streets \traffic \transp comm \advisory communications \2012\june 21 \item iv.n. elimination of 2005 edina transportation commission policy and the neighborhood traffic management plan.docx ETC. REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL SITUATION The Edina Transportation Commission Policy was adopted by the City Council in April 2005. The Policy incorporates the Neighborhood Traffic Management.Plan (NTMP). Advances since 2005 have made the ETC Policy obsolete, For example: • The ETC ordinance was changed in 2011 • Specific policies were incorporated into the 2008 Comprehensive Plan • Several short- and long -term goals in the Policy have been met • There has been little demand for the current Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) Because the Policy is obsolete it is rarely consulted. As part of Living Streets policy development, the Living Streets working group, engineering staff, and consultants are reviewing city ordinances, policies, and engineering standards with the intent to revise or eliminate those ordinances, policies, or standards that are inconsistent with Living Streets. The ETC considered the information in this report at our June 21, 2012 regular meeting and voted to forward this information and our recommendation to the City Council for consideration at an upcoming meeting. An ETC member can attend this meeting if needed to answer questions. BACKGROUND Ordinance change The Policy references Section 1225 of City Code (ETC Policy and Establishment, Purpose and Duties, and Membership). This Section was renumbered and fully revised in 2011. Policies incorporated in Comprehensive Plan The Policy includes specific policies related to Roadway Design; Roadway Function and Access; Roadway Maintenance and Operation; Transit/TDM; Parking; Pedestrian /Bicycle; Goods Movement; and Funding and Jurisdiction. These policies incorporated and added to policies in the 1999 Transportation Plan. All of these policies, with the exception of two, were included in Chapter 7 of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Policy goals achieved The Policy includes short -term goals that have been met: Review and approve Transportation Commission Policy 7/5/12 • Review Local Traffic Task Force Findings and Recommendations and rank the six "issues areas" • Review and approve a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan The Policy includes long -term goals that have been met or are ongoing: • Review and update local roadway functional classification • Review and make recommendations for collector and arterial roadway planned improvements Neighborhood Traffic Management Plans (NTMP) An initial survey of data indicates that since the Policy was adopted in 2005 there have been three resident requests for neighborhood traffic management plans. These were: • Schaefer Road (between Interlachen Boulevard and Parkwood Road) • Wooddale Avenue (between 50' and 58' Streets) • Halifax Avenue Schaefer Road was one of seven traffic concern areas scored and ranked in 2005 (ranking 6) The ETC did not recommend an NTMP. Wooddale Avenue (50' to 58') was scored and ranked in 2006. It came in first against four areas scored and ranked the previous year. Engineering staff proposed re- striping the roadway, increasing enforcement, and installing a permanent speed indicator sign. An NTMP was not completed. It appears that the annual scoring and ranking of traffic concern areas ended in 2006. In 2008, residents on Halifax Avenue submitted an NTMP application. In 2009, Engineering staff surveyed residents to see if they were still interested in an NTMP. Fewer than half of the surveys were returned, leading staff to recommend against an NTMP. Of the traffic concern areas recommended for scoring and ranking in 2005 by staff, none were recommended for an NTMP. Those that have been addressed have been through other means. For example, NE Edina and W. 70' were addressed through traffic studies. The High School area was addressed through a staff - initiated re- striping plan. In June 2010 the ETC voted to update the NTMP to include Education and Enforcement sections. These sections are typically found in NTMP policies. In October 2011 Council member Bennett requested that the NTMP policy be used, updated, or eliminated. 7/5/12 2 ANALYSIS There are exceptions to every policy; however, when exceptions become the male, the policy is no longer an effective tool for guiding decisions. This is the case with the NTMP. Engineering, staff routinely receive traffic concerns from residents; however, these concerns, are not annually scored ''and ranked, Traffic calming requests are handled directly by staff; ;the Traffic Safety Committee, or as part of street reconstruction projects. This varied approach to addressing traffic concerns.has the benefit of flexibility, but can also make `it difficult,for residents to understand the process. .Thinking about traffic calming has evolved since the NTMP was adopted. Whereas in the past, the focus was on "specific traffic calming measures, such as speed humps or diverters, the focus now is on road diets, the five E's (Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Engineering, and Evaluation), and Living Streets. This calls for a new kind of NTMP. A Living Streets NTMP is anticipated to be developed as part of a Living Streets Policy and Implementation Plan. Policies within the ETC Policy are now included in Chapter 7 of the Comprehensive Plan. The establishment and policy, purpose and duties of the ETC are outlined in the ETC ordinance. Several short -term and long -term goals in the Policy have been achieved. A Living Streets Policy and Implementation Plan will provide further guidance. The ETC Policy is no longer needed and should be retired. RECOMMENDATION The ETC recommends that the City Council eliminate the 2005- ETC Policy and NTMP. CONNECTION TO WORKPLAN This recommendation is related to Living Streets policy development. Prepared by: - JenniferJanovy Reviewed by: Paul Nelson, Surya lyer 7/5/12 3 Edina Transportation Commission Minutes of June 21, 2012 Living Streets Working Group Update Member Thompson said the group met on June 14 and the consultants shared a report that mirrored LA's Living Street. policy. He said the working group will be reviewing the report and giving feedback and the rest of the ETC can also provide feedback. The consultants will be presenting their findings and recommendation at the July ETC meeting. This will be followed by presentations to other groups to get their input. Member Janovy said there was a Living Streets related item was on the City Council agenda recently, vacation of easement in the Morningside area, and the City Council did not approve it. She said this is consistent with the Living Streets draft policy. She said further that there are right -of -ways or undeveloped land, like the vacation that was not granted, that could be used as short-cut walkways for pedestrians and they should be inventoried. She asked if they were already inventoried and staff said no. Transportation Options Working Group Member Whited said the working group is starting over by reviewing their charge and then they will create a checklist of community needs. She said member Brown has been working on an Edina street car option that could move people around the shopping areas that he would like to present to the ETC. She said he has spoken with the Chamber of Commerce, Southdale Hospital, and is in talks with Target for possible funding. This would be modeled after one in Oregon. France Avenue Pedestrian and Bike Crossings Member La Force gave an update on Stakeholder 1 meeting. He said they were asked to create a grand vision, which they did, only to be reminded in the end that they only had a small amount of money for three intersections. He said he was not sure why they took this approach. Member lyer expressed the same feelings considering the financial constraints. Member Janovy said she felt the same way and that they did not provide concrete information on certain design aspects. Regarding the grand vision, she said there is money in the CIP for studying the whole area and they would like whatever is done now, to be based on the grand vision. She said the urban design portion was not presented in a context based on this project. Member Bass said she appreciates the opportunity to think longer term than they have funding for and the approach may have been to let the Hennepin County staff that was in attendance see what the City's grand vision is for France Avenue. The next stakeholder meeting is scheduled for June 26. Member lyer suggested making the agenda clearer for the next meeting, including the desired outcome. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — None CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Janovy handed out a memo on the ETC policy and the NTMP for future discussion or an advisory communication with a recommendation to eliminate them. Chair Nelson said he spoke with city engineer Houle and he suggested waiting until the Complete Streets policy is done because other policies will become obsolete at that time. Member Janovy said waiting to do everything at once could complicate things. Motion was made by Member Janovy and seconded by Member Iver to recommend an advisory communication to the City Council recommending elimination of the ETC policy and the NTMP, which is part of the ETC Policy. All voted ave. Motion carried. Member Bass said the Edina Community Education received a grant funding from Blue Cross Foundation to do a social connectedness project and they are focusing on the Parklawn Neighborhood to do a series of 'meet on the sidewalk' to get to know the neighbors. The first meeting was last Tuesday and it was attended by the Police and Park and Recreation Departments, as well as Community Education. She said Community Education and Park and Recreation 3 of 4 ETC POLICY AND NTMP MEMO TO ETC SITUATION The Edina Transportation Commission Policy was adopted by the City Council in April 2005. The Policy incorporates the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP). Advances since 2005 have made.the ETC Policy obsolete, For example: • The ETC ordinance was changed in 2011 • Specific policies were incorporated into the 2008 Comprehensive Plan • Several short- and long -term goals in the Policy have been met • There has been little demand for the current Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) Because the Policy is obsolete it is rarely consulted. BACKGROUND Ordinance change The Policy references Section 1225 of City Code (ETC Policy and Establishment, Purpose and Duties, and Membership). This Section was renumbered and revised in 2011. Policies incorporated in Comprehensive Plan The Policy includes specific policies related to Roadway Design; Roadway Function and Access; Roadway Maintenance and Operation; TransVFDM; Parking; Pedestrian /Bicycle; Goods Movement; and Funding and Jurisdiction. These policies incorporated and added to policies in the 1999 Transportation Plan. All policies, with the exception of two, were included in Chapter 7 of the 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Policy goals achieved The Policy includes short -term goals that have been met • Review and approve Transportation Commission Policy • Review Local Traffic Task Force Findings and Recommendations and rank the six "issues areas" • Review and approve a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan The Policy includes long -term goals that have been met or are ongoing- Review and update local roadway functional classification • Review and make recommendations for collector and arterial roadway planned improvements Neighborhood Traffic Management Plans (NTMP) An initial survey of data indicates that since the Policy was adopted in 2005 there have 6/21/12 1 been three resident requests for neighborhood traffic management plans. These were: • Schaefer Road (between Interlachen Boulevard and Parkwood Road) • Wooddale Avenue (between 50'' and 58' Streets) • Halifax Avenue Schaefer Road was one of seven traffic concern areas scored and ranked in 2005 (ranking 6U'). The ETC did not recommend an NTMP. Wooddale Avenue (50'h to 581') was scored and ranked in 2006. It came in first against four areas scored and ranked the previous year. Engineering staff proposed re- striping the roadway, increasing enforcement, and installing a permanent speed indicator sign. An NTMP was not completed. It appears that the annual scoring and ranking of traffic concern areas ended in 2006. In 2008, residents on Halifax Avenue submitted an NTMP application. In 2009, Engineering staff surveyed residents to see if they were still interested in an NTMP. Fewer than half of the surveys were returned, leading staff to recommend against an NTMP. Of the traffic concern areas rdcommended for scoring and ranking in 2005 by staff, none were recommended for an NTMP. Those that have been addressed have been through other means. For example, NE Edina and W. 70' were addressed through traffic studies. The High School area was addressed through a staff- initiated re- striping plan. In June 2010 the ETC voted to update the NTMP to include Education and Enforcement sections. These sections are typically found in NTMP policies. In October 2011 Council member Bennett requested that the NTMP policy be used, updated, or eliminated. ANALYSIS There are exceptions to every policy; however, when exceptions become the rule, the policy is no longer an effective tool for guiding decisions. This is the case with the NTMP. Engineering staff routinely receive traffic concerns from residents; however, these concerns are not annually scored and ranked. Traffic calming requests are handled directly by staff, the Traffic Safety Committee, or as part of street reconstruction projects. This varied approach to addressing traffic concerns has the benefit of flexibility, but can also make it difficult for residents to understand the process. Thinking about traffic calming has evolved since the NTMP was adopted. Whereas in the past, the focus was on specific traffic calming measures, such as speed humps or diverters, the focus now is on road diets, the five E's (Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Engineering, and Evaluation), and Living Streets. This calls for a new kind of NTMP. A Living 6/21/12 2 +, . Streets NTMP is anticipated to be developed as part of a Living Streets Policy and Implementation Plan. Policies within the ETC Policy are now included in Chapter 7 of the Comprehensive Plan The establishment and policy, purpose and duties of the ETC are outlined in the ETC ordinance. Several short -term and long -term 'goals in the Policy have been achieved. The soon to be developed Living Streets Policy and Implementation Plan will provide further guidance. The ETC Policy is no longer needed and should be retired. RECOMMENDATION Place this on upcoming agenda-to discuss. Consider recommendation to City Council to eliminate ETC Policy and NTMP. 6/21/12 3 01 Vu jNCORPOPA9 tees REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV.G. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering ® Action ❑ Discussion El Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Traffic Safety Report of July 11, 2012 ACTION REQUESTED: Review and approve the revised Traffic Safety Committee Report of July 11, 2012. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the July 11, 2012, Traffic Safety Committee Report at their July 19, 2012, meeting and made the following comments: Item Al: Staff indicated that the Temporary Speed Table Policy was not distributed with report and will include in next August report. Item A2: The ETC would like to comment on the entire proposed Construction Management Plan (CMP). Staff will include the entire CMP with the August report. ATTACHMENTS: Revised Traffic Safety Staff Committee Report for July 11, 2012. Draft Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes of July 19, 2012. G:\ Engineering \Infrastructure \Streets \Traffic \Traffic Safety Committee \City Council Reports \Item W.G. Traffic Safety Report of July 11, 2012.doc TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT (Revised July 19, 2012) Wednesday, July 11, 2012 The Committee review of traffic safety matters occurred on July 11, 2012. The Committee is comprised of staff members including the City Engineer, City Planner, Police Traffic Supervisor, and Traffic Safety Coordinator. From that review; the recommendations below are provided. On .each of the items, persons involved have been `contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were also informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can be included on the July 19, ° 2012, Edina Transportation Commission and then the August 6, 2012 City Council Agenda. SECTION A: Requests on which the Committee recommends approval of request: g7- - �+�•�iininii i. �ii� � �ii'rv�0� w.��7�ii i. r..� ���: ' - Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 1 of 4 July 11, 2012 SECTION B: Requests on which the Committee recommends denial of request: Request for a stop sign at the intersection of Kellogg Avenue and 61s' Street West. The requestor lives near the intersection of Kellogg Avenue and 61St Street West. The requestor has stated that vehicles are speeding through intersection and ignoring the Yield signs that are in place currently. Requestor also feels that the traffic speeds are too high for the area. 61St Street West and Kellogg Avenue are both classified as local streets. There are no recorded crashes at the intersection from 2001 to 2010. However, the resident states that there was recently a crash at the intersection which prompted the request. The City of Edina policy regarding residential stop sign requires at least 1000 vehicles per day on each of the intersecting streets. Stop signs could also be considered if the 85th percentile speed is more than five Miles Per Hour over the posted speed limit. Stop signs are not installed in an attempt to control speed or volume of vehicles. Traffic counts were conducted in the area. Vehicle volumes entering the intersection from each leg were observed to determine compliance with the stop sign policy. Kellogg Avenue has an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 275 vehicles north of 61St Street West; and 352 vehicles south of 61St Street West. The 85th percentile speed is 28.5 and 25.0 MPH, respectively. 61St Street West has an ADT of 125 vehicles east of Kellogg Avenue and 177 vehicles west of Kellogg Avenue. The 85th speed is 22.7 and 23.2 MPH, respectively. This is below the suggested amount of volume to warrant a stop sign. Staff recommends denial of stop signs at the intersection of Kellogg Avenue and 60 Street West. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 2 of 4 July 11, 2012 SECTION C: Requests that are deferred to a later date or referred to others. At this time, there are no requests that are deferred. SECTION D: Other traffic safety issues handled. 1. Request for speeds to be monitored in the area of Harrison Avenue and Belmore Lane. Resident lives on the street and has stated that vehicles are going, "too fast" in the area. Harrison Avenue is a local street with an Average Daily Traffic (ADT) of 252 vehicles and an 85th percentile speed of 30.6 MPH. Speed information was forwarded to Edina Police Department. 2. Request for speeds to be monitored in the area of 62nd Street West and Halifax Avenue. Resident lives on the street and has stated that vehicles are going, "too fast" in the area. 62nd Street West has an ADT of 2332 vehicles with an 85th of 31.9 MPH. Speed information was forwarded to Edina Police Department. 3. Request for the intersection of TH 100 and Vernon Avenue to be looked at for traffic not yielding. Resident could not be contacted back for further information. 4. Call from a resident with, "Concerns" with the pedestrian crosswalk on Hazelton Road. Resident could not be contacted for further information. 5. Call -from ,a resident wondering why a traffic counter. was placed on her street. Resident was told that the Edina Police Department uses the traffic counters to monitor areas for speed as well as traffic volumes. 6. Call from resident requesting an all -way stop at the intersection of 48th Street West and France Avenue. Request was forwarded to Hennepin County. 7. Call from resident requesting a "Disabled Child" sign removed from the street. Resident purchased house with intent to resell and feels that the sign is depreciating the property value. Resident was informed that the resident who requested the sign can contact the City of Edina to have the sign removed. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 3 of 4 July 11, 2012 8. Call from a resident concerning traffic advisory signs placed in street on Rutledge Avenue. Resident was concerned that these signs would cause a traffic hazard if left in the street. -After investigating the area, it was determined that these signs were placed by residents. Section 460.03, Subd. 3 of the City Code states that no sign shall be placed in the right -of- way or within the clear zone. Letters were sent out to residents in the area to remove their signs. 9. Call from a resident concerning a parking lane on Xerxes Avenue north of TH 62. Resident was concerned that traffic travelling south would use the parking lane as a travel lane, causing safety issues with pedestrians. Resident was referred io Hennepin County. Traffic Safety Committee Report Page 4 of 4 July 11, 2012 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JULY 19,2012 6:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Franzen, lyer, Janovy, La Force, Nelson, Thompson, and Whited. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA, �� The agenda was amended by Chir Nelson to move'the'Streetcar presentation up after Approval of Minutes. Motion was made by member Franzen and seconded by member B ss lapprovine'the amended agenda. All voted ave. Motion carried. QW/F r0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES °e REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 21, 2012 Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by em `tuber LaForce.to approve the June 21 minutes. All voted ave. Motion carried. �p', d� SPECIAL MEETING OF JULY 9. 2012 , Edits were made as follow: Pa a 1, 3`d para rah , Ig n ce "...said something closer to option 3 was assumed in the g „ g p „ cost of the funding application... Page 1, last paragraph, tlelete. a group ;sand, replace with FHWA International Program." Page 3, 7th paragraph, 4th sentence add "���dnd she {bell Vg there�s'l�oiild be formal collaboration between the ETC and the Planning Commission; Motion was made by member,Janovv and seconded by member Bass to approve STREET CAR PRESENTATION f �f Pa Andy Brown, 5512 k p ce, and a me °HIM streetcar system drTtne•eastern and soi ' 11 off retail areas by,�re ing a systemrto-3upl said it is based on:the streetcar sys'la� community, links to seater Rail & ��f� and benefits, and Iinks:tg�Iearn more ab theJETC Trans` Fo'rtation Options Working Group, presented an idea for a rn sidefKlidinaKHe said the idea is to differentiate Southdale from other :ransportatio�1 frastructure in an area that is becoming more urban. He id, Oregon. His presentation included potential routes, benefits to the f lftfrastructure, infrastructure investments and goals, Portland's costs n explained thaatt`' -tihe street car would travel on the.street and follows the same traffic laws Duringsdiscussion, Mr. Bro: :1X1 �� X as motor vehicles; it travels mi@t�`affic at,street level with no need to step up oe down; right -of -way not needed like for light rail; and capacity is same size -as,b she IVIr. Brown was asked if the population would justify the investment and he said could based on the level of deve opment in the Southdale area. He was asked about operating hours and he said it would run all hours, except overnight. Mr. Brown said he shared the idea with Mr: Robb Gruman, administrator for Fairview Southdale Hospital and chair of the Edina Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Gruman, who was in attendance, said he is organizing a group to look at the merit for the long term. Member Braden said linking to the Greater Rail would require this to be part of the regional plan. Mr. Brown said he has focused more on fact finding so far and that there will be a need for economic and non- economic support from local businesses before seeking regional support. The consensus was that the Transportations Option Working Group would continue this discussion. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None. 1 REPORT /RECOMMENDATIONS Traffic Safety Committee (TS0 Report of July 11, 2012 Director Houle withdrew the speed table from the agenda until the next meeting because it was not included in the ETC's packet. Section A.2 Member Janovy said she was the one that contacted the planner; therefore, for clarification it should probably be reworded to say a member of the ETC. She said she is assuming parking will only be allowed where allowed and restricted to hours allowed. Director Houle Wayne said it is based on the parking rule of no overnight parking from Nov 15t to April 15 and 6 hour limit. Member Janovy asked if this could be included since the Construction Management Plan (CMP) is a standalone document and contractors may not look up the parking code. Additionally, she said she is ���i . . concerned with the width (12 feet) and wondered if was sufficient in allcases: Director Houle said he would have to take her concerns back to the group that developed the CMP; however, pushed into the neighborhood. 4 voted ave. Motion carried. Director Houle said a revised option 3 would beYp'esent l" ela, scoping prior to the August 6 public hearing. He saitlIN Mr. Chuck Rickart, project manager resented. Mr.'RicN overpass bridge and the re- scope`change�js,where they; 66th. He said the scope changeq app oved o the Met d intersections; intersection irri r6, %ments (narr`(d'wing of {g enhanced corner treatments; ADA.corppliant; and pede: countdown timers and �ehcle and Transit; and minima Trig t-of�r�ra Council was a preliminary concept "typical" interse ffl on design; mini level lighting; and no {ROW acquisitiori'w "" VA Mr. Rickart said after the special meeting designed to include stayingn'the ROW a. intersection for landscaping; a including some ROW costs. and that :C would rt imated`th In center e wider the street, the further back cars are Council would like to discuss the original re- ned when the meeting date is set. that Nd'. 007 federal grant was for a pedestrian 110or inter5bction enhancements at 76tH, 70tH and i median refuge islands with landscaping at lanes at intersections; removing free right turn islands; ,el lighting); signal improvements (APS signals, ,e accommodations; provide better accessibility to sections. Mr. Rickart said the presentation to the Met ;t to be $2,045,000 based on aerial mapping only; a ian and adjacent to intersections; minimal pedestrian the ETC on July 9, the preliminary concept plan (scope change) was they could (except for the intersections); sidewalk all the way; widened ing the same. He said the estimated cost for this design was $2,302,400, Continuing, Mr. Rickart said on May 1, the City Council expressed a desire for an urban design for the corridor - more than just landscaping, and LBH was hired. He said they looked at the entire corridor to ensure that whatever is done at the three intersections could be done at the others. Additionally, two stakeholders meeting were held to gather feedback, plus a special meeting with the ETC. He said at the first meeting the feedback was that the space between the road and sidewalk was important. He said they designed three options (1. Separated bike /pedestrian with boulevard; 2. Separated bike /pedestrian with no boulevards; and 3. On-road bike lane with sidewalks), plus leaving the original scope change as an option also. The options were presented at the second stakeholders' meeting and the consensus was to move forward with option 1; however, at that time costs and ROW impacts were not known. PA At the special meeting with the ETC on July 9, Mr. Rickart said the consensus was that the estimated cost of $9,145,500 was too high and the recommendation was to go with a revised option 3 (no bike lanes on France Ave; east /west bike lanes consistent with Bike Plan; and provide sidewalk'connections on France Ave with boulevards). Mr. Rickart turned over the presentation to Mr. Craig Churchward of LBH to explain the urban design feature. Mr. Churchward said the idea was premised on other planning documents relating to the community as a, whole and unique features of France Ave with the potential of becoming -a main street for the community and as such.create a sense of identity for the whole community. Mr. Churchward said if a full build out cannot be done, they could look at ways to create an incremental development as the road changes character— less cars, more pedestrians. He said this could be accomplished using visible vertical elements - large trees outside and inside medians; monuments to create sense of place; flowers that would be vibrant /noticeable; and pedestrian lighting. He said creating something unique or a level of detail says you care. He also!said to create a motif that can'be usedt.Ver and over as properties are redeveloped along France Ave. *; In conclusion, Mr..Rickart said the estimated cost for revised optiof hs $5 7 9,100 and that it is the urban design and ROW that has significantly increased the cost over the scope h }nge�estimatedecb t of $2,045,000. He said to meet the mandatory sunset date of March 31,'2013, the following schedule`must be' adhergJo; project development — Apr to Dec 2012; project memorandum — Oct 2012; ROW acquisitions ?Sept 2012 to Mar 2013;.,d ail design — Aug 2012 to Mar 2013; final approval (City /County /MnDOT) — Mar 31, 2013 ,,�Wd begin construction Summer 2013. r� Discussion {����.,��',� �r f.. Member Franzen said there is an extra 2 feet of:excess ROW and asked it could be narrowed up. Mr. Rickart said if they use a 'pathway' classification it would be needec andahey have n - otten MnDOT s approval yet. Chair Nelson asked about narrowing of existing lane at intersections and- rifftherentire corridor would be this way. Director Houle said the north bound lanes would be Member Janovy asked if they we to existing sidewalks. Mr. Rickar rf� existing sidewalks with the excel Member Janovy sa they continue on��tl will end at the.j e end. MemberJa'�no vrrr rr r� o .rfrr while the south boun side would beFreduced only at the intersections. p���-ying out sidewalks to put.Ah r ew ones and if the new sidewalks would link up yyvlll;•not be nppmg oy t;dny sidewalk and that they would be matching up to of the street in all ers can ReVacrc said this desik statements are made ri'page 29 of the N WE Member La Force asked if•sdewalk on the remove the trees at Macy's- in'O"ird�er to ph yet but as it looks now, the trees would b� r�a�dded Aflef there is a right turn lane, and it was not clear that ses�Mr, Rickart said it depends on the intersection; 70 for example on tWsidewalk to the existing bike lane; other intersections will what ordinance allows (no biking on sidewalk). She also said that ut details and these will need to be clarified for City Council. is multi -use and Mr. Rickart said yes. He also asked if the plan is to iewalk and Mr. Rickart said they have not worked out the fine details Member Braden asked about transit shel er locations and Mr. Rickart said Metro Transit is not proposing any changes at this time. He said they talked about moving one stop around to Hazelton and off France. Member Whited asked about monument cost and Mr. Churchward said $75,000 is included for six each monuments. She also asked about irrigation cost and Mr. Churchward said it is included. - Chair Nelson said he likes the idea of the sidewalk at Byerly's and Macy's but wondered about the additional ROW cost since the ROW has increased cost so much. Mr. Rickart said he did not have this specific ROW cost available but could forward it at a later time. Director Houle said he has shown the plans to Byerly's and they like the design so there is a possibility that the City may be able to get the ROW without cost or minimal cost; however, the City has to be cognizant of their parking requirements. He said there is also the option of putting the sidewalk below and then moving it up when the site is redeveloped in the future. Member Janovy asked about the grade of the sidewalk and Mr. Rickart said it would be ADA compliant. Member Janovy asked about the following elements and Mr. Rickart responded accordingly: crosswalks width is 8 feet; all free rights are being removed; they will be working with the County on a bike detection system; for crossings, the County prefers a design that allows pedestrians to cross all the way majority of the time without the need for a push button in the middle of the intersection but the City will seek approval for a push button; a speed study should not add extra cost; Director Houle said the state looks at the 85% percentile speed that vehicles are currently traveling to set the speed limit. Member Janovy suggested option 3 without the boulevard and a sidewalk along the curb. Mr. Rickart said the cost would be $23M. She asked what kind of sidewalk can they have without additional ROW and Mr. Plowman said it would be 6 -7 feet against the curb. Mr. Churchward added that it would not be 6 -7�f 'et of usable space —there would be shy / � distance and it's not developing the idea that was talked about with the� ic pu is and the ETC of generating a living street /DWI/ for the community. Member Janovy agreed but said that $6M is more f 2i'm.what she believes would be approved so /�rx � there is a need to strike a balance to get closer to the budget and n)'ak •it safVor pedestrians. Mr. Churchward said the three intersections need to be a statement for the rest of the co ?ridor. He rec m'mended a design that will be AMP, :ffl functionally correct and to reduce cost, eliminate the trees and monuments because , they can be added later. Member Braden asked if they've explored other funding options beeause she would hate to losthe boulevard. Director Houle said they've talked about special assessment and the City Council will be discussing tl tffp►'oject at a workshop before the Aug 6 public hearing.. }�r. Chair Nelson said he likes the idea of option 3 lecau's considering moving it forward with potential cost =sav Council to express their interest and cut and pastefi started with but it is the right size for the corridor. MI' come prepared with cost estimatewitlio t<the moms it /'r� tfi;;i ?W about removing the trees. Mrckart saidAhey will h receiving the estimated costs before the meeting. sets up the`rite`r`sections for future expansion, and is i'kHe said the W&fkshop session is the place to allow the City iid;the -$5.8M is significantly more than the $2M that they )er UForce agreedrand-Suggested for the workshop that they adiu §'adjustments, but he is not so sure neeting and member lyer requested Member Janovy said he.wafs the bouaaiff }he projefto be as beautiful as it can be but they should also f✓` `err MY consider 69 and fiot•,strand..i)edestrians fSyh�e said the:monumenff�seem like an easy thing to cut but is under the impression bas d+ao a couple conversations, ,that even with -sp cial assessments, that this project is too costly. She said they need to be a<blerto show that ifcan.be dome for less. She asked if the City Council will be asked to approve the feasibility study on- August 6 and DirectUftule said yes; however, they can continue until the next meeting if they so choose. Member lyer saidhe would like tos focus on vyhere to reduce cost and see what they can get for $3M or $4M. Member Bass said she likes tWIdea of look iiig at something less costly. She said they did not see a feasibility study for rrPr� %fi the overpass and suspect that thft would,�beNn this same spot. She said the value and utility of the project as it is now conceived will be of much greater u fiiaffresidents and the cost per user will be a lot lower than the original project. Member Braden said she has not he rdfabout the value that this will be to commercial orooerties and how thev mieht be able to contribute in say ROW dedication. Chair Nelson agreed that the bridge would be around the same cost. He believes there is a way to do the project but the workshop is the place to work things out. Motion was made by member Franzen to approve option 3 based on the discussion and to look at ways to reduce ROW cost; have landowners share in contribution of ROW; construction cost reduction such as free rights, etc. and forward to Council. Member lyer asked for an amendment to not mention option 3 because the concepts along the corridor are what they want. Motion not seconded. Member Thompson suggested approving the scope change revise and then. see show what they can get for $3M and $4M in meeting the Living Streets and urban design principles. Member Janovy said she can support this and add on up 4 to a point that the City Council is comfortable with. Member LaForce said he does not know what the City Council is comfortable with. He said the City Council saw the original project and they added the urban design. He said further that maybe they are interested in everything and suggested pushing it forward to them to see what their cost threshold is. Motion made by member Franzen and seconded by member LaForce to move forward with option 3, provided that all of the additions to the revised scope change be clearly delineated so that they can have a discussion at the City Council workshop regarding what should be added or not added, including finance options. Aye: Franzen, Braden; LaForce, Whited, Nelson, Bass, Thompson, lyer Nay: Janovy Motion carried. Updates Student Member - No update. ,0 f Bike Edina Task Force — Minutes of June 14, 2012f Member Janovy said she emailed a revised bike ordinance memblo everyone fie said the BETF approved a l %/011 recommendation to change the biking on sidewalk ordina n e suggested bringi }gait to the ETC for discussion. The consensus was to discuss at the next meeting. She also se an email with a link to Bik6,Walk Twin Cities on lessons Elklearned. r���. �� Living Streets Working Group Draft Policy Presentation Member Thompson, chair of the Living Streets p, said BAgjl aid HR Green would present an update. Mr. Fred Rozumalski, Barr Engineering, explained what-Living Streets, is. He said %it is gray and green infrastructure with xn gray being what is traditional seed{ scro ds f(cars oriented and greep are-stonA ater capture and reuse, trees, pedestrian safety, bikes, etc He5said green js�;�hot often addre��red;in streetVproJects and Living Streets tries to balance the two. He noted the components_ that woulMe included�,lving Streets but also noted that each street would be }/K designed independently. Mr. Rozumalski also discussed Common Living Streets Principles; Development Framework; Peer'Review & Lessons,Learned; Existing- rPlasanyd;olicies; V sion and Goals. Mr. Dan Edge Engagement; Examples. Member Thompson rr tngmeeri, hensive Inve Member Whited said they create Express. Next'meeting they will n could Next Sfett {which included Developing a Living Streets Plan; Public nation; Implementation Process Framework; and Design Template feedback to him via email on the vision and draft policy. �)ist for reviewing transportation items,and reviewed her program, Prism e BE Line and Veaps Volunteer Drivers Program. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS —None CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS 2013 Work Plan Director Houle said the City Council reviewed their work plan last Tuesday which included lots of projects that the ETC is involved with. He said now is the time to give input and suggested that at the August meeting the ETC identify priorities for submission to the City Council. Members can email their priorities to chair Nelson or,Director Houle. 5 Member Bass said Hennepin County is developing a pedestrian plan and they reached out to her and the Do.Town . organizers to help them reach out to the communities. Member Whited asked if the residents who are concerned about the intersection at Chowen would be able to address the ETC at the August meeting and Chair Nelson said they can during the Community Comment period. STAFF COMMENTS Director Houle said July 24 is bid opening for the Bike Boulevard and the bump outs for Wooddale —the estimate is high for the bump outs. On Aug 7, the public works department will begin the bike striping project a that was approved by the ETC (70th, Antrim, Cahill). ADJOURNMENT r Meeting adjourned. ATTACHMENTf Attendance Spreadsheet r. Id" IMF 6 TRANOORTATION_COMMISSIO'N.. Counted as Meetin4 Held (ON MEETINGS' LINE) NAME TERM J F M A M J J A S O N D Work Session Work Session # of Mtgs. Attendance MeetingslWork Sessions There is no number typed on the members' lines. 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 Bass, Katherine 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 411712012 2 enter date 7 Braden, Ann 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 Franzen, Nathan 211/2013 1 1 1 1 1 1 6, 100% er, Su rya 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 140 %0',, Janovy, Jennifer 2/1/2014 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8_, LaForce, Tom 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7. 140 %' Nelson, Paul 2/1/2013 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Schweiger, Steven student 1 1 1 1 1 1 _G 1:00 Thompson, Michael 2/1/20131 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Whited, Courtney 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 VACANT student student 0 0% Liaisons: Report attendance monthly and attach this report to the Commission minutes for the packet. Do not enter numbers into the last two columns. Meeting numbers & attendance percentages will calculate automatically. INSTRUCTIONS: Counted as Meetin4 Held (ON MEETINGS' LINE) Attendance Recorded (ON MEMBER'S LINE) Regular Meeting w /Quorum Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Regular Meeting w/o Quorum Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Joint Work Session Type "1" under "Work Session" on the meetings' line. Type ".1" under "Work Session" for each attending member. Rescheduled Meeting' Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Cancelled Meeting Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for ALL members. Special Meeting There is no number typed on the meetings' line. There is no number typed on the members' lines. 'A rescheduled meeting occurs when members are notified of a new meeting date /time at a prior meeting. If shorter notice is given, the previously - scheduled meeting Is considered to have been cancelled and replaced with a special meeting. NOTES: A ,SN , TOM)) REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHAN:GE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. H. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Fiber Optic Cabling — Utley Park to Edina Liquor Store, Improvement No. FO -007 Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: June 27, 2012 NA Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Castrejon, Inc. $ 48,000.00 2. MP Nexlevel, LLC $ 57,940.63 3. Underground Piercing, Inc. $ 70,869.16 4. Midwest Utility Service, Inc. r $118,950.00 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Castrejon, Inc. $ 48,000.00 GENERAL INFORMATION: This purchase is for the expansion of the City -owned Fiber Optic Network from Utley Park to the Edina Liquor Store at 50th Street and Halifax Ave. The I.T. Division budgeted $75,000 for City -wide fiber optic cabling in 2012. To date, $60,004 has been spent to expand cabling to the Edina Aquatic Center and Arneson Acres Park. Though fiber optic cabling is over budget for the year, the Communications & Technology Services Department staff strongly feels the cabling to Edina Liquor at 50th & France should move forward as planned. Once the store is connected, all City employees will have the benefit of fiber, including speed of data transmission, and Edina Liquor at 50th & France can be placed on the City's VoiP phone system. Staff recommends the project be paid for out of the remaining I.T. CIP allocation ($14,996 ) and the Liquor Fund ($33,004). ",O_Ozal� Engineering Signature Department The Recommended Bid is within budget t not within budget ohn Wallin, Finance Director Scott H. , ,Zap_ A. - -G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV\PROJECTS \CONTRACTS \2012 \Fiber Optic2012 \ADMIN \MISC \FO-007-50th Street Fiber \Item1V. H. RFP -FO-007 Edina Liquor,-50th and France.docx— - - oe TT less CIO 11 o REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. I. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Edina Bike Boulevard — Phase I, ENG 12 -6 Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: July 24, 2012 September 24, 2012 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Midwest Asphalt Corporation $ 208,308.76 2. Minnesota Dirt Works, Inc. $ 215,594.00 3. Urban Companies, Inc. $ 232,820.98 4. Barber Construction, Inc. $ 237,492.10 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Midwest Asphalt Corporation $ 208,308.76 GENERAL INFORMATION: This project is for bike boulevard improvements. As you will recall the City of Edina was granted $250,000 for a bike boulevard project through the Transit for Livable Communities (TLC) grant program. The Edina City Council held a project hearing on May 15, 2012 approving the proposed layout. This project will be funded through this grant. Staff recommends awarding this project to Midwest Asphalt Corporation. Engineenn, Signature ^� DepAirtment The Recommended Bid is within budget not within budget John Wallin, Finance Director S a er G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PROJECTS \CONTRACTS \2012 \ENG 12 -6 Bike Blvd TLC) \ADMIN \MISC \Item IV Request for Purchase - Edina Bike Boulevard - Phase 1, ENG 12- 6.docx r � oe C-4 ��1888 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: IV. J. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering ® ❑ Action Discussion Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -102 Nine Mile Regional Trail; Fred Course to Xerxes Avenue Agreement Richards Golf ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. 2012 -102 authorizing Mayor and City Manager to sign attached agreement with Three Rivers Park District for the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail: Fred Richards Golf Course to Xerxes Avenue Trailway Cooperative Agreement. IN FORMATION /BACKGROUND: This agreement is for the first phase of the Nine Mile Regional Trail in Edina and is needed forThree Rivers Park District to fund up to $150,000 of trail expenditures for the Gallagher Drive project. The Gallagher Drive project bids will be open on August 14, with approval of bids at the August 21 City Council Meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution 2012 -102 City of Edina and Three Rivers Park District Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail: Fred Richards Golf Course to Xerxes Avenue Trailway Cooperative Agreement. G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \STREETS DIV\SIDEWALKS N BIKEWAYS \Three Rivers Park District \Agreements \Fred Richards to Richfield Agreement \Item IV.J. Res No 2012 -102 Nine Mile Regional Trail; Fred Richards Golf Course to Xerxes Avenue Agreement.docx RESOLUTIOI"O. 2012 -102 APPROVING CITY OF EDINA AND THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT NINE MILE REGIONAL TRAIL: FRED RICHARDS GOLF COURSE TO XERXES AVENUE TRAILWAY COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City of Edina and Three Rivers Park District approved a corridor route for the Trail in 2010 and 2011, respectively; WHEREAS, the City of Edina will be rehabilitating Gallagher Drive, which will include a portion of the Nine Mile Regional Trail; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, Mayor James B. Hovland and City Manager Scott H. Neal, are hereby authorized and directed for and on behalf of the City to execute and enter into a cooperative agreement with the Three Rivers Park District for Nine Mile Regional Trail: Fred Richards Golf Course to Xerxes Avenue Trailway, a copy of which said agreement was before the City Council and which is made a part hereof by reference. ADOPTED this 6th day of August, 2012. 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 August 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 120 City Clerk G:T NCENTRAL SVCSISTREETS DMSIDEWALKS N BIKEWAYS \Three Rivers Park DistricNAgreements \Fred Richards to Richfield Agreement\Resolution No. 2012 - 102.docx ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392 CITY OFIFIEDINA AND THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT NINE MILE CREEK REGIONAL TRAIL: FRED RICHARDS GOLF COURSE TO XERXES AVENUE TRAILWAY COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT This agreement (the "Agreement ") is made and entered into this _ day of 2012, by and between the Three Rivers Park District, a body corporate and politic and a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota ( "Park District "), and the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City "). WHEREAS, Park District is a political subdivision of the State of Minnesota authorized by statute to acquire, establish, operate and maintain park and trail systems; and WHEREAS, Park District promulgates master plans for the development of park facilities including trail systems; and WHEREAS, Park District's master plans are submitted to the Metropolitan Council for approval; and WHEREAS, Park District's First Tier Trails, Greenways, and Parks Master Plan includes Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail ( "Trail ") through the City of Edina; and WHEREAS, Park District is preparing a specific master plan for the Trail in cooperation with the City; and WHEREAS, City and Park District approved a corridor route for the Trail in December 2010 and March 2011 respectively (Exhibit A); and WHEREAS, City own lands suitable for development of the Trail corridor and has requested that the Park District participate in the development of the Trail within the City; and WHEREAS, Park District and City desire to cooperate to design, construct, reconstruct, operate and maintain a continuous and contiguous Trail corridor located in the City employing their own powers; and WHEREAS, City is engaged in redeveloping the Gallagher Drive right -of -way ( "Gallagher Drive Street Improvement Project ") between Parklawn Avenue and France Avenue which includes the Trail corridor; and WHEREAS, Park District and City desire to cooperate to develop a segment of the Trail along the east and south side of the Gallagher Drive between Parklawn Avenue and France Avenue ( "Gallagher Drive Trail Segment ") and in conjunction with the City's Gallagher Drive Street Improvement Project; and August 6, 2012 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard - Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov - 952 - 826 -0371 - Fax 952 -826 -0392 WHEREAS, Park District and City desire to link the Gallagher Drive Trail Segment to Fred Richards Golf Course and the existing portion of Trail located at Xerxes Avenue and 75th Street; and WHEREAS,' in the spirit of collaboration the City will act as the agent for the Park District for the design, construction, and construction administration for the Gallagher Trail Segment and trail related structures within the Gallagher Drive Street Improvement Project; and NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, City and Park District agree as follows: 1. Property Rights. A. Edina East and Gallagher Drive Trail Segments: City shall convey to Park District a permanent non- exclusive easement for trail purposes in the.form of the Public Trailway Easement attached hereto as Exhibit B (hereinafter "Easement ") for the portions of the Trail between Fred Richards Golf Course and the intersection of-Xerxes Avenue and 75th Street following the corridor route approved by the City on December 7, 2010 and as illustrated in the attached Exhibit C. Said Easement, in conjunction with the Edina Promenade and in accordance with Paragraph 2 of this Agreement, shall provide a continuous and contiguous corridor, and shall be conveyed upon execution of this Agreement. In the event City cannot convey the Easement which provides a continuous and contiguous corridor, City shall acquire such rights to additional lands as may be necessary. Park District shall not be obligated to proceed with any obligation under this Agreement until City has conveyed to Park District an easement sufficient to create a continuous and contiguous Trail corridor. If City cannot acquire and convey the Easement to Park District which provides a continuous and contiguous Trail corridor within forty -eight (48) months following execution of this Agreement, the Agreement shall be terminated and neither the City nor Park.District shall have any obligation hereunder, except that Park District shall return the unrecorded Easement to City and take such other measures as may be necessary to cancel the Easement. Certain of the Easements lie within platted rights -of -way and easement areas where the City does not have an interest in real property but does have the legal authority to construct,. maintain and operate sidewalks, trails, and other such public ways. In such cases, the Easements do not convey an interest in real property but, pursuant to this agreement, shall serve as an irrevocable permit and license to the Park District to construct, operate and maintain a trail within the Easement areas. In the event the City's right to so maintain a trail within these segments of the Easement area is lost by vacation, condemnation, revocation of license, or permit, or otherwise, the City will acquire -such additional rights, titles and interests as are needed to assure a continuous and contiguous Trail corridor through the Easement areas. If the loss of such right to maintain a trail within right -of -way areas occurs, after construction of the Trail, the City shall acquire such additional right, title or interest and reconstruct-the Trail, if necessary, at City expense. The City represents that it currently has the legal August 6, 2012 Page 2 right and authority to construct and maintain the Trail within such platted rights - of -way. The parties recognize that certain Trail segments and road /railroad crossings may require agreements with third parties such as the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The parties shall cooperate to secure necessary permissions to use such crossings and bridges. Additional segments of the Trail, and other regional trails, may be developed within the City of Edina at a future date. This agreement may be amended as agreed upon by Park District and by City to include additional Trails segments and regional trails. B. Edina West Trail Segment: City shall investigate the extent and estimated cost of land acquisition necessary to provide a continuous and contiguous corridor for the Edina .West Trail Segment located between Trunk Highway 169 and Fred Richards Golf Course as depicted on Exhibit A. Park District will cooperate with City investigation. Following investigation, City and Park District will meet and confer regarding acquisition of necessary property rights. The City further agrees to provide a permanent non - exclusive easement for trail purposes for those portions of the Edina West Trail Segment corridor in which the City has property rights within 15 years of this Agreement as part of future Trailway Cooperative Agreement(s) on the same terms as this Agreement. If the City fails to provide said Easement with the Park District, the Park District, in its sole discretion may terminate this Agreement. 2. Edina Promenade. City agrees to allow the use of the Edina Promenade for regional trail purposes and in doing so shall maintain and operate the Edina Promenade in a manner that is consistent and complimentary to the entire Trail corridor. The City accepts all design, construction, operations, maintenance, funding, ownership, and liability responsibilities of the Edina Promenade and its use for regional trail purposes. The City shall consult with Park District. regarding any changes to the design, operation, or maintenance of the Edina Promenade which may affect regional trail user safety or use of Edina Promenade as a regional trail. If the City is unable to fulfill these regional trail responsibilities, the City will provide a permanent non - exclusive easement for trail purposes for the Edina Promenade Trail segment to the Park District in accordance with Paragraph 1. In addition the parties agree that the Edina Promenade Trail segment will become subject to the remaining terms and conditions of this Agreement. 3. Financing. No design or construction work under this Agreement shall commence for trail segments defined and included in this Agreement until funding for design or construction of said trail segment(s) is approved by the Park District's Board of Commissioners. The Park District Board of Commissioners has approved funding in the amount one hundred and fifty thousand ($150,000) for design and construction of the Gallagher Drive Trail Segment as defined in Paragraph 4A of this Agreement. The Park District Board of Commissioners reserves the right to reallocate this funding August 6, 2012 Page 3 after the twenty four month timeframe if the City has not demonstrated satisfactory progress to completing the project. Park District shall not be held 'responsible to reimburse City for eligible design and construction costs as defined in Paragraphs 4 of this Agreement until the City fulfills its Easement responsibilities in accordance with Paragraph 1 of this Agreement. 4. Design and Construction. Design and construction of the Trail and associated structures and road crossings shall be in accordance with the Typical Trail Sections (Exhibit D) and standards and guidelines adopted by the Park District. A. Gallagher Drive Trail Segment: i. Design and .Construction by Park District. Park District shall not be responsible to design or construct Gallagher Drive Trail Segment. iii. Design and Construction by City. City shall contract with consultants to provide professional services for Trail and trail related structures, including, but not limited to design development, bidding documents, construction plans and specifications, contract document preparation, construction administration, and project closeout for Gallagher Drive Trail Segment. City may do no work on the Trail or trail related structures until it has submitted all Trail plans, including substantial changes, to Park District for review and has received approval from Park District. Park District will delegate authority to approve substantial changes to appropriate staff. Approvals shall not be unreasonably withheld. City shall be responsible for bidding and construction of the Trail and trail related structures for Gallagher Drive Trail.Segment and in accordance with the Park District approved construction plans and. specifications. Bids shall segregate Trail and road redevelopment costs and shall utilize unit costs where possible. Park District may, at its sole discretion, withhold reimbursement for construction costs as provided by this Agreement for construction of the Trail and trail - related structures completed prior to Park District issuance of. Notice to Proceed to City. Park District will issue a Notice to Proceed following Park District approval of construction plans and specifications for Trail and trail related structures. If the Park District does not issue the Notice to Proceed within thirty days of the City completing the construction plans and specifications to the satisfaction of the Park District, either party may terminate this agreement and the parties hereto shall have no obligation, except that the Park District shall return unrecorded Easements to City and take such measures as may be necessary to cancel the Easements. Park District shall reimburse City for all direct costs of design services incurred by the City to design the Trail and trail related structures and construction paid or owed to the contractor engaged by City to build the Trail and trail related structures. The maximum total reimbursement -for design and construction is one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) or as negotiated and agreed to by the City Manager and Park District Superintendent after receipt of bids. August 6, 2012 Page 4 Reimbursement shall not be due until 1) Park District approves the construction plans and specifications, 2) Trail and trail related structures are constructed in accordance with the Park District approved construction plans and specification, and 3) City has conveyed required Easement to Park District in accordance with Paragraph 1 of this Agreement. Park District will not reimburse City for indirect City costs incurred by City including, but not limited to, staff costs, costs of consultants and advisors, legal fees, filing fees, permit fees, or any other expense, which do not represent direct approved design or construction costs. City shall provide all records necessary for audit of costs. City shall not seek reimbursement from Park District for design and construction costs related to the non - regional trail items of the Gallagher Drive Street Improvement Project. Park District shall reimburse City within thirty (30) days following receipt of verified statement of direct design and construction expenses for all costs authorized by this Paragraph. B. Edina East Trail Segment: i. Design and Construction by Park District. The Park District will coordinate and fund design of Trail and trail related structures between the entrance of Fred Richards Golf Course to the intersection Xerxes Avenue and 76th Street excluding the trail segments previously defined as the Edina Promenade and Gallagher Drive Trail Segments ( "Edina East Trail Segment "). Park District may, in its sole discretion, contract with consultants to provide professional design services including, but not limited to design development, bidding documents, construction plans and specifications, contract document preparation, construction administration, and project close out for Edina East Trail Segment. Park District shall submit all Trail plans to City for review and approval, provided however, that approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Park District shall be responsible for bidding and construction of the Edina East Trail Segment and trail related structures except as provided in Paragraph 2 and in accordance with approved construction plans and specifications. Construction shall commence following (1) conveyance to Park District of Easements in accordance with paragraph 1 of this Agreement, (2) Park District and City approval of plans and specifications for Edina East Trail Segment, and (3) project funding approval by Park District Board of Commissioners. ii. Design and Construction by City. In the alternative, City may seek Park District approval to design and construct the Trail and trail related structures for the Edina East Trail Segment. If such a request is approved by the Park District, in its sole discretion, City shall assume all responsibilities as!ociated with design and construction of Trail and trail related structures, including, but not limited to design development, bidding documents, construction plans and specifications, contract document preparation, construction administration, and project closeout for Edina East Trail Segment. City may do no work on the Trail or trail related structures until it has submitted all Trail plans, including substantial changes, to Park District for review and has received approval from Park District. Park District will delegate authority to approve substantial changes to appropriate staff. Approvals shall not be unreasonably withheld. August 6, 2012 Page 5 If the City's request: to design and construct the Trail and. trail related structures is approved by the Park District,-.City shall be responsible for bidding and construction of the Trail and trail related structures for Edina East Trail Segment and in accordance with the Park:.District approved construction plans and specifications.' Bids shall utilize unit costs 'where possible. Park District may, at its sole discretion, withhold reimbursement for construction costs as provided by this Agreement for construction of the Trail, and trail- related structures completed prior to Park District issuance of Notice to Proceed to City. Park District will issue a Notice'. to Proceed following (1) Park District approval of construction plans`and specifications for Trail and trail related structures and. (2) project funding approval. by 'the Park District's Board of Commissioners. If. the Park District does. not issue the Notice to Proceed within forty -eight (48) months following the City's. request to construct Edina East Trail Segment or if the Park District does not commence design and construction for the'said trail segment within the same duration after City conveyance of Easement and City's written request to construct the Edina East Trail Segment, either party may terminate this agreement and the parties hereto shall have no obligation, except that the Park District shall return unrecorded Easements to City and take such measures as may be necessary to cancel the Easements. Park, District shall reimburse City for all direct costs of design services incurred by the City to design the Trail and trail related structures and construction paid or owed to the contractor engaged by City to build the Trail an&trail related structures. The Park District and City will establish maximum reimbursement for design and construction of the Edina East Trail Segment upon City's request to. assume said responsibilities. Reimbursement shall not . be due until ' 1) Park District approves the construction , plans and specifications, 2) Trail and trail related structures are constructed in accordance with the. Park District approved construction plans and specification, and 3) City has conveyed required Easement to Park District in accordance with Paragraph 1 of this'Agree'ment. The balance of Trail and trail related structures costs, related to design and construction shall be the responsibility of City. Park District will not reimburse City for indirect City costs incurred by City :including, but note limited to, staff costs, costs of consultants and advisors,' legal fees, filing, fees, permit fees, or any, other expense, which do not represent direct approved design or construction costs except as provided herein In the event the City uses its "own 'forces to design and administer the construction of the Trail and trail related- structures, the City may seek reimbursement for direct and' reasonable staff costs if first approved by the Park District. City shall provide all' records necessary. for audit of costs. Park District shall reimburse City within thirty (30) days following receipt of verified statement of direct design and construction expenses for all costs authorized by this Paragraph. 5. Construction Administration by Citv. For Trail segments in which the City is or assumes the responsibility for construction of Trail and trail related facilities, City shall be responsible for construction administration including but not lim'ited'to construction supervision. City shall provide notice to Park District of the commencement of Trail and trail related structures construction. Park District may observe construction and may consult with City August 6, 2012 Page 6 regarding construction issues. City shall inform the Park District of final construction and shall schedule inspection by all parties and other appropriate agencies prior to closing the construction contract. Upon correction of any concerns identified in the inspections, City shall notify Park District in writing indicating completion of the project. Upon completion, Park District shall record the Easement(s) and assume Park District responsibilities under this Agreement. 6. Permits and Assessments. City shall grant the Park District all City approvals, City permits, and other official City permissions necessary to operate, maintain, construct and reconstruct Trail. In consideration of the Park District's performance under this Agreement including its maintenance obligations, City hereby agrees that the Park District shall not be subject to assessment by the City pertaining to improvements made on the lands included in, or adjacent to, the Easement area. 7. Inconsistent Rights. The City, for itself, its successors and assigns, hereby covenants that it will not construct nor grant others the right to construct any structures or improvements on the Easement area, which are inconsistent with the rights and interests herein granted to Park District, but the City shall otherwise have the right to use the Easement area and to grant to others such rights. a. Operation of Trail. Park District and its agents and licensees shall have the sole and exclusive right and authority to operate and control the Trail and to establish rules and regulations governing its use to the extent not in conflict with ordinances of the City. 9. Trail Uses and Purposes. The Trail shall be open to the general public and be. used exclusively for outdoor recreation and commuter activities, including but not limited to non - motorized uses such as walking, jogging, skating, and biking. The use of electric- assisted bicycles as defined in Minnesota State Law and Other Power Limited Mobility Devices as defined by the American with Disabilities Act and in accordance with Park District Policy are permitted. Equestrian uses are prohibited. In addition, motor vehicles used by the City or Park District for maintenance, law enforcement or other public uses will be permitted on the Trail in emergency situations, when required for a specific maintenance or patrol activity, when the motor vehicle cannot legally operate on the street, and /or when an adjacent roadway does not exist. Routine maintenance and patrol with motor vehicles will be conducted from adjacent roadways where feasible. 10. Winter Use. As of the date of this Agreement, Park District policy is to leave Trail open to the public in winter, but perform no winter maintenance. Park District reserves the right to operate and maintain Trail for winter use in its sole discretion. The City may request a Park District Winter Use Permit to operate and maintain Trail during winter months. Such permit will require City, among other things, to assume responsibility for trail maintenance, operation and liabilities associated with winter use. 11. Maintenance of Trail. Park District will be responsible for the renovation, replacement, repair, maintenance, and upkeep of Trail except bridges, tunnels and other structures August 6, 2012 Page 7 owned by others, and as provided . in Paragraphs 2 and 10. Park District shall be solely responsible for establishing maintenance standards for Trail, which will be consistent district -wide. City shall be responsible for maintaining lawn and swale areas adjacent to Trail., City shall be responsible for removing vegetation from outside the Easement area which obstructs the use or safety of Trail including adjacent safety 'zones in accordance With Exhibit D - Typical Trail Section. 12. S114na4e. _ Park District shall be responsible to furnish,. install, and maintain- regional trail informational trail signage at Park. District expense. Signage will-'indicate that the Trail is a regional trail of the Park District. Park District may install directional! signs and informational kiosks along the trail corridor at locations agreed upon by both parties. Party responsible for trail design and construction shall provide all trail regulatory signs as prescribed by the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Mn MUTCD), as a part of design and construction. responsibilities. Park District shall be responsible for the maintenance of regulatory signs post - construction at Park District expense. City may provide additional signage, provided however, that Park District approves such additional signage. City shall be responsible for providing and Maintaining, such additional signage at City expense. . When the Trail crosses a City roadway, City shall be responsible for providing and maintaining roadway crossing treatments. such as pedestrian striping, road signs and /or other treatments as prescribed by Mn MUTCD, or as' appropriate. On, street bicycle facilities of any configuration are not considered part of the regional trail. All associated road signs and /or other treatments for on- street bicycle facilities are not permitted within the Easement and are the sole responsibility of City. 13. Utilities: City shall at all times retain the right to maintain, repair.or replace any utilities and related facilities in, on, or under Trail and install such utilities and related facilities provided, that if any such activities by the City shall or may damage or limit the use of the Trail, the City will give the Park District thirty (30) days prior written notice of the 'same (except in cases of emergency), and in any event the City will upon completion of such activities so affecting Trail or any portion thereof, restore Trail as near as possible to its condition existing before` .. such maintenance, repair, replacement or other activities of the City. ' City and Park District recognize, that prior notice is needed to develop temporary trail' detour routes and temporary signage. City 'and Park District will cooperatively determine and Implement a temporary detour route when feasible. - - -- 14. -Law Enforcement. - -- - - _ -- - - -- -- - - The City will patrol and police the Trail in such manner and by such persons as the City shall"deem necessary, and may enforce all rules and ordinances of the City except as provided herein. Notwithstanding anything herein to. the contrary, the Park District shall have . the right to enforce its rules, regulations and ordinances with respect to the Trail. City shall not promulgate any'ordinance, rule or regulation which contravenes any ordinance, rule or regulation of Park District with respect to the Trail or which: contravenes this Agreement. August 6, 2012 Page 8 15. Indemnification. Each party is responsible for its own acts and omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other applicable law govern the parties' liability. To the full extent permitted by law, this Agreement is intended to be and shall be construed as a "cooperative activity "'and it is the intent of the parties that they shall be deemed a "single governmental unit" for the purposes of liability, all as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, Subd. is (a); provided further that for purposes of that statute, each party to this Agreement expressly declines responsibility for the acts or omissions of the other party. In addition to the foregoing, northing herein shall be construed to waive or limit any immunity from, or limitation on, liability available to either party, whether set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 466 or otherwise. 16. Successor and Assigns. The Agreement shall be binding upon parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns, provided, however, that neither the City nor the Park District shall have the right to assign its rights, obligations and interests in or under this Agreement to any other party without the prior written consent of the other party. 17. Amendment, Modification or Waiver. No amendment, modification or waiver of any condition, provision or term of this Agreement shall be valid or of any effect unless made in writing and signed by the party or parties to be bound, or its duly authorized representative. Any waiver by either party shall be effective only with respect to the subject matter thereof and the particular occurrence described therein, and shall not affect the rights of either party with respect to any similar or dissimilar occurrences in the future. 18. Rights and Remedies Cumulative.' The rights and remedies provided by this Agreement are cumulative and no right or remedy at law or in equity which either party hereto might otherwise have by virtue of a default under this Agreement nor the exercise of any such right or remedy by either party will impair such party's standing to exercise any other right or remedy. 19. No Agency. Nothing contained herein and no action by either party hereto will be deemed or construed by such parties or by any third person to create the relationship of principal and agent or a partnership or a joint venture or any other association between or among the parties hereto. 20. Saving Provision. If any provision of the Agreement shall be found invalid or unenforceable with respect to any entity or in any jurisdiction, remaining provision of the Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and such provisions found to be unlawful or unenforceable shall not be affected as to their enforcement or lawfulness as to any other entity or in any other jurisdiction, and to such extent the terms and provisions of this Agreement are intended to be severable. 21. Termination. This agreement may be terminated by Park District or City by mutual agreement or as otherwise provided in this agreement. This agreement shall be terminable by either party upon material breach by the other party. August 6, 2012 Page 9 The provisions of Paragraph 15 survive termination with respect to claims that arise from, actions or occurrences that occurred prior to termination. 22. Governina Laws. This, Agreement will be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 23. Time is of the Essence. Time is of the essence under this Agreement. 24. Title. City warrants that it owns good and marketable title to property(ies) in which the City provides an Easement(s) and that the undersigned is authorized to execute this Agreement. 25. Notices. Any notice given under this Agreement shall be deemed given on the first business day following the date the same is deposited in the United States Mail (registered or certified) postage prepaid, addressed as follows: If to the' Park District: Superintendent Three Rivers Park District 3.000 Xenium Lane North Plymouth, MN 55441 If to Edina City Manager City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Park District have entered into this agreement as of the date and year first above written. CITY. OF EDINA By: Its Mayor By: Its City Manager THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT By: Its Chair - Board 'of Commissioners By: Its Superintendent August 6, 2012 Page 10 REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: City Council Agenda Item Item No. IV.K. From: John Keprios, Director Parks & Recreation Department ® Action Discussion Information Date: - August 6, 2012 Subject: Professional Park Construction Design. and Construction Administration Services Agreement for Countryside Park ACTION REQUESTED: Staff recommends approval of the Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. (HKGi) Professional Services Agreement to develop construction plans, specifications and bidding documents and provide construction administration services for the development of the Countryside Park master plan. The total proposed professional services fees are $68,220.00 plus reimbursable expenses of mileage and printing. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: HKGi is the architect firm that worked for the City of Edina and with the Park Board and neighborhood to establish the current master plan concept for Countryside Park. The master plan has been waiting for adequate funding to begin development of construction plans and specifications to bid the park improvement projects and begin construction. The Waters Development paid their $695,000.00 Park Developer's fee on July 19, 2012, which now affords us to pursue the development of the Countryside Park master plan. This proposed professional architect/engineering services agreement would cover design and specifications services for all of the park master plan improvements except the replacement of the park shelter building design which is proposed to be with another architect firm. HKGi proposes to use the engineering services of Bolton and Menk Inc. for final grading design and the design and plans for sanitary sewer and water main connections which is included in the proposed design fee. The scope of services include schematic design drawings for the new replacement playground equipment, renovation of the prep baseball field, landscape areas, trails, seeding, plantings and coordination of park design elements with the park shelter building design to be completed by another architect firm. Part of the scope of services includes working with the neighborhood and staff in the design and development of the new replacement playground equipment plan. The professional services also include construction oversight and administration of all the master plan elements with the exception of the park shelter building. The total Countryside Park renovation project is estimated to be approximately $1,023,000.00. $330,000.00 is budgeted in the 2012 Capital Improvement Plan for Phase I of the Countryside Park master plan improvements. The Waters Development Park Developer's fee of $695,000.00 brings the Park Developer's Fund balance to a total of $873,295.00. It is our goal to rely on only $695,000.00 of that Fund to complete the master plan development. Senior Landscape Architect Greg Ingraham and his staff at HKGi have done a wonderful job working with the neighborhood and assisting staff and the Park Board in a comprehensive process that established a park master plan that will serve the community's needs for many years. ATTACHMENTS: A. HKGI Professional Services Agreement B. Countryside Park Master Plan Creative Solutions for Land Planning and Design July 9, 2012 John Keprios; Director Edina Parks and'Re:creation 4801 West 50th Edina, MIN 55424 -1394 Re: Countryside Park Renovatioii Proposal and Agreement . Park Construction Plans, Specifications, Bidding and Construction Adniiiiistration Dear jolrn: Oinbehalf of Floisington Koegler Group Inc. (HKGi), we are pleased to submit this proposal /agreement to provide professional park construction design and construction administration services for renovation of Countryside Park. The park construction plans and.specifications will be based on the park schematic design we prepared in coordination with City staff and the construction project will be designed to match available City funds allocated .for Countryside Park renovation. We will use engineering services from Bolton and Menk Inc. for final grading design and the design and plans for sanitary seNver and water main connections. We will coordinate bidding and provide construction oversight and administration for a smooth process and quality construction. We are ready to begin work on the construction plans upon authorization from the City and vve will have the construction document package available for bidding at the end of 2012 with an anticipated start of construction in Spring 2013. We will work closely with City staff on the park plans and specifications and we.Nvill coordinate the park design with the park building architectural design. Project Work Plan Working closely with City staff and the Park Board, the HKGi team will provide the following professional services to accomplish the project: Task 1- Preliminary.Construction Design Package As a logical next step following the recently completed schematic phase, the HKGi tearn will prepare further refinement to all site elements approved in the. schematic design drawing includin g playgrounds, play fields, landscape areas- trails all -site seedin g and p lantin s. This phase of the work will include further refinement of layout and site organization; materials selection, grading and drainage strategies, preliminary planting design and plant availability and preliminary construction details. HKGi will coordinate park design'elements with the park building design'(by others). We will update the preliminary construction cost estimate and work with City staff to define the construction design package and potential add alternates to 123 North Third Street, Suite 100, Minneapolis, ,MN 55401 -1659 Ph (6 12) 338 -0800 Fx (612) 338 -6838 Countryside Park Renovation HKG i match the park improvement budget ($1,023,000). Outline technical specifications will be prepared and we will coordinate general specification language with City staff. Meetings: Minimum of (2) staff level design review meetings to gather input on the design status for the Park. Presentation of the schematic park design plan to the Park Board. Task 1 Deliverables: Preliminary Site Layout, Plan Preliminary Site Grading Plan Preliminary Site Planting Plan Preliminary Construction Details Outline of Project Specifications Updated Cost Analysis Task 2 — Final Design /Construction Documents Following Preliminary Design tasks, the HKGi team will refine the package into a bid set by finalizing plans and details, developing the project's General, Supplemental, and Technical specifications, and establishing the project bid form. The final set will provide prospective bidders a clear set of drawings and related specifications that illustrate the desired design for the park improvements. We will also complete and submit MPCA NPDES and sewer extension permits, MDH permit and permits required by the local water shed agency. Meetings: Minimum of (2) staff level review meetings to gather input on the progress of the Construction Documents. Minimum of (2) coordination meetings with Architect Task 2 Deliverables: Site Materials Plan (including enlargement plans) Site Layout Plan Site Grading Plan Site Planting Plan Construction Details Project Specifications including General, Supplemental, and Technical Conditions. Final Cost Estimate Task 3 — Bidding Support Following the preparation of Construction Documents, the HKGi team will coordinate an advertisement for bid, post plans on Quest site or similar, respond to bidder's questions, develop and distribute any required addenda, attend bid opening, tabulate bids, and review and recommend a qualified bidder. We will also support the City as needed in the selection of a qualified Contractor for the project. Task 3 Deliverables: Electronic and hard copies of bid documents Review of bidder qualifications Attendance at Pre -bid meeting Countryside Park Renovation HKGi Bid Tabulation Summary Recommendation of qualified bid Tas.k.4 —Construction Oversight and Administration 3 Following the project bidding, the HKGi team will provide scheduled on site observation during construction of the designed improvements to ensure that the requirements of the plans and specifications is adhered to by the selected Contractor. Site. meetings (bi- weekly) Will be organized and thoroughly documented during all active construction periods. Our team will coordinate all contract related . tasks including supporting staff in the initiation of an Agreement with selected Contractor, interim and final pay requests, change orders and supplemental instructions, project punch lists, and all other closeout and project acceptance documents. Task 4 Deliverables: Meeting summaries from bi- weekly meetings Copies of all pay requests and supplemental instructions Prepare project punch lists Project closeout documents Professional Services Fees Task 1— Preliminary Construction Design Package $16,100.00 Task 2 — Final Design /Construction Documents $33,120.00 Task Bidding Support r $2,100.00 Task 4 — Construction. Oversight and Administration $16,900.150 Total Fees $68,220.00* *plus reimbursable expenses of mileage and printing Schedule We are available to begin work on the Countryside Park construction plans upon approval of this scope of work /agreement by the City. Assuming authorization to proceed in July 2012, Nve will prepare plans and specifications for bidding in December 2012 /january 2013 and start of construction in Spring 20.13. Invoicing will occur monthly for work completed. The City of E✓ lina shall pay HKGi within 30 clays of receipt: of project invoices. Qualifications and Personnel I. '1'he_Hoisington Koegler Group Team is uniquely' qualified to prepare the park - construction package for Countryside Park. We have an intimate knowledge of Countryside Park through our work on the park concept plan, schernatic plan, playground specifications and project construction budget. We.have; a successful history of park construction design and construction administration. We feature award - winning and creative part: design. We bring extensive experience in park revitalization. Experienced engineering support from Boloton and Menk. Countryside Park Renovation 4 HKG i Paul Paige Nvil.l direct the .Countryside Park - planning work. Greg Ingraham will continue to assist With commtuiication and; coordination. Gabrielle Grinde and Amy Bower will help prepare the plans and specifications, assist with bidding and provide construction oversight. Brian Hilgardner will. direct the engineering work for Bolton and Menk., Contact Paul at 612 252 -7125 or Greg at 612.252.7132 if you have anV questions about the work plan or process or need any revision in this - proposal /agreement. We look forward to the opportunity to assist Edina .Nvith its park construction design needs and to helping to guide the renovation of Countryside from concept through final °construction. If you are in agreement with this proposal, please sign below, send one copy to Paul for our files andwe will Begin work. Sincerely, ,t Paul Paige; RLA Greg Ingraham, RLA Vice President Senior Landscape Architect Hoisington Koegler Group Lic. Hoisington Koegler Group Inc. SIGNATURE OF ACCEPTANCE: - City of Edina, MN 4W W 80 L Colonial Wav F. 4 f� Countryside Park Master Plan Little League Field Prep Field (325'to center field fence) Basketball Court Tennis Courts (2) Hockey Rink (16s' length) Children's Play Area Free Skate Area Park Building / Warming House Parking Lot Ws Paved Trail Park Benches Wetland Overlook and Boardwalk June 29, 2012 01 LIU •ry � • �CbRS OB �� REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. IV.L. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ 'Discussion ❑ Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Set Date For Canvass of Municipal Election For November 9, 2012 At 5:00 p.m. ACTION REQUESTED: Set a special meeting date of Friday, November 9, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. to canvass the results of the November 6, 2012 Municipal Election. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: M.S. 205.185, Subd. 3 requires that between the third and tenth day after an election, the governing body of a city shall canvass the returns and declare the results of the election. Staff recommends the Council set the canvass date for Friday, November 9, 2012, at 5:00 p.m. as the date for this meeting. ow e v 8 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. IV. M. From: Brian E Olson,. PE Director of Public Works Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Overlay of Frontage Road (Eden Avenue to Southview Lane) Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: August 2, 2012 August 17, 2012 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Bituminous Roadways, Inc $ 78,634.00 2. Midwest Asphalt Corporation $ 88,865.00 3. Northwest Asphalt, Inc. $ 91,077.00 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Bituminous Roadways, Inc $ 78,634.00 GENERAL INFORMATION: This project is for street improvements for the Frontage Road on the east side of TH100 from Eden Avenue to Southview Lane. The project includes milling and overlaying the existing roadway with a bituminous pavement utilizing an echelon paving technique. (i.e. when two pavers are spaced so that the first lane does not cool significantly before the second lane is laid. If constructed properly, a hot joint appears almost seamless and produces the highest density when compared to the semi -hot and cold joints.) This will require that the roadway will be shut down for paving activities but will result in a better end product. A detour will be set up to alert the traveling public. This project will be funded by the general fund and is within budget. Bituminous Roadways has worked cooperatively with the City of Edina in the past and is a -very reputable Contractor. Staff recommends awarding the project to Bituminous Roadwa s, Inc. Public Works Signature Department The Recommended Bid is within budget not within budget _ John Wallin, Finance Director Scott Neal, /City Manager A d/�� FG..% "�'J r / ` Li'! At r G: \PW\ADMIN \BUDGETS \Purchasing \Request for purchase \Item IV. M. Request for Purchase - Overlay of Frontage Road from Eden Avenue to Southview Lane .docx ITEM #V. A. R ESO LUT I OAS: 2012 -105 HONORING COMMUNITY GARDENING DAY -IN EDINA Whereas, there are schoolyard garden's at Highlands Elementary and Concord Elementary providing community gardening opportunities to hundreds of "students, teachers, staff and residents; and Whereas, schoolyard gardens educate students about.land stewardship, providing a classroom for children and adults to learn skills caring for the natural environment; and Whereas, schoolyard gardens provide a living laboratory where students engage in hands -on skill building in math and science; Whereas, schoolyard gardens allow students to see the process from growing to harvesting to preparation to meal time, making more likely that they would continue to make healthy eating choices; and ,Whereas, schoolyard gardens have taught students the value of sharing with their community by donating excess food to VEAP and other local food shelves near the city of Edina; and Whereas, the city of Edina is participating in a collaboration among the cities of Bloomington, Edina, and Richfield and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota to improve the health of our communities; and Whereas, there are additional community gardens located at churches and apartment buildings bringing together and uniting congregations and senior communities in the city; and Whereas, community gardens build community by crossing cultural and socio- economic divides by providing cross - cultural and intergenerational opportunities for neighbors to meet and work together; and Whereas, community gardens combat inactivity, unhealthy eating habits and social isolation, thereby reducing risk of diabetes and obesity; and Whereas, community gardens provide access to nutritionally rich and culturally appropriate foods that may otherwise be unavailable or new to students and residents; and Whereas, community gardens provide horticultural therapy and exercise, helping to draw people out of their homes and get active; and Whereas, community gardens provide 'a more livable environment in Edina and present a positive local image to a community's residents and visitors; and Whereas, Community Garden iDay will take place in the Twin Cities Metro area on August 11th, giving residents an opportunity to learn about community gardening and visit gardens in their area, Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, That the City of Edina recognizes the role community gardens play in making our city more livable, resilient and healthy. Be It Further Resolved that the City Council of the City of Edina declares August 11th, 2012 as Community Garden Day in the City of Edina. Adopted August 6, 2012 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN:gov • 952- 927 -8861 a Fax 952 - 826 -0389 EIW /01 �% 19 J! � ess RE PO RURECOM M E N DATIO N To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No: VI.A. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering ® Action F] Discussion 11 Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Public Hearing — France Avenue Intersection Enhancements, Resolution No. 2012 -103. ACTION REQUESTED: Approve attached Resolution No. 2012 -103, approving Option 3 as the proposed layout for the France Avenue Intersection Enhancements project. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND : As you will recall the City of Edina was granted $1,000,000 Federal Transportation Enhancements funding for the construction of pedestrian and intersection enhancements at 76th Street, 70th Street, and 66th Street, along with providing missing sidewalk segments on the east side of France Avenue. The Edina Transportation Commission reviewed the feasibility study at the July 9 Special ETC meeting and the July 19 ETC meeting. The ETC made recommendations to modify Option 3 and add more information regarding costs to be included in the feasibility study that is currently being submitted to the City Council. The costs for the project still exceed the rescoping application that was submitted to the Met Council. Staff suggests if the City Council would like to go forward with Option 3, which the extra costs are mostly right -of -way acquisition and urban design element costs, that they be funded through either the Centennnial Lakes TIFF fund or through Special Assessments or delay constructing the urban design piece and ask adjoining property owners to donate the required right - of -way. If the City Council would like to go forward with the Special Assessments then a public hearing should be scheduled for the September 7 City Council meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Feasibility Study: France Avenue Intersection Enhancements, dated July 27, 2012 G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PROJECTS \IMPR NOS \BA404 France Ave Intersection Enhancements \ADMIN \MISC \Item VI.A. France Avenue Intersection Enhancements, Resolution No. 2012- 103.docx RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -103 RECEIVING FEASIBILITY STUDY AND APPROVING OPTION 3 FOR . FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-404 WHEREAS, the City of Edina was. granted $1,000,000.00 Federal Transportation Enhancements funding for the construction of pedestrian and intersection enhancements at 76" Street, 701h Street, and 66th Street; and WHEREAS, the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) reviewed the feasibility study at a July 9 Special ETC meeting and at their regular July 19 meeting; and .WHEREAS, the ETC recommended modifying Option 3 and adding more information regarding costs in the feasibility study; WHEREAS, the City Council has received the France Avenue Intersection Enhancements,'dated,July 27, 2012; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNES OTA: 1. The City Council approves Option 3 layout for the France Avenue .Intersection Enhancements project. ADOPTED this 6th day of August, 2012. 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 August 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 20_ City Clerk ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 wwwEdinaMN.gov • 952- 826 7.0371 • Fax 952 - 826 -0392• r's►' w9t�11' ok e �o FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS ii Revised July 27, 2012 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA I hereby certify that this feasibility study was prepared by me or under my direct supervision, and that I am a duty Registered Prolessional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 28082 07127,'12 Charles Rickart, PE Reg. No.�� Date Approved llG„eAA41� 7A �! �- Wayne b. Houl6, PE Date City Engineer 4,91 " ok e FEASIBILITY STUDY — BA 404 J N�? �o (Revised July 27, 2012) •.��� ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT leas CITY OF EDINA FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 76th Street, 701h Street and 66th Street Federal Transportation Enhancement Project — S.P. 120 - 020 -37 Revised July 27, 2012 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Edina was successful in securing Federal Transportation Enhancement funding and a subsequent Scope Change and Sunset Date extension for the construction of Pedestrian / Intersection Enhancements at 76th Street, 70th Street and 66th Street. In addition the project will provide missing sidewalk connection on the east side of France Avenue insuring that all areas on both sides of France Avenue have an opportunity to access one of the planned crossing locations. The primary goal of the project is to provide safe, efficient and aesthetically pleasing crossings of France Avenue for pedestrian and bicycles. In order to achieve these goals, direction was provided by; previous studies for the France Avenue /Southdale area; Federal and State design guidelines; the City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan; two Stakeholders meetings, and; input from the Edina Transportation Commission. Based on the review of the existing conditions and the project goals, three (3) intersection design concepts were developed, reviewed and analyzed. The options included: Option 1 — Separated Bike /Pedestrian Lanes with Boulevard Option 2 — Separated Bike /Pedestrian Lanes with no Boulevard Option 3 — Sidewalk with Boulevard Each option was evaluated and included specific corridor, pedestrian, bike, transit, intersection and traffic signals elements. Based on the evaluation of these options and input from the Stakeholders, Option 1 was selected as the initial preferred concept. However, following preparation of the project cost estimates and input from the Edina Transportation Commission, Option 3 — Sidewalk with boulevard (on- street bike lanes, side streets only), was the concept recommended to bring forward for further review and approval by the City Council. The estimated permanent right of way needed for Option 3 is 44,700sf compared to 82,000sf for Option 1. The estimated cost included with approved Scope Change and Sunset Date extension was $2,045,000, which included no right of way cost and minimal landscaping (urban design) and lighting costs. The comparable cost for Option 3 is $2,309,600 and $3,624,000 for Option 1. The total estimated cost including right of way and urban design elements for Option 3 is $5,799,100 compared with $9,145,500 for Option 1. Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 2. LOCATION The intersection improvements are located along France Avenue at 76th Street, 70th Street and 66th Street as shown in Figure 1 below. _ e ,g 1 .. - ® Franca A­ua S • .. , ILI CO -.� rc 'LEGEND N ' Proposed Intersecticn Improvements K • Proposed Intersection Improvements By Three Rivers Park District Figure 1. Proiect Location Map 3. INITIATION & ISSUES Background 1 History The City of Edina was successful in 2007 in securing Federal Transportation Enhancement funding for the 72nd Street Pedestrian Bridge over France Avenue. As a result of several studies, change in policy direction and new leadership at the City the concept of a bridge over France Avenue was deemed no longer practical. The City then requested and was granted a Scope Change and a one year Sunset Date extension from the Metropolitan Council for the project. The re- scoped project will accomplish the same goals, safely and efficiently for less overall cost, in partnership with the other agencies and with greater community support. The vision for the re- scoped project stems from the County's "France Avenue Corridor Study" completed in 2009. Intersection enhancements such as; median refuge islands, accessible pedestrian signals, pedestrian warning signs, enhanced pedestrian corner treatments, etc, will be provided at three primary intersections. 66th Street: This proposed crossing would provide access to; medical buildings, Southdale Mall, Aquatic Center, Rosland Park, TLC Bike Boulevard, and access to transit. Page 2 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 70u' Street: This proposed crossing would continue the complete street project recently constructed west of France Avenue. It would serve primarily single family neighborhood, The Galleria, Target, Promenade, Southdale Library, Hennepin County Government Center, and access to transit. 76'h Street: This proposed crossing would serve primarily multi - family housing and connect to Centennial Lakes Park, Promenade, Three Rivers Park District Nine mile trail in Richfield, Edinborough Park, medical facilities, and access to transit. Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) is also planning improvements to Gallagher Drive. Although this intersection will be improved by TRPD the proposed crossing will serve the future planned regional trail, Promenade, multi - family housing, and access to transit. In addition to the intersection enhancements the proposed project will provide missing sidewalk connections insuring that all areas on both sides of France Avenue have an opportunity to access one-of the planned crossing locations. The final approved Scope Change project included the following elements. • Median refuge islands with landscaping at intersections • Intersection improvements including= • Narrowing of existing lanes at intersections • Removing free right turn islands • Enhanced corner treatments • ADA compliant pedestrian accommodations • Pedestrian level lighting • Signal Improvements including- • APS signals • Countdown timers • Vehicle and bike detection • EastNVest bike accommodations • Eastside missing sidewalk connections with in the existing R/W • Improved better accessibility to transit • Minimal R/W acquisition only at intersections Included in the Scope Change request was a construction cost estimate for the proposed project based on the above typical improvements. Detailed survey and quantities were not calculated. The following outlines the estimated costs from the Scope Change request. Intersection improvements $ 1,005,000 Revised signal systems $ 600,000 Signing and striping $ 36,000 Trail / sidewalk $ 54,000 Retaining walls $ 150,000 Guard rails $ 50,000 Lighting $ 80,000 Traffic control $ 20,000 Landscaping $ 50,000 Total Cost $ 2,045,000 Page 3 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS A copy of the approved Scope Change and Sunset Date extension request is included in the Appendix. Following the approval of the Scope Change request a topographic survey was completed that better defined the impacts and costs of the proposed plan. Based on the updated information it was determined that some right of way would be needed to complete the project. The following shows the updated cost to complete the plan approved with the Scope Change. Approved Scope Change Revised Cost 76t Street: R/W = $194,200 Construction = $545,300 Urban design = $16,000 701h Street: R/W = $163,500 Construction = $521,000 Urban design = $16,000 66th Street: R/W = $73,100 Construction = $503,400 Urban design = $16,000 Total Intersection: R/W = $430,800 Construction = $1,569,200 Urban design = $48,000 Sidewalk Connections: R/W = $72,500 _ Construction = $181,900 Urban design = $0 Total Cost: R/W = $503,300 Construction = $1,751,100 Urban design = $48,000 Total Project Cost = $2,302,400 The City has worked with several agencies during the preliminary studies, concept development and the proposed re- scoping of the project since the original TE application was submitted and approved. These agencies have included: • Hennepin County Community Works • Hennepin County Transportation • Three Rivers Park District • Transit for Livable Communities • Metro Transit • Minnesota Department of Transportation Page 4 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Project Goals / Objectives / Direction The proposed improvements are anticipated to provide a catalyst for France Avenue that will: • Encourage pedestrians to use enhanced intersections by creating inviting passages from surrounding areas, development along France Avenue, and buildings at the enhanced intersections. • Create inviting and comfortable parallel corridors leading to enhanced intersections with patterns and details that reflect the France Avenue corridor. • Orient buildings with primary entrances at corners to encourage pedestrian activity. • Discourage crossings at locations other than enhanced intersections. • Create inviting and safe waiting spaces at enhanced intersections. • Ensure safe and comfortable space is available at medians in the event a pedestrian cannot cross the entire street. • Establish continuity in design,.among enhanced intersections. • Create, to the degree possible, designs oriented to pedestrians within the street crossing zones that are related to, but still distinct from, the waiting spaces. • Improve transit accessibility City of Edina 2008 Comprehensive Plan The proposed project is consistent with the direction outlined in the City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Land Use and Community Design Chapter 4 of the plan addresses the relationship between Land Use and the function of roadway corridors. As shown below in Figure 2 France Avenue is identified as a primary thoroughfare where as 66th Street, 70th Street and 76th Street are residential and /or business thoroughfares. The Comprehensive Plan outlines that the residential and business thoroughfares should provide for non - motorized connections. Page 5 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS r, _r Roadway Corridors N rrrrr Regional T �, Primary Thoroughfare Highways r Residential Thoroughfare Gateway Business Thoroughfare aye _ Locations se _ 66th Transit Shuttle Pro pod Regiw.al� Trail r � 66th Street � r r StreetsCape r, r » m r- > �naLake Parkiawn Q r o VU 7r th r a ♦rte r � 5 Figure 2. Community Design Roadway Corridors Sidewalk / Bicycle Facilities Chapter 7 of the plan addresses locations of proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities and funding options within the City. Figures 7.10, Sidewalk Facilities and 7.11, Bicycle Facilities from the Comprehensive Plan are included in the Appendix. Both indicate a need for additional facilities along France Avenue and the primary cross streets. Figure 3, below shows the relationship and need to provide improved safe and efficient connections between the residential land uses west of France and the commercial land uses east of France Avenue. r O o Z o a 0 1 Z I T4 ZIV ,r' s s AV S s ,l d Pinery B ke Roule P—ty R"w, Trel (ar eMwn n Ciy Comp. — +' Crye'Mary rCw - ,�I i- E D. 1 N A f T.arrK .QnN H F I E L M Figure 3. Existing Pedestrian / Bike Network Page 6 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Stakeholder Meeting Input In order to insure that all interests in the area were addressed a Stakeholders group was established. The Stakeholders included: • Edina Transportation Commission • Edina Planning Commission • Hennepin County Public Works • Hennepin County Housing, Community Works and Transit • MnDOT • Three Rivers Park District • Metro Transit • Bike Edina Task Force • Transit. for Livable Communities • Local Businesses • Local Residents This group has. had two meetings. The first meeting was held at the City of Edina Public Works Facility on May 31 St, 2012 at 7:00 PM. There were approximately 18 people in attendance, including city staff, project consultant team members, and representatives from various agencies and organizations, including the Edina Transportation Commission, Bike Edina Task Force, do.town, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District, and the City of Bloomington. A presentation was given by the project consultant team, and discussion was encouraged. Several major themes emerged from the discussion. All stakeholders agreed that the existing France Avenue design could be improved for cyclists and pedestrians. Stakeholders proposed several ideas and themes for improvement, including the need for France Avenue to be a Gateway to Edina, a need to improve transit access, a need to improve conditions for corridor residents, the importance of encouraging vibrant street life, and the importance of improving pedestrian and cyclist safety. Several specific strategies were discussed, including a "Dutch style" bicycle and pedestrian intersection design strategy, the importance of vertical elements in the design, and the importance of providing varying textures and colors to provide visual cues. The meeting was concluded with direction to staff and the consultant team to further develop and evaluate several concepts. The second stakeholders meeting were held at the City of Edina Public Works Facility on June 26`t', 2012 at 7:00 PM. There were approximately 21 people in attendance, including city staff, project consultant team members, and representatives from various agencies and organizations, including the Edina Transportation Commission, Edina Planning Commission, Edina City Council, Hennepin County, Three Rivers Park District, the City of Bloomington, and several persons active in the local business community. A presentation was given by the project consultant team, and discussion was encouraged. The consultant team presented three conceptual alternatives for the identified intersections and requested feedback from the stakeholders. Page 7 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS The three options included two variants of the "Dutch style" intersection design and one option with traditional bike lanes. The stakeholders discussed the strengths and weaknesses of each option, and the group agreed that Option 1 was the preferred option because it provided the greatest degree of separation between motorists, cyclists, and pedestrians. Further discussion reinforced the need for strong vertical elements in the design to ensure a top - quality experience for pedestrians as well as cyclists. The meeting was concluded with direction to staff and the consultant team to focus on Option 1, while enhancing the design with additional vertical elements. Minutes from each meeting are included in the Appendix. Edina Transportation Commission Review A special Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) meeting was held on July 9th,. 2012 to discuss the proposed improvements and Option 1 as the recommended alternative. Based on the high cost of Option 1 and a rethinking. of the need for bike facilities on France Avenue, the consensus at the meeting waslo move forward with a modified Option 3 that would include an 8 foot sidewalk with.an 8 to 10 foot boulevard between the roadway and the sidewalk. A copy of the meeting minutes is included in the Appendix. A regularly scheduled ETC meeting was held on July 19th, 2012 to further discuss the proposed improvements and the revised Option 3 based on their comments from the July 9th meeting. Concerns were raised again with the cost of the improvements proposed with the revised Option 3. The meeting included a discussion of what elements of the project could be removed to reduce the cost. The recommendation of the ETC at the meeting was to move forward with Option 3 and to work with the City Council on what elements could be removed to get to an acceptable budget for the project. A City Council Workshop to discuss the project with the ETC is planned for August 6th. A copy of the draft meeting minutes is included in the Appendix. Agency Meetings /Comments Hennepin County The project development team met with Hennepin County Staff on June 25tH, 2012 to discuss the proposed improvements and options for France Avenue. Their primary concerns /comments included: • Raised planters /curbs along the median curb or in the boulevard. Due to a potential safety problem for vehicles leaving the roadway. • They wanted to ensure appropriate truck turning movements were maintained at the corners. They have had some issues at intersections with tight radii where large vehicles track on the sidewalk where pedestrians may be standing. • Narrowing of lanes is fine, but during final design we will need to be cognizant of the joints and especially the crown lines. • They were less enthused about a pedestrian push button station in the median. They would like the signal timing to allow pedestrians to cross in one cycle. • They would like to see a detail plan once a concept is selected. • A concern raised was the use of the average PM peak hour as the analysis period vs. a holiday peak. Page 8 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Metropolitan Council Informal comments were received from Metropolitan Council staff via email following the first Stakeholders meeting. The comments and responses to those comments are included in the Appendix. Metro Transit The project design team met with Kristin Thompson, Brad Smith and Cindy Harper of Metro Transit on July 5th, 2012. We discussed the project and shared the proposed improvements. The members of Metro Transit were supportive of the proposed improvements including removing cyclists from the travel portion of the roadway, and did not foresee any issues with the existing bus routes and stops, and agreed that the improvements would be a major upgrade for Metro Transit. We discussed the desire to possibly add bus shelters. They provided details on their standard bus shelters and the standard concrete pad. They informed the design team that bus shelters are added only if there are 25 boarding's at the bus stop. If the ridership numbers were not up to the set amount, they would not maintain or construct the shelter. However, the City could put up a shelter of their choosing at the City's cost. , It was not anticipated that any of the bus stop locations or routes would change in the future. Given the current northbound condition near Hazelton and 72nd Street, where the bus stop is at a location without a sidewalk, they would consider relocating these to a location that has more room, possibly on Hazelton Avenue. It is proposed to add a sidewalk in this location, but a problem with snow removal still exists given the proximity to the existing retaining wall. One option to provide additional space for the bus stop would be removing the dedicated right turn lane. They do not like to place bus stops adjacent to right turn lanes given the difficulty of entering back into traffic. 4. EXISTING CONDITIONS France Ave Corridor France Avenue is a north / south Hennepin County Road (CSAH 17), "A" Minor Arterial roadway. In general, in the area south between TH 62 (Crosstown) an 1 -494, it is a 6 lane (3 lanes in each direction) roadway with left and right turn lanes at the primary intersections. A 40 mph speed is posted on the roadway. Sidewalks Sidewalks are currently provided on the west side of France Avenue the entire length from 66th Street to 76th Street. The width is approximately 6', for most of the sidewalks, with no boulevard. The only exception is near 66th Street where the sidewalk is 5' with a 5' boulevard. On the east side a 5' sidewalk is provided from 76th Street to Parklawn Avenue (on private property) with a boulevard that varies in width. Mid -block between Parklawn and Gallagher (430'N. of Parklawn) a 6' sidewalk is provided. A 5' sidewalk is also provided on the east side from 175' south of 66`h Street to the north. Page 9 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Transit Transit service is provided along France Avenue with 5 primary routes each is discussed below and summarized in Table 1'. The location of the existing transit stops are shown in Figures 4a — 4c. Route 6 provides local bus service throughout the Edina Southdale Area and parts of Minneapolis. The route provides local stops along France Avenue between Minnesota Drive and Hazleton Road before accessing the Southdale Transit Center. Route 578 provides express bus service throughout several Edina neighborhoods including the Southdale area with downtown Minneapolis. This route travels along France Avenue between 69th and 70th Street before accessing the Southdale Transit Center and downtown Minneapolis via TH- 62 and 1 -35W. Route 579 provides express bus service between the Southdale Transit Center and the University of Minnesota. The route uses 66th Street, 691h Street, France Avenue, and York Avenue to access the Southdale Transit Center before using TH -62 and 1 -35W to access the University. Route 587 provides express bus service between the Edina Southdale area and downtown Minneapolis. This route travels along France Avenue between 69th Street and Gallagher Drive. It also serves Valley View Drive and Normandale Road before accessing downtown Minneapolis via TH -100 and I- 394. Route 684 provides express bus service between Eden Prairie, the Southdale Transit Center, and downtown Minneapolis. The route passes through Edina on TH -62, and using Valley View Drive, 66th Street and 691h Street, and York Avenue to access the Southdale Transit Center before continuing to downtown Minneapolis. Operated by Southwest Transit. Page 10 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Route Project Area Service Destinations Frequency Headway Rush Hour Midday Evening Saturday Sunda /Holiday U of M Di n kytow n 76th Street, as well SE Minneapolis as France Avenue Downtown Minneapolis 6 between Minnesota Hennepin Avenue S 410 10.15 15 15 15 Drive and Hazleton Uptown Transit Station Road France Avenue S Xeres Avenue S Southdale Transit Center Edina Industrial Park 70th Street Tracy Avenue 66th Street, 69th Benton Avenue Street, as well as 77th Street 578 gush Lake Road France Avenue 30 Express between 69th Street Highwood Drive and 70th Street France Avenue Southdale Transit Center York Avenue Downtown Minneapolis 66th Street, 69th S79 Street, as well as Southdale Transit Center Express France Avenue U of M 60 between 66th Street and 69th Street 69th Street, as well France Avenue 587 as France Avenue Valley View Road Express between 69th Street Normandale Road 30-40 30-40 and Gallagher Drive Downtown Minneapolis 684 66th Street, 69th Eden Prairie (various) Express Street Southdale Transit Center 30 Downtown Minneapolis Table 1. Existing Transit Route Summary it 4W Yz - G w _ OIL �� �_ yam. .., .....w. .,a�a. i/•. � � �, .. F `. ca • Figure 4a. France Ave Existing Transit Stop Locations Page 11 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS i s _ 7 mw , 311 k _ MJAWk' Y �iri'' :a e'`�,..,�� EaFr. �yti'�- "! � f+F. +��kti � ' �`• \, .l: P ",� Figure 4b. France Ave Existing Transit Stop Locations 1 40, IN <_ ca Figure 4c. France Ave Existing Transit Stop Locations Page 12 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS France Ave at 76th Street 76th Street is an east / west city street providing access between the commercial / residential areas east and west of France Avenue. It was identified in the City's Comprehensive plan as a component of the east / west reliever roadway to 1 -494. 76th Street is classified as an "A" Minor Arterial with a posted speed of 30 mph. Figure 5 below shows the existing roadway typical sections at France Avenue and 76th Street. 2' 111' 12 12.5 ,2b' 11' 11' 13' 12' ,2.4" 11' 2' Rt Tum Lana Th- Lane Thru Lara Thru Law UT= Lary Mad. Thm Lane Tl U Lana T11r, Lena TM, Lana Existing France Avenue Section (North Leg of Intersection) 1XI ' 1.S 11 11' 14' 11,5' :2' 17 1,.5' 2' Thru Law T:ru Lora Mod. U Turn Lome Thru Lorca Thru Land Thru Law RI Tum Lara Existing 76th Street Section (West Leg of Intersection) Figure 5. France Ave at 76th Street Typical Sections France Ave at 701h Street 70th Street is an east / west city street providing access between the residential areas west of France Avenue and the commercial areas to the east of France Avenue. In 2010 70th Street was reconstructed east of France Avenue to include three single lane roundabouts. West of France Avenue, 70th Street was reconstructed in 2011 as a "complete street" including a single lane in each direction, bike lanes, parking lanes, a roundabout and a traffic signal system to help control speed. 70th Street is classified as a Collector Roadway in the City's Comprehensive Plan a posted speed of 30 mph east of France Avenue and 25 mph west of France Avenue. Figure 6 below shows the existing roadway typical sections at France Avenue and 70th Street. Page 13 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Y 12' 125' IT I 12' s 15' 13.5' 12 12.5 Y Rt Tum Lerta M" Lane Thm Lane Lt Tum Lena Mad. Thru lane Thm Lere TNu Lana Existing France Avenue Section (North Leg of Intersection) 1's 12.5 l3• - 4' 12.5' 1Y 135. 1,6 T N Lero TNu Lane Mad U Turn Lora I TNu Lam Rl Tum Lone L 70.V r� Existing 70th Street Section (EAST Leg of Intersection) Figure 6. France Ave at 70th Street Typical Sections France Ave at 66th Street 66th Street is an east / west city street west of France Avenue and a Hennepin County Road (CSAH 53) east of France Avenue. This roadway provides access between the residential areas west of France Avenue and the Commercial areas to the east of France Avenue primarily Southdale Center. 66`h Street is classified as an "A" Minor Arterial with a posted speed of 30 mph. Figure 7 below shows the existing roadway typical sections at France Avenue and 66th Street. T 1' 2' 11,5' 12.5 12' 11.6 6.5 It•5 1Y 1Y 2 Thr. I RTL Thm Lane Thnt Lone I U Turn Lana I I Mad. I I Tnru Lane T.vu Lane T1ru Lane Existing France Avenue Section (North Leg of Intersection) Y 71' 17 12' t2' 1Y a5 13.5' 1Y Rl Tum 1.. Thru Lane VOL. Ll Turn lane L: Turn Lane Med. Thru Laro 7::ru Laro I Existing 66th Street Section (East Leg of Intersection) Figure 7. France Ave at 66th Street Typical 7. France Ave at 66th Street Typical Sections Sections Page 14 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 5. CORRIDOR ANALYSIS Traffic Analysis. Traffic volume data was collected for France Avenue and the adjacent side streets in comparing the past two counting years (2009 and 2011) traffic has actually decreased slightly on France Avenue below is a summary of the traffic volume data used in for the analysis. France Avenue 2009 Count — 26,000 vpd to 28,500 vpd 2011 Count — 24,300 vpd to 27,800 vpd 76th Street 2009 Count - 8,000 vpd to 9,100 vpd 701h Street 2009 Count — 9,300 vpd to 10,600 vpd 66th Street 2009 Count — 10,000 vpd to 16,100 vpd Traffic operations were evaluated for the France Avenue Corridor in order to evaluate lane configuration alternatives using 2009 traffic volume data. This section describes the methodology used to assess the operations and provides a summary of traffic operations. Analysis Methodology The traffic operations analysis is derived from established methodologies documented the Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (HCM). The HCM provides a series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations. Intersections are given a Level of Service (LOS) grade from "A" to "F" to describe the average amount of control delay per vehicle as defined in the HCM. The LOS is primarily a function of peak traffic hour turning movement volumes, intersection lane configuration, and the traffic controls at the intersection. LOS A is the best traffic operating condition, and drivers experience minimal delay at an intersection operating at that level. LOS E represents the condition where the intersection is at capacity, and some drivers may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through an intersection controlled by traffic signals. LOS F represents a condition where there is more traffic than can be handled by the intersection, and many vehicle operators may have to wait through more than one green phase to make it through the intersection. At a stop sign - controlled intersection, LOS F would be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues on each approach at an all -way stop, or long queues and /or great difficulty in finding an acceptable gap for drivers on the minor legs at a through- street intersection. Page 15 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS The LOS ranges for both signalized and un- signalized intersections are shown in Table 2. The threshold LOS values for un- signalized intersections are slightly less than for signalized intersections. This variance was instituted because drivers' expectations at intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can be altered by increasing (or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control arrangements, adjusting the timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric improvements. LOS also changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease. Source: HCM Table 2 - Intersection Level of Service Ranges LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as "approaches ") or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low- volume legs by converting a two -way stop condition to an all -way stop, or adjusting' timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost. Although LOS A represents the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to construct roadways and intersection to such a high standard often exceeds the benefit to the user. Funding availability might also lead to acceptance of intersection or roadway designs with a lower LOS. LOS D is generally accepted as the lowest acceptable level in urban areas. LOS C is often considered to be the desirable minimum level for rural areas. LOS D or E may be acceptable for limited durations or distances, or for very low- volume legs of some intersections. The LOS analysis was performed using Synch ro/Si mTraffic: Synchro, a software package that implements Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies, was used to build each signalized intersection and provide an input database for turning- movement volumes, lane geometrics, and signal design and timing. In addition, Synchro was used to optimize signal timing parameters for future conditions. Page 16 of 45 Control Delay (Seconds) Signalized Un- Signalized A s 10 s 10 B 10 -20 10 -15 C 20 -35 15 -25 D 35-55 25-35 E 55-80 35-50 F > 80 > 50 Source: HCM Table 2 - Intersection Level of Service Ranges LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes referred to as "approaches ") or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low- volume legs by converting a two -way stop condition to an all -way stop, or adjusting' timing at a signalized intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on minor legs, such as additional lanes or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost. Although LOS A represents the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to construct roadways and intersection to such a high standard often exceeds the benefit to the user. Funding availability might also lead to acceptance of intersection or roadway designs with a lower LOS. LOS D is generally accepted as the lowest acceptable level in urban areas. LOS C is often considered to be the desirable minimum level for rural areas. LOS D or E may be acceptable for limited durations or distances, or for very low- volume legs of some intersections. The LOS analysis was performed using Synch ro/Si mTraffic: Synchro, a software package that implements Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodologies, was used to build each signalized intersection and provide an input database for turning- movement volumes, lane geometrics, and signal design and timing. In addition, Synchro was used to optimize signal timing parameters for future conditions. Page 16 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS SimTraffic is a micro - simulation computer modeling software that simulates each individual vehicle's characteristics and driver behavior in response to traffic volumes, intersection configuration, and signal operations. The model simulates drivers' behaviors and responses to surrounding traffic flow as well as different vehicle types and speeds. It outputs estimated vehicle delay and queue lengths at each intersection being analyzed. Corridor Analysis The traffic operations analysis was completed for several lane configuration alternatives along France Avenue. The PM peak hour traffic conditions from 2009 were used for the analysis. Each alternative including the results of the analysis is discussed below. A summary table of each analysis alternative is included in the Appendix. Existing Lane Configuration — This analysis provided the base line condition that was used to compare the results of the other lane configuration alternatives. The results of the existing analysis found that several movements are at Level of Service (LOS) E or F. In addition some of the existing max vehicle queues exceed the available turn lane storage. 2. Removing Free Right Turn Lanes — By removing the free right turn lanes it was found that there was very little impact to the overall operations and that there would be a minimal increase in vehicle delays. 3. Removing One Through Lane on France Avenue — Removing one of the through lanes increased the number of intersection movements that are at LOS E or F. Average vehicle delays increased by 10 to 20 sec per vehicle at the intersections. 4. Removing Additional Left Turn Lanes — This alternative removed one left turn lane at locations were there were dual left turn lanes. The results of the analysis found that at every location were the lane was removed the left turn queues exceed the available storage. In addition, the overall intersection average intersection delays increased by an additional 5 to 10 secs per vehicle. One concern that was raised by Hennepin County was the use of the average PM peak hour as the analysis period. The concern is that even though we don't typically design for a holiday peak, this area of France Avenue with Southdale and the other retail uses, tend to have a more extended holiday timeframe and that the level of traffic on France Avenue is actually higher on an average. Based on the traffic operations analysis results it was determined that the final concepts would be developed based on only eliminating the free right turn lanes and no other lane reductions. Page 17 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Crash Analysis A crash investigation of the past 5 years (2007 -2011) was completed for the corridor. The results indicate that there were 258 crashes in the corridor from 66th Street to 76th Street with 95 of those crashes at the intersections proposed to be improved with this project. The results also conclude that the overall crash rate and severity rate in the corridor is below the state wide average for the same type of roadways. The investigation found that there were 4 pedestrian or bicycle crashes in the corridor. Three of the four were with vehicles turning right failing to yield to bicycles. These crashes are listed below. • 66th Street — Northbound right -turn vehicle failed to yield to bike (2011) • 69th Street — Southbound right turn vehicles struck bike (2011) • 69th Street — Northbound through vehicle struck pedestrian (2011) • Gallagher Drive — Westbound right turn vehicle failed to yield to bike (2011) A table showing the results of the intersection analysis is included in the Appendix. 6. IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS Urban Design Context Any improvements to selected intersections along France Avenue must be made in the context of the City's other plans for the corridor, including its Comprehensive Plan, transportation plans, and plans for economic development. In general these plans have suggested a gradual transformation of France Avenue from a vehicular- oriented street to one that offers a "living street" experience for not only people in motorized vehicles but also to pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. Such a reorientation will affect not only the design of France Avenue and the streets that intersect it, but also the private property adjacent to France Avenue. The City, County, and the owners of private property will need to work together to achieve this goal. The concept is to fully connect the public domain of the street with the private domain of buildings. This will create a realm for social interaction, a place that provides an opportunity for people to meet and congregate, purposefully or serendipitously, or simply move between locations. To achieve this goal, France Avenue will be transformed into a tree -lined boulevard with several distinct features will be added to France Avenue including new and additional street, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit elements, as discussed below. Page 18 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS A generalized concept of one of the proposed intersections as envisioned under Option 1 illustrating a novel approach to moving bicyclists through the intersection by superimposing what is essentially a roundabout for bicycles over a standard vehicular intersection. Note that existing free -right turning movements have been eliminated and the median enhanced to improve pedestrian safety by decreasing crossing distance. This is true of all alternative options. Similarly all of the proposed options would significantly improve pedestrian comfort and enhance the identity of the corridor by increasing the number of trees providing an overstory canopy along streets, sidewalks, and in the median. Although it would be preferred to have new structures abut the street, particularly at corners, some existing buildings will remain removed from the street, requiring that sidewalks be extended from the street to those more distant structures. This concept for locating new buildings near sidewalks or improving the sidewalk connection for existing buildings would be applied in all alternative options. Corridor Elements The stated goal of the City to transform France Avenue between TH 62 Crosstown and 1 -494 into an attractive and distinct tree -lined living street with its own distinguishing identity that not only differentiates it from other corridors but also from other segments of France Avenue. To do this, the primary change will be the relationship between buildings and the street. In general, buildings will move closer to the street. At intersections, buildings will be adjacent to both France Avenue and the intersecting street. In locations where streets and existing buildings will remain distant, connecting plazas and generous sidewalks will encourage better pedestrian connectivity. Eventually intervening parking lots will be eliminated or at least become less common; a landscaped buffer will separate the street from pedestrians; doorways to buildings will open to intersections or sidewalks parallel to the street. The cross section of the corridor would also change. Lane width would be reduced to 11 feet with opposing traffic separated by a substantial planted median of 10 or more feet. For Option 1, bicycles would be accommodated on France Avenue with a 5 foot bike lane in each direction. In that option, planters or a 20 -foot planted buffer would separate France Avenue from the sidewalk. Page 19 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS For Option 2 the bike lane would be separated only by a curb. For Option 3, bicycles would simply share the road with traffic. Sharrows for assisting the turning movements of bicyclists would be included at certain cross streets in some. options. Inexperienced bicyclists may prefer to ride on the sidewalk but that is contrary to the city's existing public policy although it may be allowed under state standards if the sidewalk's layout meets state criteria. The sidewalk would be a least seven feet wide under the first two options, running parallel to the street. For Option 3, the walk would be 8 feet wide. Under all options the sidewalk placed adjacent to buildings may actually be wider to accommodate outdoor civic or commercial activities. The roadway median (between opposing lanes of traffic) and the sidewalk median (between the sidewalk and the street) would be slightly bermed to reduce headlight glare and planted with, as appropriate, flowers, shrubs, and trees. Plantings would be unique and contribute to creating a unique identity to the corridor. . Street and pedestrian lighting will be installed along the roadways and sidewalks. The roadway lighting will be standardized yet unique to the corridor. The pedestrian lighting will be identical to the pedestrian lighting with an "E" emblem as used recently elsewhere in the City. Both street and pedestrian lighting will be placed uniformly along the edge of the roadway or sidewalk to emphasize the linearity of the corridor. It is anticipated that street lights may become necessary as trees mature and ambient light shining on the roadway, is reduced. The lighting of the roadway will not be immediately installed as part of the currently proposed improvements to intersections and sidewalks, although conduit for future installation may be included. However, some intersection and pedestrian level lighting is included with the project. Lighting of buildings, signs, and places of outdoor gathering will be coordinated to establish an overarching architectural identity for the corridor. Gateway monuments would demarcate the entrances to this segment of France Avenue, announcing its distinct identify as a uniquely designed and managed destination. Similar, although less pronounced identifying markers would occur where cross streets intersect France Avenue. Wayfinding for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists will need to be installed to facilitate active - transportation. For motorists, this may include active messages, particularly for events, seasonal information, and directions to and the availability of parking facilities. For bicyclists, it may be providing direction to major nearby destinations and for pedestrians, kiosk bulletin boards providing room for announcements of public events. Page 20 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Distinctive gateway monuments not only define the entrances to a corridor but presage the character of the whole district, inviting participation and providing an identity to an iconic street in a vibrant community. Such monuments can be destinations themselves, provide community and historical information, and must be attractive throughout the day and year. Pedestrian Elements The primary attribute of the pedestrian realm will be the sidewalk itself. The walk will be concrete with a scoring pattern unique to the corridor. The preference will be to have buildings abut the sidewalk. It will be a standard seven to eight foot width depending on the option selected with an additional 18 -inch shy distance next to buildings to allow for fagade projections and fenestrations. The walk may be widened to accommodate future commercial uses, such as restaurant patios and sidewalk cafes, or even developed into small plazas or pocket parks in coordination with future private development. The concept is to create opportunities for people to interact. Additional pedestrian amenities, such as benches, tables, arbors, or drinking fountains may be included. Some of these amenities may be installed in coordination with private development that is anticipated to occur along the corridor in the upcoming years and decades. The boulevard buffer between the sidewalk and the street is critical for developing the pedestrian realm. The buffer will provide an area for trees, shrubs, and flowers. At a minimum, there will be an 8 foot bio -swale boulevard buffer planted with trees between the sidewalk and street. Flowers will be planted near cross streets to emphasize the intersections. To provide for plant health and vigorous growth, irrigation and soils designed for compact urban locations are assumed for all boulevard and median plantings. For Option 1, planter boxes filled with shrubs and flowers will provide separation between bicyclists and pedestrians. The scale of the plantings will be massive and perfuse to visually complement the width of the street, the height of adjacent buildings, and the vibrancy of activity. In particular, large distinctive street trees, primarily deciduous, will enclose the sidewalk and street while providing a pedestrian scale space and detailing beneath the canopy, creating a safe enclosure for people moving through the corridor on foot. Shrubs and flowers will provide interesting details to pedestrians. Page 21 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS d' I W By working with private developers, the pedestrian realm can become a place for social interaction. Providing amenities that make it comfortable for people to walk and congregate is essential. Explicitely marking where pedestrians are located and providing a wayfinding system increases pedestrian safety and encourages people to walk. Pedestrian activated crossing signals and video activated signals for bicycles will enhance the safety for active transporation while improving the systems's resposiveness to the needs of pedesrians and bicyclists. Bike Elements For Option 1, bicycles will be accommodated along France Avenue with a dedicated lane for northbound bikes and a dedicated lane through the intersection of 66th Street, 70" Street and 76th Street for southbound bikes. The preferred width is six feet. At intersections, a specially adopted layout, essentially a roundabout for moving bicyclists safely through traffic will be accommodated. Left turns will be accommodated through the roundabout rather than crossing traffic over to a left turn lane. Bike lanes will be separated from lanes for motorized traffic by a wide curb. At intersections, bike lanes will be color- coded. For Option 2, bicycles will be accommodated on the France Avenue but separated from traffic by a curb. For Option 3, bike lanes will only be provided on selected cross streets. No dedicated bike lanes will be placed on France Avenue for Option 3. Page 22 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Accommodating bicycle parking will be critical in the corridor. Parking by building entrances, outdoor public gathering spots, and at transit nodes will need to be coordinated with private development. In addition, "on- street" bicycle rental vending may become an option in the area and will need to be accommodated off of France Avenue and other intersecting streets. It will be critical that the location of bicycle lanes, parking, and rental not interfere with pedestrian movement. Coordination with private developers to accommodate bicycle parking, including the possibility of having bicycle lockers, may be necessary. Edina has designated Frnace Avenue as a secondary bike route. Although, given various alternative routes, it will probably be used only by more experienced riders. Under Option 9, the introduction of the bicycle roundabout superimposed over a standard intersection provides a safe way for bicyclists to negotiate the intersection. Signal detection methods for bicyclists will be provided under all options. Transit Elements Coordination with transit providers will be essential for transforming France Avenue into a living street. Linking the sidewalk's pedestrian system with the streets' transit system will require site - specific coordination. Providing a corridor - specific transit shelter at all transit stops will encourage use of the transit system. Coordinating vending machines for newspapers or at a minimum defining their locations will benefit the appearance of the corridor. The placement of transit shelters must not interfere with pedestrian or bicycle movement. Providing bicycle storage lockers at transit stops will encourage residential neighbors to use transit and provide an opportunity to reinforce France Avenue as a destination. Page 23 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS A seamless transition from transit to bicycling and walking is critical for establishing a living street. The location and design of transit shelters can provide an iconic element for the corridor. It is anticipated that a uniquely designed bus shelter that will be coordinated with other design elements in this corridor will reinforce the street's distinctiveness. Page 24 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Intersection Elements Crosswalks will be marked with the proven safety improvement, a traditional zebra - striped crosswalk with stop bars. This will provide the best safety measures for pedestrians. A wide center median, at least 10 feet, will create a pedestrian refuge in the center of France Avenue. The median should extend beyond the crosswalk into the intersection to provide an additional buffer for stranded pedestrians. City and County standards will be applied to curb cut locations and design. Traffic Signal Elements The appearance of traffic signals, poles, and masts will be coordinated with lighting fixtures and standards. It is anticipated that the color of traffic semaphores will be bronze. American with Disabilities (ADA) standards will be applied to all traffic signal elements. Video detection or other detection methods will be used to identify if a pedestrian or bicyclist is approaching or in a crossing and the cycle times adjusted to allow sufficient time for crossing and turning movements. Turning movements for cars will be delayed if the presence of a pedestrian or bicyclist is detected. A manual override system will be provided for both pedestrians and bicyclists. The design of the functional aspects of intersection and traffic signal elements will reinforce the aesthetic and urban design characteristics of the corridor by providing safety and comfort to pedestrians and bicyclists. Page 25 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 7. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES Three primary intersection options were prepared and evaluated, taking into consideration of the design elements discussed in the previous section and input from the Stakeholders and Edina Transportation Commission. Each option is discussed below with their advantages and disadvantages, Intersection Option 1 - Separated Bike /Pedestrian Lanes with Blvd This option provides a one -way off -road bike lane separated by a boulevard and an elevated pedestrian sidewalk also separated from the bike lane, from 76th Street to 66th Street for northbound and at the intersections of 66th Street, 701h Street and 76th Street for southbound. At the intersections the bikes would be separated in their own crossing using a modification of the "Dutch" design. Figures 8a — 8c show Option 1 at each intersection. Advantages: • Aesthetically pleasing with more opportunity's to provide landscaping • Provides buffer to pedestrians and bikes • Biscuits allow for better sight distance for bikes and vehicles • Widened Median allows for refuge island for pedestrians • Increased buffer in corners for pedestrians • Biscuits allow for signal pole placement • Decreased distance for pedestrians and bikes to cross Safer crossing for pedestrian and bicyclists. Disadvantages: • Requires significant R/W • High Cost • Pedestrians need to wait further back behind bike lane • Additional maintenance for snow removal Page 26 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS lot i Tl�, y r i, Figure 8a. France Ave at 76th Street Option 1 i � r J .y ®r. Figure 8b. France Ave at 70th Street Option 1 Page 27 of 45 '! w r r •I, lot i Tl�, y r i, Figure 8a. France Ave at 76th Street Option 1 i � r J .y ®r. Figure 8b. France Ave at 70th Street Option 1 Page 27 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS i .c ., 11 ! A,` Co co to> r 1 1 ° - - 1 � '1 -4 1 ! Figure 8c. France Ave at 66th Street Option 1 Intersection Option 2 — Separated Bike /Pedestrian Lanes with no Blvd This option provides an off -road bike lane with no boulevard and an elevated pedestrian sidewalk separated from the bike lane from 76th Street to 66th Street for northbound and at the intersections of 66th Street, 70th Street and 76th Street for southbound.. At the intersections the bikes would be separated in their own crossing using a modification of the "Dutch" design. Figures 9a — 9c show Option 2 at each intersection. Advantages: • Provides some opportunity to provide landscaping • Provides buffer for pedestrians and bikes • Biscuits allow for better sight distance for bikes and vehicles • Widened median allows for refuge island for pedestrians • Increased buffer at corners for pedestrians • Biscuits allow for signal pole placement • Decreased distance for pedestrians and bikes to cross • Less R/W required than Option 1 Disadvantages: • Requires more R/W than Option 3 • Higher Cost than Option 3 • Pedestrians need to wait further back behind bike lane • Additional maintenance for snow removal • Barrier curbs are susceptible to damage Page 28 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS r � i �j Figure 9a. France Ave at 76th Street Option 2 0 , low J' 1 !Z 7,- 11` r � i �j Figure 9a. France Ave at 76th Street Option 2 0 , low . -T FAT ,i Figure 9b. France Ave at 70th Street Option 2 Page 29 of 45 J' 1 . -T FAT ,i Figure 9b. France Ave at 70th Street Option 2 Page 29 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 7 - -� - - 4 � r 57 " TIt Figure 9c. France Ave at 66th Street Option 2 Intersection Option 3 — Sidewalk with Blvd (On- Street Bike Lanes, Side Streets Only) This option provides a standard on -road bike lane only on the cross streets at 76th Street, 701h Street and 66th Street. No on -road or separated bike lanes would be provided on France Avenue. A sidewalk would be provided with a boulevard between the roadway and sidewalk on the eastside of France Avenue from 76th Street to 66th Street and on the westside only at the intersections. At the intersections the bikes and pedestrians would use the same crosswalk facility. Figures 10a — 10c show Option 3 at each intersection. This option also provides for the possible future expansion to a project that would provide separated bike and pedestrian facilities (similar to Option 1). This would however require purchasing additional right of way or negotiations with adjacent property owner as the properties would develop. Advantages: • Provides some opportunity to provide landscaping • Provides buffer for pedestrians • Widened median allows for refuge island for pedestrians • Would require minimal to no additional R/W • Lower cost than any other option • Is the accepted way to handle bike lanes at intersections • Expandable to separated Bike /Ped facilities in the future. Page 30 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Disadvantages • Increases the width to cross for pedestrians from options 1 and 2 • Pedestrians close to traffic in corners • Signal Pole placement will require longer mast arm poles • Would require widening along entire France corridor for future expansion of a bike lane low _ 3t jet •. �. 1 r i HSi+�Af � 61 s,s • r ` .ti;Sl. Is.- �* , :4 --411 1 4 t • fi a ti Figure 10a. France Ave at 76th Street Option 3 a r Page 31 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS RR S TO v. E STING A T. 4a IQ p s m _ h R LA i y JA AMWR cn` 74 i HARR d1F 0 S R01{A EXBTINt R UNDABOUT A T Figure 10b. France Ave at 70'h Street Option 3 Page 32 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS D 4 Ll 'r m 1 hd 1' r ,.to _ co FIJTUR E L4 y 4 5 • ;S Y Figure 10c. France Ave at 66th Street Option 3 Other Intersection Design Options Considered Other intersection design options were also considered but were determine to be not feasible because they would physically fit the France Avenue situation or would create a significant impact to adjacent property. These options included: • Continuous flow intersection • Michigan left turns • Grade separated cross street Page 33 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Corridor / Sidewalk Connection Options Three sidewalk connection options were considered for completing the gaps in the sidewalks on the east side of France Avenue including: Continuing the preferred alternative the entire length with curb adjustments. Continuing the preferred alternative the entire length with curb adjustments except at locations where there were impacts to property other than just right of way. Making only sidewalk connections without any significant right of way impacts or curb impacts. 8. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS Based on the evaluation of these options and input from the Stakeholders, Option 1 was selected as the initial preferred concept, however following preparation of the project cost estimates and input from the Edina Transportation Commission, Option 3 — Sidewalk with Boulevard (On- Street Bike Lanes on Side Streets Only), is the preferred and recommended concept. The proposed improvements will include the following: • Reducing the vehicle lanes to the minimum State Aid requirements on northbound France Avenue the entire length from 76th Street to 66th Street and on southbound France Avenue and the side streets only through the intersections at 66th Street, 70th Street and 76th Street. • Removing and relocation of the France Avenue northbound outside curb from 76th Street to 66th Street and southbound outside curb at the intersections of 66th Street, 701h Street and 76th Street. • Removing free right turn islands in all quadrants at 76th Street, in the southeast quadrant at 70th Street, in the southeast quadrant at 69th Street, in the southeast quadrant of the Southdale entrance, in the northeast quadrant of the Southdale exit an in the southeast, southwest and northeast quadrants at 66th Street. • Widening the center median on France Avenue and the side streets to a 10 foot width only at the intersections of 66th Street, 701h Street and 76th Street. • Providing an 8 foot landscaped boulevard on the eastside of France Avenue from 76th Street to 66th Street. • Providing an 8 foot sidewalk on the eastside of France Avenue from 76th Street to 66th Street and on the westside of France Avenue only at the intersections of 66th Street, 70th Street and 76th Street. • Providing a minimum 6 foot landscaped boulevard on the side streets at 66th Street, 701h Street and 76th Street. Page 34 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS • Providing a 6 foot sidewalk on the side streets where sidewalks currently exist at 66"' Street, 70th Street and 76th Street. • Either a 5 foot on- street bike lane or a shared lane with "Sharrow" eastbound and westbound on 66th Street, 70th Street and 76th Street through France Avenue. • ADA compliant pedestrian ramps at all intersections and driveways on the eastside of France Avenue from 76th Street to 66th Street and on the west side of France Avenue at 66th Street, 70th Street and 76th Street. • Revised traffic signal systems at 66th Street, 70th Street and 76th Street including APS pedestrian push buttons, countdown pedestrian signal timers, median refuge island pedestrian push buttons and new vehicle and bicycle detection systems. • Urban design feature including, landscaping, monuments, planter boxes, bollards and colored or stamped concrete at the intersection of 66th Street, 701h Street and 76th Street. Figures 11a — 11c show the recommended improvements. Detailed plan sheets for the corridor are included in the Appendix. i.-- —.--'t c ➢6 --- =Q: Figure 11a. France Ave Preferred Alternative Page 35 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS -- i s _ - _ _ Y i; MY ' rt ^ • - 1, Figure 11 b. France Ave Preferred Alternative \ .iY• w s 1 � # .. � a ri • i ,JI r I r i e + „{ ne +'t 4 if- JV CI RLIOly. Figure 11c. France Ave Preferred Alternative The proposed typical sections for France Avenue and the Side Streets are shown in Figure 12. Vim , , mW z s la�amwpr�gz ,r ,r ,r ,a +Iru L n I,MU Lnr TWU L” M"m lR Thru lair 71" L"'" nvu Lvr RR Wr4o qlI c 6X. RAM 6X klY1� Proposed France Avenue Section `Existing R/W Varies RAN +• T RMr 1• R � S 1+• 1,' V +a 19 H' IT S +a z C C +• �Baiea�r 9Mr Tau L-r Tau L-r 0"a LT. LT_ T-t Lana TMU L-r MI RT. �• ',V Lary larr Ex. RAM EX RAM L I � , I Proposed Side Street Section Figure 12. France Ave Option 3 Typical Section Page 36 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS The area from Gallagher Drive to north of Hazelton Road will require slight modifications from the typical section. From Gallagher Drive to Hazelton Road, adjacent to the Macy's and Byerly's property, it is proposed to construct the sidewalk with a railing, on top of the existing retaining wall. The area between the roadway and existing retaining wall will be a landscaped boulevard. This will require slight modifications to the existing parking lots. The area north of Hazelton Road will include a slightly narrower (4 to 6 foot) boulevard to avoid significant impacts to the existing parking lot. Figure 13 shows a detail of this area. i _ t +w rr rr. w Figure 13. France Ave — Gallagher Dr to Hazelton Rd Ir r'. A detail of a typical intersection corner showing the location of the interaction of the pedestrian, the location of the ADA ramps and location of areas where additional landscaping could occur is shown in Figure 14. W ' Figure 14. France Ave Concept 3 Intersection Detail Page 37 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS (I Several urban design refinements are included as part of Option 3 based on Stakeholder input and discussions with Edina's Transportation Commission. The refinements include a focus on sidewalks with a row of trees along the median and sidewalks to enhance the pedestrian experience. Enhancements for pedestrians crossing France Avenue and other streets are also included with this option. Additional plantings, irrigation, engineered soils, gateway markers, lighting and other amenities would be included. The cross section and plan view figures below for Option 3 illustrates several unique urban design elements including gateway monuments, boulevard and median tree plantings, pedestrian lighting, and paving patterns that together provide an identity and create a composition unique for France Avenue. Distinctive corner with raised planters with shrubs and flowers, roadway identification markers and coordinated bollards will provide a buffer between pedestrians and motorized traffic. The planter, scoring patterns, markers and bollards will also clearly orient walkers, especially those with physical impairments to clearly marked crosswalks. Figures 15a — 15g capture these suggested refinements for the corridor and a typical intersection. ar Figure 15a. France Ave Corridor Urban Design Concept Page 38 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 4. l� t ri. Figure 15b. France Ave Intersection Urban Design Concept roe- , 1 t� '1111' i- `e7 _ j of tit 1 �i Figure 15c. France Ave Intersection Urban Design Concept Page 39 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS f III I' Figure 15d. France Ave Urban Design Concept Corner Detail 0 io 160 so Figure 15e. France Ave Urban Design Concept Lighting Detail Page 40 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS Figure 15f. France Ave Urban Design Concept Corner Detail Figure 15g. France Ave Urban Design Concept Corner Detail Page 41 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 9. RIGHT -OF -WAY & EASEMENTS 10. PROJECT COSTS The estimated permanent right of way and temporary easements needed for Options 1 and 3 are outlined below. These areas represent the estimated worst case and best case for right of way needs. Option 1 76th Street: Perm R/W = 18,OOOsf T/E = 15,OOOsf 701h Street: Perm R/W = 8,500sf T/E = 7,300sf 66th Street: _Perm R/W = 8,500sf T/E = 7,600sf Sidewalk Connection Areas .Perm R/W = 47,OOOsf T/E = 351200sf Total Option 1: Perm R/W = 82,OOOsf T/E = 65,100sf Option 3 76th Street: Perm R/W = 7,100sf T/E = 1,850sf 70`h Street: Perm R/W = 3,800sf T/E = 3,800sf 66th Street: Perm R/W = 1,800sf T/E = 2,600sf Sidewalk Connection Areas Perm R/W = 32,OOOsf T/E = 22,OOOsf Total Option 3: Perm R/W = 44,700sf T/E = 30,250sf Right of way acquisition will need to follow the Federal Right of Way Acquisition process. This is one of the critical elements in meeting the project sunset date timeline of March 31St, 2013. In order to meet this timeline the process will need to begin by September 1St, 2012. This process would also include potential condemnation if required. As part of the Scope Change and Sunset Date extension request the estimated project cost was $2,045.000. This included minimal landscaping ($50,000) and minimal lighting ($80,000). The cost also did not include any additional right of way. Estimated costs were developed for Option 1 and Option 3. These costs include estimated right of way, urban design elements and construction for each intersection as well as the sidewalk connection improvements. The estimated costs do not include indirect costs such as engineering, legal and administration, etc. The costs are based on preliminary estimated quantities and current average bid prices per item. The right of way costs assume $35 /sf for permanent and $20 /sf for temporary easements, based on recent acquisition data. Page 42 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS A summary of the preliminary estimated cost is shown below. The detailed preliminary cost breakdown is included in the Appendix. Option 1 76th Street: RNV = $1,005,000 Construction = $755,000 Urban design = $213,000 70th Street: R/W = $480,000 Construction = $711,000 Urban design = $201,000 66th Street: RNV = $487,500 Construction = $730,000 Urban design = $207,000 Total Intersection: RNV = $1,972,500 Construction = $2,1969000 Urban design = $621,000 Sidewalk Connections: RNV = $2,525,000 Construction = $1,428,000 Urban design = $403,000 Total Cost: RNV = $4,497,500 Construction = $3,624;000 Urban design = $1,024,000 Total Project Cost = $9;145,500 Option 3 76th Street: RNV = $285,500 Construction = $577,000 Urban design = $367,000 70th Street: RNV = $209,000 Construction = $550,000 Urban design = $367,000 66th Street: RNV = $115,000 Construction = $556,000 Urban design = $367,000 Total Intersection: RNV = $609,500 Construction = $1,683,000 Urban design = $1,101,000 Sidewalk Connections: RNV = $1,560,000 Construction = $626,600 Urban design = $219,000 Total Cost: RNV = $2,169,500 Construction = $2,309,600 Urban design = $1,320,000 Total Project Cost = $5,799,100 The comparable cost to the Scope Change and Sunset Date extension estimated cost of $2,045,000 is $3,624,000 for Option 1 and $2,309,600 for Option 3. It should be noted that the estimated cost of Option 1 does not include the bike lane and right of way acquisition adjacent to the Macy's /Byerly's site. The addition of these costs would increase the total cost to $10,308,000. The estimated costs for Option 3 do include the additional right of way and sidewalk connections adjacent to Macy's /Byerly's site. In addition the urban design cost does include additional urban design features such as monuments, additional landscaping, assuming the larger boulevard area, additional pedestrian level lighting and the additional boulevard area on the side streets. Page 43 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS As indicated previously, concern was raised over the cost of the recommended Option 3 compared to the original budget of $2,000,000. Based on discussions with the ETC costs for specific plan elements were requested. Listed below are the elements and the associated cost savings should they be eliminated from the project. A. Locating the sidewalk adjacent to the Macy's and Byerly's sites behind the curb with no boulevard: R/W = $350,000, Construction = $50,000 B. Not including the Urban Design Monuments: Construction = $450,000 C. Negotiating right of way cost with Southdale: R/W = $498,400 D. Negotiating right of way cost with Galleria: R/W = $157,500 E. Negotiating right of way cost with US Bank: R/W = $93,100 F. Not replacing the existing (narrow) sidewalk adjacent to Centennial Lakes and south of Gallagher Drive: R/W = $250,000, Construction = $38,040 G. Not including trees outside of intersections: Construction = $27,000 H. Not including any street lighting: Construction .= $345,000 11. FUNDING As indicated in the approved Metropolitan Council Scope Change request, the estimated project cost is $2,045,000. Funding for the project is currently allocated using the following funding sources. Federal TE funding $1,090,000 Southdale Area TIF funding $1,000,000 Total programed funding $2,090,000 Should the project be approved the remaining funding could be provided using additional Southdale Area TIF funding, State Aid funding, Hennepin County Road landscaping /safety improvement funds or other local funding sources such as an area special assessment. Hennepin County will have a solicitation in the fourth quarter of 2012 for landscaping /safety improvements along County roadways. It will be competitive process. The County will be setting aside about $1 Million a year with about $500,000 per mile of roadway per City. Any of the additional costs above the programed funding could be included in the area special assessment. The area special assessment would require that the project follow the 429 process. In the project area from 66th Street to 76th adjacent to France Avenue there are 15 parcels on the eastside that would benefit from the project especially the addition of the sidewalk and other urban design features. Page 44 of 45 Feasibility Study FRANCE AVENUE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS 12. FEASIBILTY The proposed improvements as outlined in this study are found to be necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering standpoint. 13. PROJECT SCHEDULE APPENDIX The project is on a very aggressive schedule to meet the sunset extension date of March 315', 2013.The following general schedule is anticipated. A detail schedule is included in the Appendix. Meetings Stakeholder Meeting #1 Hennepin County Staff Stakeholder Meeting #2 Metro Transit Staff Edina Transportation Commission (Special Meeting) Edina Transportation Commission Edina City Council Work Session Edina City Council MnDOT Federal Project Process Project Development Project Memorandum Right of Way Begin Appraisals Offer letters Begin condemnation (if needed) Title and position Detail Design Final Approval (City, County, MnDOT) Begin Construction May 31st, 2012 June 25th, 2012 June 26th, 2012 July 5th, 2012 July 9th, 2012 July 19th, 2012 August 6th, 2012 August 6th, 2012 April — December 2012 October 2012 September 1, 2012 November 1, 2012 December 1, 2012 March 2013 August 2012 — March 2013 March 2013 Summer 2013 Scope Change and Sunset Date Extension request Edina Comprehensive Plan Figure 7 -10 Sidewalk Facilities Edina Comprehensive Plan Figure 7 -11 Bike Facilities Stakeholders Meeting #1 minutes Stakeholders Meeting #2 minutes ETC July 91h Special Meeting approved minutes ETC July 20th Meeting draft minutes Met Council comment summary Level of Service summary tables Crash investigation summary table Estimated cost summary Detail project schedule Option 3 Detail Plan Sheets Page 45 of 45 SUNSET DATE EXTENSION and SCOPE CHANGE REQUEST S.P. 120 - 020 -037 France Avenue / 72 "d Street Pedestrian Bridge Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota 1. PROJECT BACKGROUND A. Project Name: 72" Street Pedestrian Bridge over France Avenue in the City of Edina B. _Location Map: A location map is attached as Exhibit 1. C. Sponsoring Agency: City of Edina 4801 W. 50d` Street Edina, MN 55424 D. Other Participating Agencies: Hennepin County and MNDOT have been or will be involved in the review and/or approval of the project. No financial participation is anticipated from these agencies. E. Project Description: The current project includes the construction of a pedestrian and bicycle bridge over France Avenue in the vicinity of 72 "d Street South. The bridge would provide a connection between the commercial, retail and offices located east of France Avenue and the residential neighborhoods west of France Avenue. The City is requesting a change in scope to provide more logical and efficient connections to these areas. Section 4 of this request outlines the proposed scope change. F. Funding Category: The project is funded with Federal Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds. G. Federal Funds Allocated: Federal funds in the amount of $1,000,000 have been secured. H. Local Share and Source: The City has included this project in their 2010 — 2014 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2012 using Southdale Area Tax Increment Financing funds and Municipal State Aid funds for the local funding match. I. Fiscal Year Program: The current project is programmed for Fiscal Year 2012. 2. PROJECT PROGRESS A. Project Schedule: A revised project schedule is attached as Exhibit 2. The current progress on the project is attached as Exhibit 3. B. Right -of -Way Acquisition: The adjacent property owners to the 72 "d Street are aware of the project and preliminary discussions on potential right of way needs were completed. C. Permits: . The following table is a list of anticipated permitting agencies and the status of their reviews: Agency Permit Status MPCA . NPDES Not yet submitted, Scope Change Request February 2012 with Final Plans Nine Mile Watershed District Wetlands (if required) Not yet submitted, Not yet submitted, July 2012 Hennepin County with Final Plans D. Approvals: The following is a list of agencies with approval authority and the status of each approval: Agency Approval Required Status Met Council Sunset Date Extension February 2012 Scope Change Request February 2012 MnDOT Project Memorandum Not yet submitted, April 2012 Final Plan Approval Not yet submitted, July 2012 Hennepin County Preliminary Plan Not yet submitted, March 2012 Final Plan Approval Not yet submitted, July 2012 City of Edina Transportation Commission Preliminary Plan February 2012 City Council Preliminary Plan March 2012 Final Plan Approval June 2012 E. Identified Funds Spent to Date on Project: To date, local City funds, grant monies and funding by other agencies in excess of $100,000 have been spent on the preparation of studies in the area, preliminary concept plans and alternatives for the proposed improvements. 2 3. JUSTIFICATION FOR EXTENSION A. What is unique about this nroiect that requires an extension of the Sunset? A sunset extension request has become necessary primarily due to: 1. New Transportation Studies/Projects impacting the project area. Several transportation studies and improvements have been initiated and completed in the project area during the time since the original TE application was approved for funding. Since the project was selected a number of things have developed that warrant consideration of an alternative to a pedestrian bridge as the best solution for improved pedestrian and bicycle access to and within the Greater Southdale /Centennial Lakes area. These projects included: • Hennepin County/Edina - France Avenue Corridor Study — 2009 Hennepin County together with the Cityof Edina completed the France Avenue Corridor Study which shows enhanced pedestrian/bike friendly intersections. The proposed re- scoped project would be consistent with the County's plan. Included in Appendix A is a copy of the study. • Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) - Regional Trail Alignment process — 2010. This trail will provide an east -west connection to the TRPD regional trail system. Exhibit 4 illustrates the proposed Nine Mile Regional trail corridor. • Metro Transit - Bicycle and Pedestrian Connections to Transit infrastructure Study — 2009. This study identifies a high priority corridor project Edina "G" project) north/south along France Avenue from 70 Street to Minnesota Drive. The study recommends ADA Pads, curb cuts, crosswalk (paint) streetlights, benches, bike lockers, shelters and trash receptacles. It also notes that there are many locations along France Avenue that have deficient lighting near bus. stops. Pedestrian level lighting near the bus stops would improve pedestrian safety. These improvements will enhance use of alternative modes of transportation. Edina - W. 70th Street Corridor Study and Improvements — Initiated 2007, completed 2011. The completion of the 70th Street project between Highway 100 and France Avenue includes sidewalks, bike lanes and reflects complete streets/ living streets design. An improved intersection at France and 70th street would provide a link from this recently completed project to the 70`h Street sidewalk on the eastside of France Avenue. This would also provide connections to the Promenade pedestrian corridor east of France Avenue. 3 Transit for Livable Communities (TLC) - Bike Boulevard project — Initiated 2009, anticipated completion 2012. The City has been awarded TLC funding for the construction of a bike lane that would connect from 58th Street south via Wooddale Avenue to 70th Street, this project helps build Edina's bicycle network which is consistent with the adopted Edina bike plan. Edina — Southdale Area Pedestrian Study — 2009. This study analyzed pedestrian movements in the Promenade /Centennial Lake corridor. 2. Transportation Commission and Bike Edina Task Force review of the proposai' The Edina City Council established the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) to help guide the City in implementing its vision for an integrated, multi - modal local transportation system as stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The system will provide safe and efficient transportation options for all users (motorists, transit riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians of all. ages and abilities) in a way that promotes the economic, environmental; social, and personal vitality of the City and its residents. The Commission shall: A. Advise the City Council on.the operation of the local transportation system (all modes, users, and abilities). B. Develop strategies, plans and recommendations to implement the City's multi -modal transportation vision. C. Review neighborhood street capital investment projects for adherence to adopted City policies and planning documents. D. Review and comment on large development proposals, such as those requiring an Alternative Urban Areawide Review, Environmental Assessment, or Small Area Plan. E. Discuss regional transportation improvements by outside agencies that may affect the local transportation system. F. Promote the City's transportation vision through education and open forums. G. Review and comment on citizen transportation concerns, traffic complaint reports, and data. H. Review and recommend transportation - related funding. I. Advise the City Council on additional matters when directed by the City Council. The Bike Edina Task Force was established prior to the City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan update. This task force studied the City's bicycle system and prepared a detailed report recommending improvements to the City's bicycle system. This document was included as part of the approved Comprehensive Plan. 4 Both the ETC and the Bike Edina Task Force have reviewed the current Pedestrian Bridge proposal and have raised questions on the location and efficiency of the overpass at 72 °d Street. The primary question is, will people use the overpass with the land use attractions and pedestrian facilities spread out on both sides of France Avenue from 65h Street to 78h Street? And, is the 72nd Street overpass the most appropriate solution for pedestrians and bicyclists? Exhibit 5 shows the Pedestrian and Bicycle Framework on both sides of France Avenue. 3. Concern over the need and effectiveness of a Pedestrian Bridge in this location. As indicated, both the ETC and Bike Edina Task Force has raised a concern with location and effectiveness of the pedestrian bridge at the 72nd Street location. With a north/south pedestrian corridor (the Promenade) located east of France Avenue and several residential communities and businesses located west of France Avenue, concentrating the primary crossing at 72 °d Street has been questioned. The concern is that pedestrian and bicyclists will use the existing signalized intersections to cross France Avenue even with the overpass at 72 °d Street in place. Providing multiple enhanced crossings of France Avenue appears to be a more logical solution that would be used by more pedestrians and bicyclists. Exhibit 5 shows the Pedestrian and Bicycle Framework on both sides of France Avenue. Hennepin County together with the City of Edina prepared a study in 2009 that evaluated and recommended improvements to enhance safety, vitality, identity, cohesiveness and visual quality of the France Avenue corridor. Based on that study, enhancing multiple crossing along France Avenue would create a more useable pedestrian and bicycle network than with the proposed overpass. A copy of the study is attached in Appendix A. The City Council with recommendation from the ETC has initiated further study to review and determine what the appropriate locations and crossing enhancements should include with the proposed at -grade crossing alternatives. Section 4 of this request outlines the alternatives and locations being considered. 4. New policies related to transportation and active living. The City of Edina, Hennepin County and MnDOT have all adopted new policies guiding transportation related to pedestrian and bicycle projects in the time sense the initial application. The primary focus of the policies is an emphasis that streets are designed and operated to enable safe access for all users. These policies include: • Edina Comprehensive Plan Update — 2008 • Edina Comprehensive Bicycle Plan — 2008 • Hennepin County Active Living Resolution — 2007 • Hennepin County Complete Streets Resolution — 2009 • MnDOT Complete Streets - 2009 • Edina support for a Statewide Complete Streets Policy - 20:10 • Edina authorization to pursue Living Streets Policy — 2011 • Edina, Richfield and Bloomington Do.Town Campaign — 2011' S. City Leadership Transitions The City of Edina hired a new City Manager in November of 2010 and a new Assistant City Manager in July of 2011. This new staff leadership together with new members on the City Council and Transportation Commission has established a new vision for the City's pedestrian and bicycle system. 6. Identification of. a new source for the Local Matching funds The matching funds for the project were originally programmed using City property taxes and State Aid funds. In 2011 the City Council identified Centennial Lakes Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district funds as an alternative source for matching funds and programmed the project accordingly in the 2012— 2016 CIP. . The above delayed direct action on the project as each study, public process and new policy provided more information to be considered. In May 2011 the Edina City Council .formally referred the matter to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC). The ETC reviewed the referenced studies and policies and recommended that the City not pursue the proposed pedestrian bridge, but pursue several enhanced at grade crossings as an alternative. In November 2011 the City Council reviewed the ETC's recommendation and voted to direct staff to prepare a sunset date extension and scope change request. B. What are the financial impacts if this project does not meet its sunset date? The City and other, agencies have-invested significant time and funding in excess of $100,000 in exploring solutions to improving the pedestrian and bicycle accessibility and flow across France Avenue and in the Southdale /Centennial Lakes area. C. How does this project implement regional policies? The proposed Sunset Date Extension and re- scoping the project from a bridge at a single location to three redesigned enhanced intersections is consistent with the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Policy Plan's philosophy of developing higher benefit/lower cost projects. The Met Council Transportation Policy Plan includes the following primary policy for pedestrian and bicycle travel: Policy 18: Providing Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel Systems: The Council, state, and local units of government will support efforts to increase the share of trips made by bicycling and walking and develop and maintain efficient, safe and appealing pedestrian and bicycle transportation systems. The project meets the following strategies associated with this policy: • Strategy 18a. - Bicycle and Pedestrian Regional Investment Priorities • Strategy 18b. - Connectivity to Transit • Strategy 18c. - Local Planning for Bicycling and Walking • Strategy 18d. — Inter - Jurisdictional Coordination • Strategy 18e. - Complete Streets D. What are the implications if the Project does not obtain the requested extension? An extension of the sunset date is critical to allow time for the successful implementation of one of the City's primary Pedestrian/ Bicycle objectives to "Create pedestrian and bicycle interconnections among major generators with continuity across major roadway and other barriers ". If the extension were not granted the City would forfeit the TE funding on the project and postpone the project until funding can be obtained. Postponing the project until an unknown future date would seriously.complicate political approval processes, render useless some of the work done to date, and be very inefficient. Furthermore, postponing leaves a significant gap in the Cities trail and bike system. E. What actions will the agency take to resolve the problem facing the proiect in the next three to six months? City has identified potential solutions to the providing a more efficient and user friendly project. Exhibit 2 describes the schedule that the City is committed to, to bring this project to a successful conclusion. This schedule will allow the City to complete the right -of -way acquisition and Project Memorandum early enough in 2012 to allow construction to begin in early 2013. 7 4. SCOPE CHANGE REQUEST A. Project Description The following is the proposed scope change project description. The primary changes from the original description are shown as italicized. The France Avenue Pedestrian Crossing project would complete a missing link by overcoming the France Avenue barrier (ADT 28,700) for the pedestrian and bicycle circulation system in this part of Edina. The pedestrian and bicycle amenities will include a significant emphasis on aesthetics and special amenities such as public art, water fountains at a similar caliber to the Centennial Lakes pedestrian circulation network. Intersection enhancements such as; median refuge island, accessible pedestrian signals, pedestrian warning signs, enhanced pedestrian corner treatments, etc, will be provided at 66`h Street, 70`h Street and 76m Street This intersection together with the Gallagher Drive intersection being improve by Three Rivers Park District will result in the provision of safe and efficient pedestrian and bicycle facilities connecting a significant activity centers east of France Avenue with established neighborhoods to the west. The Promenade and Centennial Lakes trail systems serve high density residential areas, medical offices, movie theatres, Centennial Lakes Park, Edinborough Park, the YMCA, Hennepin County Regional Library and Service Center and a multitude of retail shops including Target, the Galleria and Southdale Shopping Center. The Promenade trail also includes an east -west leg which connects to the City of Richfield and the future Nine mile regional trail. The total project cost is estimated to be approximately $2,045,000. The re- scoped project will accomplish the same goals, safely and efficiently, for less overall cost, in partnership with the other agencies and with greater community support. The vision for the re- scoped project stems from the County's "France Avenue Corridor Study" completed in 2009. Attached in Appendix A is a copy of the study. B. Location Map A location map is attached as Exhibit 1. C. Project Layout The proposed project will provide improvements at three primary intersections. 66`h Street. This proposed crossing would provide access to; medical buildings, Southdale Mall, Aquatic Center, Rosland Park, TLC Bike Boulevard, and access to transit. 70`h Street: This proposed crossing would continue the complete street project recently constructed west of France Avenue. It would serve primarily single family neighborhood, The Galleria, Target, Promenade, Southdale Library, Hennepin County Government Center, and access to transit. H 76`h Street: This proposed crossing would serve primarily multi - family housing and connect to Centennial Lakes Park, Promenade, Three Rivers Park District Nine mile trail in Richfield, Edinborough Park, medical facilities, and access to transit. Three Rivers Park District (TRPD) is also planning improvements to Gallagher Drive. Although this intersection will be improved by TRPD the proposed crossing will serve the future planned regional trail, Promenade, multi - family housing, and access to transit. Prior to TRPD choosing the Gallagher Drive trail alignment, the hope was that the 72nd Street bridge project would directly serve the trail. Once the public process was competed and the alignment was chosen, it was known that the bridge would not directly serve the trail. Making a connection between the bridge and trail would involve property redevelopment, land acquisition and/or easements at an increased cost. In addition to the intersection enhancements the proposed project will provide missing sidewalk connections insuring that all areas on both sides of France Avenue have an opportunity to access one of the planned crossing locations. Several alternative intersection enhancements have been consider, Appendix B outlines the enhancements being considered and their potential benefit to the France Avenue corridor. A map showing the proposed intersection improvements and locations of the improvements in relationship to the existing pedestrian and bicycle system is included as Exhibits 6. As illustrated on the map providing multiple crossing locations will greatly reduce the distance pedestrians will need to travel to get to a safe crossing, thereby increasing the number of users for the system. D. Work to be completed With approval of the Sunset Date extension and Scope Change request, the City will complete the Project Memorandum, Construction Plans and Right of Way acquisition. Exhibit 2 shows the proposed project schedule. E. Agency Coordination The City has worked with several agencies during the preliminary studies, concept development and the proposed re- scoping of the project since the original TE application was submitted and approved. These agencies have included: • Hennepin County Community Works • Hennepin County Transportation • Three Rivers Park District • Transit for Livable Communities • Metro Transit Support letters from some of these agencies (Hennepin County and Three Rivers Park District) are included in Appendix C. L] F. Revised cost estimate The original estimated construction cost of $2,090,000 was.based on 2007 dollars. Today's costs for the same project would be close to $2,250,000. This does not take into account City Council direction that the bridge would need to have extensive aesthetic treatments and would need to look like a "piece of sculpture ". This would also add to the original cost estimate for this single crossing of France Avenue. Base on the proposed change in scope the following estimated cost has been developed accommodating improvements to three (3) crossings of France Avenue. It is assumed that the Gallagher Drive intersection improvements would be completed by TRPD. These costs are based on preliminary concept plans and will be refined during final design. Revised project cost estimate: Intersection improvements $ 1,005,000 Revised signal system $ 600,000 Signing and Striping $ 36,000 Trail / Sidewalk $ 54,000 Retaining walls $ 150,000 Guard rail $ 50,000 Lighting $ 80,000 Traffic Control $ 20,000 Landscaping $ 50,000 Total Cost $ 2,045,000 G. Key Criteria rescoring The following outlines each prioritizing criteria with the changes in the previous responses show as italicized. The original score is also included. 1. Urgency (250 points). Discuss if/how the project proposes or addresses each of the following: (Original Score = 205) • Takes advantage of a time - sensitive opportunity, e.g., a willing landowner, cost savings, affiliation with another project, competing development opportunities RESPONSE: The City of Edina completed an area study examining the potential to provide attractive trail and sidewalk connections from the north end of Centennial Lakes towards Southdale Shopping Center and beyond. The pedestrian and bicycle amenities will include a significant emphasis on aesthetics and special amenities such as public art, water fountains at a similar caliber to the Centennial Lakes pedestrian circulation network. The City has constructed the trail network east of France Avenue. The France Avenue Pedestrian Crossing plan would complete a missing link by overcoming the France Avenue barrier for the pedestrian and bicycle circulation system in this part of Edina. The proposed plan will provide multiple crossings at a lower cost than the original plan. 10 • Significantly addresses a strong un -met need or area of concern/problem associated with the development of an integrated bicycle or pedestrian transportation network or providing a safe bicycle or pedestrian route RESPONSE: As a part of the pedestrian circulation study public meetings many residents of the Cornelia neighborhood west of France Avenue have expressed a strong desire to be able to access the wide variety of shops, businesses and recreational amenities east of France Avenue without having to drive to them. The neighborhood proximity to the Centennial Lakes area is within walking distance; however, residents are discouraged from walking due to the France Avenue barrier to pedestrians and cyclists. The proposed plan Will improve access to transit, not only by providing crossings of France Avenue, but also by providing missing sidewalk connections and the opportunity to improve transit stops. 2. Impact (250 points). Discuss how the project addresses each element below (respond as appropriate to A. or B., not both): (Original Score = 207) A. Bike/Ped Infrastructure (QA #1, and QA #8): Fills gaps, overcomes barriers, and/or connects system segments in pedestrian/bicycle network. The applicant should provide a map showing the location of the project within the context of an existing and planned bicycle or pedestrian network. If the project is removing a barrier, the applicant should demonstrate the magnitude of the barrier (number of lanes, average daily traffic, posted speed, etc.) and how the proposed project will improve travel across that barrier. RESPONSE: The proposed project is intended to overcome a significant barrier between residential neighborhoods west of France Avenue and the commercial and recreational amenities east of France Avenue. France Avenue currently carries 28,700 vehicles per day and is generally 8 -10 lanes wide at intersections making crossing very intimidating for most people. The east side of France Avenue does not have adequate provisions for pedestrian and bicycle traffic also limiting the attractiveness of crossing the street. Conversely, the Centennial Lakes area and Promenade located approximately 500 feet east of and parallel to France Avenue provide a high quality pedestrian environment that connects commercial businesses, retail, recreation, and civic amenities situated among the landscaped gardens, ponds and open spaces. The France Avenue Pedestrian Crossing project will provide enhancements to the existing signalized intersections thus allowing residents to easily move between their neighborhoods to the vibrant Centennial Lakes area without the need to get in cars. The project will provide more efficient and usable crossings at up to four locations rather than one. 11 Project provides a high- demand facility or program. Relative levels of demand will be determined using population density and connections to significant travel attractors. Metropolitan Council. staff will determine population density using 2000 residential population within one mile of the project. The applicant should also list.below significant destinations that are near the facility or that the facility provides close connections to. Destinations can be recreation areas such as parks, beaches, rivers, lakes, etc; or commercial or mixed -use districts, major employment areas or other major cultural destinations. RESPONSE: The number and variety of destinations for pedestrians and cyclists using the. France Avenue Pedestrian Crossings is expansive. The France Avenue Pedestrian Crossings and trail systems will connect to the Edina Promenade and Centennial Lakes trail networks which provide pedestrian access to virtually a small city within Edina. The proposed project will also connect to the future_Nine Mile Creek Regional Traib The following is a sampling of some of these destinations: • Centennial Lakes Park • Edinborough Indoor Park • Southdale YMCA • Hennepin County Library • Hundreds of retail shops between 66th and 1 -494 including Southdale Shopping Center; Galleria Shopping Center, Yorktown Mall, Target . • Fairview South dale Medical Center • Medical and other offices in and throughout Centennial Lakes Business Park • Restaurants ranging from fast food to white table cloth o Skateboard Park o Westin and Residence Inn Hotel's • City Parks including. Aquatic center, Frisbee golf course, Fred Richardson golf course • LA Fitness Health Club • Addresses safety concerns. The applicant should describe how the project addresses an identified safety problem. RESPONSE: Existing pedestrian and bicycle access across France Avenue is provided at signalized intersections between 1 -494 and 66th Street. Although these intersections provide pedestrian indications, the sheer width of the roadway and volume of traffic create an imposing barrier for pedestrians, especially elderly, handicapped and children. The proposed France Avenue Crossing plan would provide intersection enhancements by narrowing roadway lane widths, providing a secure median island refuge and improvements to the pedestrian refuge areas in each corner of the intersection, all to provide safe efficient and comfortable alternatives for residents west of France to cross the roadway and connect with the beautiful pedestrian environments created with Centennial Lakes and the Promenade. 12 • Provides more than a local benefit. An example of such a project is a bicycle trail that is part of a county, regional or state trail system, or one that links different trail systems together. RESPONSE: The France Avenue Pedestrian Crossing plan is part of a larger trail regional tail network which runs generally east - west across Edina connecting with many activity centers and north south trails along the way. The future Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail extends east into Richfield and is planned to extend west through the City of Edina. 3. Relationship between Categories (100 points). Projects will score higher if they provide multiple benefits toward the purpose of the Transportation Enhancements program. Applicants should review the respective category criteria to determine the extent to which the project relates to the other two categories: (Original Score = 35) What is the relationship to the Scenic and Environmental group? For example, how does the bike /ped project provide a natural resource enhancement? RESPONSE: The France Avenue Pedestrian Crossing plan will connect people with the Centennial Lakes trail network and Promenade trails. Both of these trail corridors provide users the ability to interact with the natural environments including a variety gardens and manicured landscapes, open spaces, water features as well as attractive design elements within the public realm and adjacent private properties. Centennial Lakes and The Promenade both display very high design aesthetic which gives pedestrians and cyclists a pleasurable experience as they travel through. The design aesthetic of the intersection enhancements will be developed in conjunction with public involvement and will result in an attractive streetscape which will enhance civic pride. • What is the relationship to the Historic and Archaeological group? For example, how does the bike /ped project take advantage of or enhance historic and cultural resources or provide orientation/interpretation to users? RESPONSE: The France Avenue Pedestrian Crossing plan will connect residents with current cultural activities which occur on regular basis at Centennial Lakes Park, Edinborough Park and Southdale as well as civic amenities such as libraries. 4. Relationship to Intermodal/Multimodal Transportation System (100 points). Discuss how the project will function as a component and/or enhancement of the transportation system: (Original Score = 79) • How will the bicycle or pedestrian facility benefit the experience of users of the transportation system? 13 RESPONSE: The improved safety through intersection enhancements will allow residents west of France Avenue to make many short trips to the Centennial Lakes /Southdale area by walking or biking in lieu of using automobiles. By providing several convenient and efficient alternatives to driving rather than just one crossing will encourage more people to walk or bike and result in healthier people and more interesting travel experiences. • How will the project benefit multiple modes of transportation? An example of a project that would do this would be a bicycle facility that connects to a transit center or a mixed -use pedestrian- oriented district, or a pedestrian project that is a component of a transit- oriented development. RESPONSE: The Promenade and Centennial Lakes trail corridors are anchored at the north (Southdale Shopping Center) and south (Edinborough) ends by Transit Centers offering connections to Metro Transit buses. Residents living west_of France Avenue will have a convenient and attractive trail to connect them with regional transit options without using automobiles. The Promenade and Centennial Lakes corridors are located in one of the best regional examples of a vibrant pedestrian district. Providing convenient access to this district and the transit hubs by means of the enhanced pedestrian crossings of France Avenue and providing the missing sidewalk connections along France Avenue will entice residents to access these amenities without getting into. automobiles. • How does the facility serve trips that could otherwise be made by motor vehicles? RESPONSE: The Promenade and Centennial Lakes corridors are located in one of the best regional examples of a vibrant pedestrian district. Providing convenient access to this district and the transit hubs by means of the new enhanced crossings of France Avenue -and providing the missing sidewalk connections along France Avenue will entice residents to access these amenities without getting into automobiles. 5. General/Integrative Criteria — Development Framework Implementation (150 points). (Original Score =125) There would not be any change for this criterion. 6. General/Integrative Criteria — Maturity of Project Concept (150 points). (Original Score = 83) See Exhibit 3 for updated Appendix K Schedule. 14 Sunset Date Extension / Scope Change Request hXnlult 1: Locanon �- III�f6tl� Ehaat Road W 72nd atrast Current roject}.0 3 16" • .` Parklawn Awr�» w Est t I ` 11�7gh Straat ' / , _. Sunset Date Extension France Avenue 72nd Street Pedestrian Bridge Scope Change Request } City of Edina, Minnesota Project Location Map 15 Sunset Date Extension / Scope Change Request Exhibit 2: Revised Project Schedule Proposed Revised Project Schedule Right of Wav Acquisition • Title Research ....................................................................... ............................... April 2012 • Initial Parcel Work and Landowner Notification ................. ............................... April 2012 • Construction Limits Determined .......................................... ............................... April 2012 • Acquisition ............................... ............................... ............................May to October 2012 • Title and Possession ..................................................... ............................... November 2012 • R/W Certificate # 1 ........................................................ ............................... December 2012 Proiect Development and Documentation • Draft PM Submittal .............................................................. ............................... April 2012 • Final PM Submittal (pending WDOT review time) ................ ...........................June 2012 • PM Approval (pending Mn/DOT review time) ................. ............................... August 2012 Final Design and Construction • Layout Submittal to County for Approval ............................ ............................... April 2012. • Final Design Preparation ■ 60% Plan Submittal ......................... ............................... ...........................June 2012 ■ 95% Mn/DOT Plan Submittal ............................... ............................... August 2012 ■ .WDOT State Aid Plan Approval ....................... ............................... October 2012 • Permits ................................................... ............................... .......................November 2012 • Bidding .................................................. ............................... December 2012 /January 2013 • Construction ....................................................................... ............................... Spring 2013 16 Sunset Date Extension / Scope Change Request Exhibit 3: Progress Schedule for Sunset Extensions PROGRESS SCHEDULE FOR SUNSET EXTENSIONS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION ❑EA X Project Memorandum ❑ Completed/Approved Date of Approval X Not Complete Anticipated Date of Completion — Submittal to MnDOT April 2012, MnDOT approval August 2012. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC HEARING (not necessary for Project Memorandum) ❑ Completed Date of Approval ❑Not Complete Anticipated Date of Completion FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (Not required for Project Memorandum) ❑Completed/FONSI Approved Date of Approval ❑Not Complete Anticipated Date of Completion STUDY REPORT (required for Environmental Assessment Only) ❑ Completed Date of Approval ❑Not Complete Anticipated Date of Completion CONSTRUCTION PLANS ❑Completed (Includes signature of District State Aid Engineer) Date X Not Complete Anticipated Date of Completion — Submittal to MnDOT 60% June 2012, MnDOT approval October 2012. RIGHT -OF -WAY ACQUISITION ❑ Completed (Includes approval of right -of -way Cert. # 1 or # 1 A) Date of Approval X Not Complete Anticipated Date of Completion — December 2012 LETTING Anticipated Letting Date — January 2013 17 �1111 P� 20 Ote, CeAat\opa r 3 Minneapolis 33 Connect to Three • Regional Trails •�� Connect to Minneapolis Grand Rounds Trail System at Lake Nokomis • •.� too • S •• •• Edina Minnesota River Bluffs Trail • •• • , ._.. .121 - ^' ...,.,,: _. -. LRT Regional Nine Mile Creek/ ' • • ; chflelo 21 Regional Trail • • t71I 39J ; ; ••' • • • • • • • . • •. Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail i f 16 Miles 0 05 1 15 2 Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail • • • • Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Corridor 00 Three Rivers Park District Proposed /Existing Regional Trails l-' Glo0mmr�ion 135J o 32 C, t �Z 3 -17; 55 65 Minneapolis/ St. Paul Airport Connect to Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Visitor Center 1 N Th. GIS Data is provided 'ae ie' without w rranty d any repr•sentat— d —racv, timailneea, or •omplaten- ��� The user acknowledges and accepts the hmitatwrm d the -- Data, �ndudong the tact that the Data ,s dynamic and n m a wrntant state 0 maintenance, co—otan. and update. ThreeRivers Map xaDared by Three R—re path (),strict PAKK DISTRICT Piammmg 5ec1wn - KKG o• -tot 1 k c � a av A � z� A k �I tar a p rA n °a A �• A O `C �p A UU a• � y� A C fD rr Sunset Date Extension / Scope Change Request Exhibit 5: France Avenue Pedestrian and Bicycle Framework e 72nd Street Pedestrian Bridge Sunset Date Extension Scope Change Request �' City of Edina, Minnesota Pedestrian and Bicycle Framework) 19 Sunset Date Extension / Scope Change Request Exhibit 6: Proposed Improvements N As . 131 77s All . %l. • � -` :ems x w r'3 f L O 1.9 1 a u u a a i IL w' ♦ e \fit MVS �OKM 2M Z z , , , , a i , i .t 4r �- 1 - =. ; . r � �r W �z +.V Apf M i Tj . -.171► � � �„i _..ter � 3AOB♦ 33S 3MIl H7JVM � 1 i ❑9 _ , s �i i r" r t � f • i r s s1 �'/ •I' erlg�... - c o n o � o u m m � � u w• ro CD a a r- a` U � po d p 6 O u Q � a r1 C m 5 CL CL N C n y c c i c aw >c tl U 20 •� .. o '��11��11 rMwOr � 111 � 11.1111 �1 = 58■ 111���' oomm ■�mst'� � -� ■■•. MAN .C.ii��11��i,■ 11.___..1141111 11111111 1111 �j■►� ��!; �� r ,111111 111111111 ' �` �1 ► �1 I� 111 � � �r � 494 A V�a phpnsivp Plan Undatp 3i 3 ,158!�e. 111S�i��_100 62 I '' .1 494 21 17 31 EIICVCIA Facilinp France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements S.P. 120 - 020 -037 Stakeholder Meeting #1 Meeting Minutes 5/31/2012 City of Edina Public Works Building In attendance: Surya lyer .......... ..........................Edina Transportation Commission Tom La Force ...... ..........................Edina Transportation Commission Katherine Bass ... ..........................Edina Transportation Commission Jennifer Janovy .. ..........................Edina Transportation Commission Marty Mathis ....................... ...........................Bike Edina Task Force Alice Hulbert ........................ ...........................Bike Edina Task Force SaraMaaske ................................................. ........................do.town Karen Nikolai .......................... ............................... Hennepin County Cary Teague .................................... ............................... City of Edina Gene Persha ............................... ............................... Edina Resident Tom Johnson .......................... ............................... Hennepin County Jonathan Vlaming ............ ..........................Three Rivers Park District Robyn Anderson ................. ............................... City of Bloomington Reuben Collins ...................... ............................... WSB & Associates Chuck Rickart ......................... ............................... WSB & Associates Andrew Plowman .................. ............................... WSB & Associates CraigChurchward ......................................... ............................... LHB WayneHoule .................................. ............................... City of Edina Meeting Start Time 7:00 PM I. INTRODUCTIONS Houle led group introductions. II. PRESENTATION Houle Provided Background information, History, and Project Foundation Discussion: Mathis noted that Bike Edina Task Force should be included in the list of project stakeholders. Churchward presented information about project goals, objectives and direction. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #1 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 1 Rickart presented information about traffic volumes, crash data, and background data. Discussion: LaForce asked a question about where the traffic volumes were collected. Rickart noted that County has specific locations where they place counters on regular intervals. Bass asked if the lower crash rates observed at the intersections was a reflection of people not wanting to cross France Avenue. Rickart clarified that the data represented vehicle crash rates and that we do not have good data regarding the number of bikes or pedestrians traveling along the corridor. Rickart presented information regarding the roadway typical sections. Churchward presented information about urban design elements such as parking, corner radius, bollards, ped ramps, landscaping, medians, etc. He mentioned the important distinction between horizontal and vertical elements. Discussion: Mathis commented about the poor visibility of salmon colored crosswalks and the higher visibility associated with zebra stripe crosswalks. Johnson noted that Hennepin County re- stripes most roadways annually, but that often the County asks Cities to maintain crosswalks. Churchward presented information about the impact of sidewalk width on pedestrian comfort, potential crosswalk improvements, and the impact of design elements on placemaking. He mentioned the importance of details such as pedestrian scale lighting, natural foliage and creating barriers between motorists and pedestrians. VIDEO: Dutch Bike Lane Corner Enhancements Churchward invited meeting attendees to share ideas. Discussion: LaForce asked what the speed limit was and if we know what typical speeds are. Johnson responded that the speed limit is 40 mph, and noted that the frequent signals along the corridor may keep drivers from reaching higher top speeds. Others indicated that they felt speeds were often higher than 40 mph. Hulbert mentioned the need for gateways at either end of the corridor and a need to limit sight lines along the corridor to encourage drivers to slow down. Persha commented about the poor state of the bus stops at Gallagher. There are poor pedestrian connections to the stops. Peds often get splashed by water from France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #1 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 2 puddles in the road as they wait for buses. The shelters are in poor condition and unsightly. He noted that smaller street widths would really enhance the corridor. Bass commented that it is important to remember and convey the message that people live on France Avenue. It is an existing neighborhood. More residential development is anticipated. It's not just a commercial corridor. She mentioned that SWLRT will skip Edina and that other communities will benefit from the investment. Edina needs to work hard to give people a reason to continue coming to Edina if it is to compete. Churchward commented on the need to create street life, the need to provide for a pedestrian "experience ", the need to create the ability for people to "park once" lanovy asked what the available space was for sidewalks along the corridor, and how we will deal with grade issues along the east side of the corridor. Teague responded that the existing ROW varies along the corridor, and that opportunities to develop sidewalks and obtain ROW occur as parcels redevelop. Bass asked if the city has any ordinances or codes that require buildings to architecturally engage the street. Teague responded that the city has some tools they can use to persuade developers, but the tools are not very strong and the city can not require it at this time. Vlaming mentioned a need to understand where motorists are coming from and going, and thought that many of them are trying to avoid TH -100. He noted that 50th & France works well because it is a small geographic area. France Avenue is a much longer corridor, so he recommended that this study focus heavily on developing "nodes ". The existing landscape is dominated by parking lots, but it has great potential. He noted that Three Rivers Park District has a very strong interest in enhancing the Gallagher Drive intersection and hoped there would be a way to include it in the study. Persha noted that France Avenue is an unpleasant pedestrian environment and that strolling along the corridor is not a realistic objective. We should focus on moving people across France rather than along France. He reiterated a need for gateways and for a "naming" strategy for the area. Vlaming noted that Bloomington has had success naming areas (such as South Loop) Hulbert noted that 50th & France has been a successful commercial node because a conscious decision was made to narrow the roadways to create a pleasant pedestrian feeling. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #1 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 3 Vlaming mentioned the need to find commercial businesses that cater to the needs of the local residents rather than meeting regional needs. Hulbert asked if MnDOT would be open to lane width reductions. Johnson responded that the county was open to the idea, but that there are challenges relating to concrete joints that will need to be addressed. Rickart presented information regarding design constraints, LOS expectations, design standards, funding limitations, and schedule constraints that must be considered. Discussion: Mathis asked how much funding was available. Houle responded that about $2 million is available for the project including the federal funding and the local match. Persha mentioned the need to engage more citizens in the process now or else they will be reactive later. He noted a need to train drivers to be more sensitive to pedestrians, and noted that California has done a good job with this and with marking crosswalks. He has never observed a parent with children trying to cross the roadway because it is not safe. Jenovy reiterate that the TE funding source is for specific intersection improvements. She asked about the potential for bike lanes along France Avenue. Rickart responded that they are not included in the study, but there is a need to ensure that the outcome of this study does not preclude them later. Houle pointed out that France is not on the County bike plan, but there is still potential for cyclists to use France to feed other routes. Johnson reiterated that the grant funding will only pay for certain items and stated the importance of communicating to the public exactly what items are eligible for inclusion in the project. Jenovy mentioned that the City may have access to additional funding sources, and mentioned the Centennial Lakes TIF district. Rickart mentioned the importance of sticking to the project schedule, which will also limit the realistic possibilities. Churchward agreed that this project and study should be viewed as a catalyst for many rounds of potential future improvements. Hulbert mentioned a desire for planter boxes to create a physical separation from vehicles. Jenovy stated the need for an "Edina Brand ". France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #1 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 4 Nikolai mentioned the importance of placemaking and the need to include land -use planning in this study process. Meeting Concluded at 9:00 PM. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #1 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 5 France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements S.P. 120 - 020 -037 Stakeholder Meeting #2 Meeting Minutes 6/26/2012 City of Edina Public Works Building In attendance: Ann Braden ....... ..........................Edina Transportation Commission Courtney Whited .........................Edina Transportation Commission Tom LaForce ...... ..........................Edina Transportation Commission Jennifer Janovy .. ..........................Edina Transportation Commission Arlene Forrest ........ ............................... Edina Planning Commission Mike Fischer . ............................... Edina Planning Commission / LHB Joni Bennett . ............................... ..........................Edina City Council Karen Nikolai .......................... ............................... Hennepin County Tom Johnson .......................... ............................... Hennepin County Amy Gurski ...................... ..........................Three Rivers Park District Gene Persha ............................... ............................... Edina Resident Sherry Hastings ......................... .......................Business Community Laurie VanDalen ........................ .......................Business Community Robyn Anderson ................. ............................... City of Bloomington Reuben Collins ...................... ............................... WSB & Associates Chuck Rickart ......................... ............................... WSB & Associates Andrew Plowman .................. ............................... WSB & Associates CraigChurchward ......................................... ............................... LHB Wayne Houle .................................. ............................... City of Edina Cary Teague .................................... ............................... City of Edina Steve Sletten .................................. ............................... City of Edina Meeting Start Time 7:00 PM I. INTRODUCTIONS Houle led group introductions. II. PRESENTATION Houle presented a recap of the last stakeholder meeting and presented an overview of the agenda for further discussion. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #2 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 1 Houle played the Dutch Intersection Design video. Rickart and Churchward presented information establishing project objectives and context. Rickart presented information related to the design process, project expectations, and traffic operations. He presented information about the traffic analysis completed for several options, including removing free - right- turns, eliminating a lane on France Ave, and removing dual -left -turns on side streets. Discussion: Braden asked if the options considered were evaluated as independent options, or as incremental options. Rickart indicated that all scenarios assumed that free - right -turns would be removed, but that the other options were considered independently. Johnson indicated that Hennepin County has established LOS D as the standard, and that this project would be evaluated relative to that standard. Rickart presented graphics and explanations about Option 1. Discussion: Nikolai asked a question about where the stop bar will be located relative to the crosswalk and the bike lane. She stressed the importance of having the stop bar located away from the crosswalk to enhance safety. Rickart responded that there would likely be 1' separation between the crosswalk and the stop line, and that the stop line is typically 2' wide for a total separation of 3'. Anderson asked for clarification about the scope of the project and whether the proposed bike lanes were intersection treatments only or for the whole France Ave corridor. Rickart confirmed that the proposed improvements are for intersections only. Houle indicated that this project is viewed as a catalyst project setting the stage for future improvements along the corridor. Fischer asked if we knew how much ROW we were gaining by implementing narrower lanes, and if that gain eliminated the need for substantial ROW takings. Rickart responded that we were gaining a few feet by using narrower lanes, but we are also proposing wider medians, so the proposed wider bike lanes and sidewalks will require additional ROW. Anderson asked whether right- turn -on -red would be permitted at this location. Rickart responded that the design team is still looking at this and a decision has not been made. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #2 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 2 Persha asked about how bus stops would be handled at these intersections. Rickart stated that there aren't any bus stops at any of the intersections that would be impacted, however, enhancements are planned for some of the bus stops along the east side of France with the construction of the sidewalk. Churchward presented conceptual renderings of the proposed improvements and provided information about the importance of vertical elements and textures for bike /ped facilities. Discussion: Hastings commented that she liked the renderings, and stated that alternate textures are important for motorists as well to signal that they are entering a different type of space. VanDalen asked for clarification about the cost of the project and the anticipated funding source. Houle Responded that the total project cost is about $2 million. $1 million will be provided by the federal government, and $1 million will come from the TIF district. Rickart presented information about Options 2 and 3 and pointed out operations characteristics of each. Discussion: Hastings asked if the median was wide enough to be a safe haven for pedestrians. Rickart responded that the median was designed to be 10' wide and about 13' long, which should provide a comfortable space for pedestrians. VanDalen commented on the time and disruption the current work Hennepin County has been doing on France Avenue and asked if this project was going to have to replace some of the work they are doing now. Houle responded that the work Hennepin County is doing is routine maintenance, and that some of these intersection improvements would replace areas they are working on now. Sletten asked if the medians would have a different look or texture than the rest of the crosswalk area. Churchward responded that this decision has not been made yet, but that medians with different texture might enhance the feeling of safety for pedestrians. Nikoli asked for clarification on whether the sidewalks along the east side of France were included in this project. Rickart replied that they would be included in this project. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #2 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 3 Houle stated that maintenance of the sidewalks and trails, including snow removal, would be a city responsibility. The city already maintains the sidewalks here and has the equipment necessary to do so. Persha commented that the two traffic signals between 66th and 69th are dangerous. There are no crosswalks, but people dart across anyway. Anderson commented that the proposed improvements would help establish a gateway effect to help people recognize pedestrians. Rickart presented information relating to the upcoming steps in the process, including MnDOTs functional group reviews and scheduling. Houle invited any additional questions. Discussion: Whited asked if there was concern about drivers choosing to use York Avenue instead if the proposed improvements resulted in slower operating speeds. Houle responded that the City has been trying to encourage people to choose York Avenue for several years because it is viewed as being underutilized, so if this project displaces traffic, it could be a benefit. Whited asked if the city was reaching out to existing businesses to help encourage things like providing bike racks. Teague responded that the city has ordinances in place that requires any new construction to provide a minimum number of bike parking spaces, but that there are no tools to make existing businesses provide bike parking. Fischer commented that it was extremely important for the City to establish a firm vision for the corridor so that the City can negotiate with property owners as they want to redevelop. He commented that developers are typically very willing to provide streetscape elements when there is an established vision. Houle stated that one outcome of the stakeholder meeting was to receive direction from the stakeholders about any preferences that stakeholders had for any of the options. Hastings noted that she preferred Option 1 because it provided the greatest level of separation between the roadway, bike lanes, and the sidewalk. Fischer agreed that the separation between the modes is an attractive element of Option 1. Anderson asked if there were concerns about the visibility of cyclists if a planted strip was between motorists and cyclists. Churchward responded that plantings would either be very low, or else tree trunks are only momentary disruptions. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #2 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 4 Braden asked if this solution had been implemented anywhere else in the Metro area where it could be viewed. Houle answered that this solution is new and has not been implemented elsewhere in the Metro. Bennett commented that it seemed like the proposed options are all trying to squeeze bike facilities along a roadway that cyclists don't often use, and questioned whether the space would be better used for pedestrians. She expressed concern that the proposed sidewalks were not wide enough or substantial enough to provide a top pedestrian experience, and questioned whether the bike facilities are a good use of funds in this location. She expressed an interest in seeing additional vertical elements to separate pedestrians from motorists, and referenced her experiences in New York and Santa Barbara. Houle responded that the design process is ongoing, and that additional vertical elements will be considered in the future. Janovy asked if the proposed sidewalk width was known and whether there would be a boulevard. Rickart responded that the desired width is 8' and that a boulevard will be provided every place where possible. Forrest asked if there were known bike /ped counts along France Avenue. Anderson commented that the do.town initiative will be doing bike /ped counts. Nikoli responded that planning journals have reported that once cities have implemented high - quality facilities, the bike /ped counts have increased dramatically. Bennett reiterated her previous comment and clarified that she is very supportive of bicycle facilities. However, she noted that if accomplishing the objective of providing bike lanes along France Avenue results in suboptimal pedestrian space, she would prefer to see the bike facilities removed to better accommodate pedestrians. Houle summarized the meeting by asking for confirmation that the consensus of the group was that Option 1 is the preferred alternative moving forward, with special attention to ensure that appropriate vertical elements are used to provide a top -tier pedestrian experience. The group confirmed his summary. Meeting Concluded at 9:00 PM. France Avenue Pedestrian Improvements Stakeholder Meeting #2 Minutes SP 120 - 020 -037 Page 5 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JULY 19, 2012 6:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Franzen, lyer, Janovy, La Force, Nelson, Thompson, and Whited. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA The Streetcar presentation was moved up to after Approval of Minutesby =Chair Nelson. Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 21, 2012 ave. Motion carried. SPECIAL MEETING OF JULY 9. 2012 _ Edits were made as follow: Pagel, 3'd paragraph, 1n sentence "...said something closer to option 3 was assumed in the cost of the funding application..." Page 1, last paragraph; delete,_ "a group" �� replace with "FHWA International Program." Page 3, 7th paragraph, 4th sentence add " :and she beheves_there should be formal collaboration between the ETC and the Planning Commission." -` t n. was made by memberJanovv and seconded by member Bass to approve STREET CAR PRESENTATION Andy Brown, 5512 Par .Rlace,, and a member Wf the `gET.0 Transportation Options Working Group presented an idea for a streetcar system for thee =eastern =and southeastern side of Edina He said the idea is to differentiate Southdale from other retail areas by creating a system, =fosupport tliemtransportation infrastructure in an area that is becoming more urban. He said it is based onµthe streetcar syst mein Portland, - Oregon. His presentation included potential routes, benefits to the community, links to :Greater Rail & Transportaticilh frastructure, infrastructure investments and goals, Portland's costs and benefits, and finks toiearn more aboutfederal funds. During discussion, Mr. Brown explained thatAthe street car would travel on the street and follows the same traffic laws as motor vehicles; travels mid - traffic at st ii& level with no need to step up or down; right -of -way not needed like for light rail; and capacity is same size ;OLI:,u Mr. Brown was asked if the population would justify the investment and he responded that it could base on the level'of development in the Southdale area. He was asked about operating hours and he said it would run all hours, except overnight. Mr. Brown said he shared the idea with Mr. Robb Gruman, administrator for Fairview Southdale Hospital and chair of the Edina Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Gruman, who was in attendance, said he is organizing a group to look at the merit for the long term. Member Braden said linking to the Greater Rail would require this to be part of the regional plan. Mr. Brown said he has focused more on fact finding so far and that there will be a need for economic and non - economic support from local businesses before seeking regional support. The consensus was that the Transportations Option Working Group would continue this discussion. XMMUNITY COMMENT — None. 1 REPORT /RECOMMENDATIONS Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Report of July 11, 2012 Director Houle withdrew the speed table from the agenda until the next meeting. Section A.2 Member Janovy said she was the one that brought this forward. Assume parking will only be allowed where allowed. Wayne said it is based on the parking rule. Can this be put in there because contractors may not go looking for the code. Concern about 12 ft wide – is this sufficient in all case? Construction Management Plan generated by staff – Houle said it would be posted at jobsite with contractor name /phone #. Regarding 12 ft wide – push cars into neighborhood and wider you go more cars are pushed further in. 20 ft clearance for fire code? Does this apply? For traveling no, but for parking their outrigger. Would benefit from being speeif said Janovy but good step in the right direction. Cannot park on grass. Shuttle employees in is encouraged. MAgbehave ETC review said Houle. Janovy said goal is to have less negative impact. Yes, ETC to review. Director Houle said a revised option 3 would be presented ai scoping prior to the August 6 public hearing. He-said the ETC Mr. Chuck Rickart, project manager, presented. NU Ric -kart e; overpass bridge and the re -scope change is where they e 66th. He said the scope changed approved by the MetCouncil intersections; intersection improv�nts�(narrowingofaexisti enhanced corner treatments;:ADAtcompliantM and pedestrian countdown timers and vehicle and bike detecio.n); east /west Transit; and minimal right- of- way'(ItOW) acquisition only afN Council was a preliminary^concept p1` and_he =e=est mated the "typical" intersection design minimal landscapin - -P. g�in— n er n level lighting; andno °ROW acquisition was Mr. Rickart said aftethe special meetii designed to include staying in the ROW intersection for landscaping and media including some ROW costs the Cit-- uncil would =_likgjo discuss the original re- be- informed when the mating date is set. plained thattthe 2007 federal grant was for a pedestrian w_which is�fdr intersection enhancements at 76tH, 70tH and i eluded median refuge islands with landscaping at ig_lanes at:intersections; removing free right turn islands; I9 eVN ligtif%�Y,- -signal improvements (APS signals, bike accommodations; provide better accessibility to tersections. Mr. Rickart said the presentation to the Met -o—&Oo be $2,045,000 based on aerial mapping only; a edian and adjacent to intersections; minimal pedestrian ssumed. th theETC on July 9, the preliminary concept plan (scope change) was Est they° ould (except for the intersections); sidewalk all the way; widened dying the same. He said the estimated cost for this design was $2,302,400, Continuing, Mr. Rickart said on M iT 1;rthemCity Council expressed a desire for an urban design for the corridor - more than just landscaping, and LBH was hired'. He said they looked at the entire corridor to ensure that whatever is done at the three intersections could be done at the others. Additionally, two stakeholders meeting were held to gather feedback, plus a special meeting with the ETC. He said at the first meeting the feedback was that the space between the road and sidewalk was important. He said they designed three options (1. Separated bike /pedestrian with boulevard; 2. Separated bike /pedestrian with no boulevards; and 3. On-road bike lane with sidewalks), plus leaving the original scope change as an option also. The options were presented at the second stakeholders' meeting and the consensus was to move forward with option 1; however, at that time costs and ROW impacts were not known. At the special meeting with the ETC on July 9, Mr. Rickart said the consensus was that the estimated cost of $9,145,500 was too high and the recommendation was to go with a revised option 3 (no bike lanes on France Ave; east /west bike lanes consistent with Bike Plan; and provide sidewalk connections on France Ave with boulevards). Mr. Rickart turned over the presentation to Mr. Craig Churchward of LBH to explain the urban design feature. Mr. Churchward said the idea was premised on other planning documents relating to the community as a whole and unique features of France Ave with the potential of becoming a main street for the community and as such create a sense of identity for the whole community. Mr. Churchward said if a full build out cannot be done, they could look at ways to create an incremental development as the road changes character — less cars, more pedestrians. He said this could be accomplished using visible vertical elements - large trees outside and inside medians; monuments to create sense of place; flowers that would be vibrant /noticeable; and pedestrian lighting. He said creating something unique or a level of detail says you care. He also said to create a motif that can be used over and over as properties are .redeveloped along France Ave. In conclusion, Mr. Rickart said the estimated cost for revised option 3 is --$, ROW that has significantly increased the cost over the scope change,estimal mandatory sunset date of March 31, 2013, the following schedule:must=be 2012; project memorandum —Oct 2012; ROW acquisitions — Sept201'2 to M 2013; final approval (City /County /MnDOT) — Mar 31, 2013; Chk_�begin constr Discussion - Member Franzen said there is an extra 2 feet of excess ROW d -pske they use a 'pathway' classification it would be needed and they va e.r asked about narrowing of existing lane at intersectionseand if the a th the north bound lanes would be reduced while tlaemsoutf`rbound side ,100 and that it is the urban design and cost of $2,045,000. He said to meet the ere to: project development — Apr to Dec 20;13; detail design —Aug 2012 to Mar tionSummer 2013. d be narrowed., up. Mr. Rickart said if Eten MnDOT's approval yet. Chair Nelson idor would be this way. Director Houle said be reduced only at the intersections. Member Janovy asked if they would be ripping outsidewalks=to�put in new4ones and if the new sidewalks would link up to existing sidewalks. Mr. Rickart saidthey will not berripping ou'any sidewalk and that they would be matching up to existing sidewalks with the exceptio of 66th n Member Janovy said it looks IN bike lanes are being added where there is a right turn lane, and it was not clear that they continue on the other side cf =fhe street,in all cases. Mr Rickart said it depends on the intersection; 70th for example will end at the intersection -and bikers ca_n getac osszon the sid6walk to the existing bike lane; other intersections will end. Member Janovy saidAhis.design does not match whatRordi annce allows (no biking on sidewalk). She also said that statements are made on page 29 &Ahe rep rt without details and these will need to be clarified for City Council. Member LaForce ask_edµif sidewalk on`ihe eastside s�multi -use and Mr. Rickart said yes. He also asked if the plan is to remove the trees at Ma' 1s in order to 006e the sidewalk and Mr. Rickart said they have not worked out the fine details yet but as it looks now, thetrees would be= removed. Member Braden asked about transit sheltefAbcations and Mr. Rickart said Metro Transit is not proposing any changes at this time. He said they talked abouVmoving'one stop around to Hazelton and off France. Member Whited asked about monument cost and Mr. Churchward said $75,000 is included for six each monuments. She also asked about irrigation cost and Mr. Churchward said it is included. Chair Nelson said he likes the idea of the sidewalk at Byerly's and Macy's but wondered about the additional ROW cost since the ROW has increased cost so much. Mr. Rickart said he did not have this specific ROW cost available but could forward it at a later time. Director Houle said he has shown the plans to Byerly's and they like the design so there is a possibility that the City may be able to get the ROW without cost or minimal cost; however, the City has to be cognizant of their parking requirements. He said there is also the option of putting the sidewalk below and then moving it up when the site is redeveloped in the future. Member Janovy asked about the grade of the sidewalk and Mr. Rickart said it would be ADA compliant. Member Janovy asked about the following elements and Mr. Rickart responded accordingly: crosswalks width is 8 feet; all free rights are being removed; they will be working with the County on a bike detection system; for crossings, the County prefers a design that allows pedestrians to cross all the way majority of the time without the need for a push button in the middle of the intersection but the City will seek approval for a push button; a speed study should not add extra cost; Director Houle said the state looks at the 85% percentile speed that vehicles are currently traveling to set the speed limit. Member Janovy suggested option 3 without the boulevard and a sidewalk along the curb. Mr. Rickart said the cost would be $23M. She asked what kind of sidewalk can they have without additional ROW and Mr. Plowman said it would be 6 -7 feet against the curb. Mr. Churchward added that it would not be 6 -7 feet of usable space —there would be shy distance and it's not developing the idea that was talked about with the public and the ETC of generating a living street for the community. Member Janovy agreed but said that $6M is more thanAhat she believes would be approved so there is a need to strike a balance to get closer to the budget and make,it -safe ffor pedestrians. Mr. Churchward said the three intersections need to be a statement for the rest of the corridor H� e�recommended a design that will be functionally correct and to reduce cost, eliminate the trees and mo;num�entswbecause they can be added later. Member Braden asked if they've explored other funding options beca said they've talked about special assessment and the City Co Aug 6 public hearing. Chair Nelson said he likes the idea of option 3 because it sets-u:pahe considering moving it forward with potential cost:savings. He said®tF Council to express their interest and cut and paste = He,said the $5:8 —= started with but it is the right size for the corridor -= Member La Force come prepared with cost estimate without the mo uments;�not_doi about removing the trees. Mr receiving the estimated costs Member Janovy said she wants4he_ consider 69`h and not strand pede ti impression based on a couple conve they need to be able to shoWA;h it feasibility study.on August 6 atndDir choose. Memberrlyer said he would' Member Bass said shOlikes the idea of k the overpass and suspec Lhat they woul conceived will be of much greater use to Member Braden said she has do- Pheard < be able to contribute in say ROW dedic? believes there is a way to do the project would hateto lose the boulevard. Director Houle I be discussing =this project at a workshop before the intersections for futurezexpansion, and is e.workshop session is the- place to allow the City %J� significantly more than the $2M that they agreed and suggested for the workshop that they ng extrar- -adius adjustments, but he is not so sure they will fhaye detail=costs for the meeting and member lyer requested eeting. Mal and and for the-pro ect to be as heautiful as it can be but they should also heF4id the mon mu ents seem like an easy thing to cut but is under the is ,that en with special assessments, that this project is too costly. She said done foal` e"ss�F-.She asked if the City Council will be asked to approve the 0- Glesaid yes; however, they can continue until the next meeting if they so focuson where t educe cost and see what they can get for $3M or $4M. ig at something less costly. She said they did not see a feasibility study for !win this same spot. She said the value and utility of the project as it is now 'dents and the cost per user will be a lot lower than the original project. R the value that this will be to commercial properties and how they might Chair Nelson agreed that the bridge would be around the same cost. He the workshop is the place to work things out. Motion was made by member Franzen to approve option 3 based on the discussion and to look at ways to reduce ROW cost; have landowners share in contribution of ROW; construction cost reduction such as free rights, etc. and forward to Council. Member lyer asked for an amendment to not mention option 3 because the concepts along the corridor are what they want. Motion not seconded. Member Thompson suggested approving the scope change revise and then see show what they can get for $3M and $4M in meeting the Living Streets and urban design principles. Member Janovy said she can support this and add on up to a point that the City Council is comfortable with. Member La Force said he does not know what the City Council is 4 comfortable with. He said the City Council saw the original project and they added the urban design. He said further that maybe they are interested in everything and suggested pushing it forward to them to see what their cost threshold is. Motion made by member Franzen and seconded by member LaForce to move forward with option 3, provided that all of the additions to the revised scope change be clearly delineated so that they can have a discussion at the City Council workshop regarding what should be added or not added, including finance options. Aye: Franzen, Braden, LaForce, Whited, Nelson, Bass, Thompson, lyer Nay: Janovy Motion carried. MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JULY 19, 2012 6:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Franzen, lyer, Janovy, LaForce, Nelson, Thompson, and Whited. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA The Streetcar presentation was moved up to after Approval of Minutes Motion carried. APPROVAL OF MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 21. 2012 ave. Motion carried. SPECIAL MEETING OF JULY 9.2012: Edits were made as follow: Page 1, 3`d paragraphj15t sentence "...said some cost of the funding application..." Page 1, last paragr ph, delete. "a groW!" @ Program." Page 3, 71h paragraph, 4`h sentence add ".- and she bel eves there ETC and the Planning Commission' Mofion.was made =kiv memberJanovv STREET CAR PRESENTATION Andy Brown, 5512 Park Place, and a ihdmb6 F= f the ETC Tra streetcar system fo "r the =eastemwand southeastern side off E retail areas by creating a systemtto support the�transportati said it is based on the streetcar system�in Portlnd ,.Oregon. community, links to °Greater Rail &Transportation Infrastrui and benefits, and links torlearn more about federal funds. Nelson. g closer to option 3 was assumed in the replace with "FHWA International iuld be formal collaboration between the sportation Options Working Group presented an idea for a na;�He said the idea is to differentiate Southdale from other n,infrastructure in an area that is becoming more urban. He lis presentation included potential routes, benefits to the ure, infrastructure investments and goals, Portland's costs During discussion, Mr. Broviin explained tha:tthe street car would travel on the street and follows the same traffic laws as motor vehicles; travels mid traffic at Or—def level with no need to step up or down; right -of -way not needed like for light rail; and capacity is same size as =b'us I Mr. Brown was asked if the population would justify the investment and he responded that it could base on the level of development in the Southdale area. He was asked about operating hours and he said it would run all hours, except overnight. Mr. Brown said he shared the idea with Mr. Robb Gruman, administrator for Fairview Southdale Hospital and chair of the Edina Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Gruman, who was in attendance, said he is organizing a group to look at the merit for the long term. Member Braden said linking to the Greater Rail would require this to be part of the regional plan. Mr. Brown said he has focused more on fact finding so far and that there will be a need for economic and non - economic support from local businesses before seeking regional support. The consensus was that the Transportations Option Working Group would continue this discussion. 'OMMUNITY COMMENT – None. 1 REPORT /RECOMMENDATIONS Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Report of July 11, 2012 Director Houle withdrew the speed table from the agenda until the next meeting. Section A.2 Member Janovy said she was the one that brought this forward. Assume parking will only be allowed where allowed. Wayne said it is based on the parking rule. Can this be put in there because contractors may not go looking for the code. Concern about 12 ft wide — is this sufficient in all case? Construction Management Plan generated by staff — Houle said it would be posted at jobsite with contractor name /phone #. Regarding 12 ft wide — push cars into neighborhood and wider you go more cars are pushed further in. 20 ft clearance for fire code? Does this apply? For traveling no, but for parking their outrigger. Would benefit from being specific:said Janovy but good step in the right direction. Cannot park on grass. Shuttle employees in is encouraged. M_ay have ETC review said Houle. Janovy said goal is to have less negative impact. Yes, ETC to review. Director Houle said a revised option 3 would be presented ai scoping prior to the August 6 public hearing. He�said the ETC Mr. Chuck Rickart, project manager, presented. IVIr: Ricka overpass bridge and the re -scope change is wher6% a 66th. He said the scope changed approved by the Met Cot intersections; intersection impro nts»(narrowing of -- enhanced corner treatments;;ADA complian .,,and pedest countdown timers and vehicle`andbike detection); east /i Transit; and minimal right -of- way "(ROW) a Council was a preliminary concept plan ®ani "typical" intersectionEdesign mminimal land level lighting; an o ROW acgiiis`.ition was Mr. Rickart said after =the special meetit designed to include stay g in the ROW intersection for landscaping and media including some ROW costs. ;i,tion only ng the City, - Council would- to discuss the original re- be- di formed when the meeting date is set. rt.explained that -the 2007 federal grant was for a pedestrian e w.which is f intersection enhancements at 76th, 70h and ncil' included median refuge islands with landscaping at Kisting lanesiat:intersections; removing free right turn islands; ian Ie— �.eI'lighting�).7signal improvements (APS signals, vesfbike accommodations; provide better accessibility to ail4ersections. Mr. Rickart said the presentation to the Met the costa to be $2,045,000 based on aerial mapping only; a er med n and adjacent to intersections; minimal pedestrian :heEETC on July 9, the preliminary concept plan (scope change) was theyT5bld (except for the intersections); sidewalk all the way; widened ng the same. He said the estimated cost for this design was $2,302,400, Continuing, Mr. Rickart said on Maytl ity Council expressed a desire for an urban design for the corridor - more than just landscaping, and LBH was Hired: He said they looked at the entire corridor to ensure that whatever is done at the three intersections could be done at the others. Additionally, two stakeholders meeting were held to gather feedback, plus a special meeting with the ETC. He said at the first meeting the feedback was that the space between the road and sidewalk was important. He said they designed three options (1. Separated bike /pedestrian with boulevard; 2. Separated bike /pedestrian with no boulevards; and 3. On-road bike lane with sidewalks), plus leaving the original scope change as an option also. The options were presented at the second stakeholders' meeting and the consensus was to move forward with option 1; however, at that time costs and ROW impacts were not known. At the special meeting with the ETC on July 9, Mr. Rickart said the consensus was that the estimated cost of $9,145,500 was too high and the recommendation was to go with a revised option 3 (no bike lanes on France Ave; east /west bike lanes consistent with Bike Plan; and provide sidewalk connections on France Ave with boulevards). Mr. Rickart turned over the presentation to Mr. Craig Churchward of LBH to explain the urban design feature. Mr. Churchward said the idea was premised on other planning documents relating to the community as a whole and unique features of France Ave with the potential of becoming a main street for the community and as such create a sense of identity for the whole community. Mr. Churchward said if a full build out cannot be done, they could look at ways to create an incremental development as the road changes character— less cars, more pedestrians. He said this could be accomplished using visible vertical elements - large trees outside and inside medians; monuments to create sense of place; flowers that would be vibrant /noticeable; and pedestrian lighting. He said creating something unique or a level of detail says you care. He also said to create a motif that can be used over and over as properties are redeveloped along France Ave. In conclusion, Mr. Rickart said the estimated cost for revised option 3 is�$'S ROW that has significantly increased the cost over the scope change- estima mandatory sunset date of March 31, 2013, the following schedulejm: 5% 2012; project memorandum — Oct 2012; ROW acquisitions — Sep-A2 to h 2013; final approval (City /County /MnDOT) — Mar 31, 2013;,an: in const Discussion Member Franzen said there is an extra 2 feet of excess ROW a7- ke they use a 'pathway' classification it would be needed and they�taewr asked about narrowing of existing lane at interse_ctions,and if the entiF the north bound lanes would be reduced while tl_eesouth =bound side v 100 and that it is the urban design and cost of $2,045,000. He said to meet the ire to: project development — Apr to Dec ?013; detail design —Aug 2012 to Mar i n Summer 2013. uld be narrowedup. Mr. Rickart said if Often MnDOT's appuroval yet. Chair Nelson rridor would be this way. Director Houle said I be reduced only at the intersections. Member Janovy asked if they would be ripping out sidewalksto put in new--ones and if the new sidewalks would link up to existing sidewalks. Mr. Rickart said _they will not tiepripping`out�any sidewe -lknd that they would be matching up to existing sidewalks with the exception of 66= th Member Janovy said it looks like bike lanes a ,e.being added„ where there is a right turn lane, and it was not clear that they continue on the other side of= the�street i all cases. MF Rickart said it depends on the intersection; 70`h for example will end at the intersection and bikers can getfacrosson the sidewalk to the existing bike lane; other intersections will end. Member Janovy said�`this '—design does not match­what ordi6dhce allows (no biking on sidewalk). She also said that statements are made on page 29 ofthe report_-without detailsµand these will need to be clarified for City Council. Member La Force asked:if sidewalk on h:i,,.e-.eastside i ulti -use and Mr. Rickart said yes. He also asked if the plan is to remove the trees at Macyµs�in order to place the sidewalk and Mr. Rickart said they have not worked out the fine details yet but as it looks now, tFie trees would betremoved. Member Braden asked about tfansit sheelf r =f locations and Mr. Rickart said Metro Transit is not proposing any changes at this time. He said they talked aboutmoving one stop around to Hazelton and off France. Member Whited asked about monument cost and Mr. Churchward said $75,000 is included for six each monuments. She also asked about irrigation cost and Mr. Churchward said it is included. Chair Nelson said he likes the idea of the sidewalk at Byerly's and Macy's but wondered about the additional ROW cost since the ROW has increased cost so much. Mr. Rickart said he did not have this specific ROW cost available but could forward it at a later time. Director Houle said he has shown the plans to Byerly's and they like the design so there is a possibility that the City may be able to get the ROW without cost or minimal cost; however, the City has to be cognizant of their parking requirements. He said there is also the option of putting the sidewalk below and then moving it up when the site is redeveloped in the future. Member Janovy asked about the grade of the sidewalk and Mr. Rickart said it would be ADA compliant. Member Janovy asked about the following elements and Mr. Rickart responded accordingly: crosswalks width is 8 feet; all free rights are being removed; they will be working with the County on a bike detection system; for crossings, the County prefers a design that allows pedestrians to cross all the way majority of the time without the need for a push button in the middle of the intersection but the City will seek approval for a push button; a speed study should not add extra cost; Director Houle said the state looks at the 85% percentile speed that vehicles are currently traveling to set the speed limit. Member Janovy suggested option 3 without the boulevard and a sidewalk along the curb. Mr. Rickart said the cost would be $23M. She asked what kind of sidewalk can they have without additional ROW and Mr. Plowman said it would be 6 -7 feet against the curb. Mr. Churchward added that it would not be 6 -7 feet of usable space —there would be shy distance and it's not developing the idea that was talked about with the public and the ETC of generating a living street for the community. Member Janovy agreed but said that $6M is more than there is a need to strike a balance to get closer to the budget and make.it s three intersections need to be a statement for the rest of the corridor: Heoi functionally correct and to reduce cost, eliminate the trees and mo;numen "t Braden asked if they've explored other funding options because :she would said they've talked about special assessment and the City CounciNwill be di Aug 6 public hearing. Chair Nelson said he likes the idea of option 3 because it sets -u7p inte considering moving it forward with potential cost-,savings. He said- the.vui Council to express their interest and cut and paste .He_.said the $5.81V!--_ s started with but it is the right size for the corridor Member La Force agog come prepared with cost estimate without the monumentsan about removing the trees. Mr. Rickart-said they will have deta receiving the estimated costs befo ethe=meeting. Member Janovy said she want§A eaboulevardwand for thew consider 69`h and not strand pedestrians. She -said the monurr impression based on_a;.couple conve they need to be ab le'toaho.w=.th"at,iit can°I feasibility study;§n=August 6 and�Directoi choose. Member: y, r said he would =likej Member Bass said she likes the idea of Ic the overpass and suspect= thatrtthey woul conceived will be of much greatteerr use to Member Braden said she has rZ— Gheard be able to contribute in say ROW ded.� icai AT believes there is a way to do the project ne Yuen with d yes ;`hon i where to oing she believes would be approved so pedestrians. Mr. Churchward said the a design that will be ;e they can be added later. Member lose the boulevard. Director Houle *this project at a workshop before the for futurewexpansion, and is Frkshop session is tFiewplace to allow the City ,significantly more than the $2M that they ed and suggested for the workshop that they itracadius adjustments, but he is not so sure the"meeting and member lyer requested to be as beautiful as it can be but they should also ; seem like an easy thing to cut but is under the it assessments, that this project is too costly. She said d if the City Council will be asked to approve the , they can continue until the next meeting if they so ce cost and see what they can get for $3M or $4M. ng at something less costly. She said they did not see a feasibility study for yin this same spot. She said the value and utility of the project as it is now idents and the cost per user will be a lot lower than the original project. at the value that this will be to commercial properties and how they might Chair Nelson agreed that the bridge would be around the same cost. He the workshop is the place to work things out. Motion was made by member Franzen to approve option 3 based on the discussion and to look at ways to reduce ROW cost; have landowners share in contribution of ROW; construction cost reduction such as free rights, etc. and forward to Council. Member lyer asked for an amendment to not mention option 3 because the concepts along the corridor are what they want. Motion not seconded. Member Thompson suggested approving the scope change revise and then see show what they can get for $3M and $4M in meeting the Living Streets and urban design principles. Member Janovy said she can support this and add on up to a point that the City Council is comfortable with. Member La Force said he does not know what the City Council is comfortable with. He said the City Council saw the original project and they added the urban design. He said further that maybe they are interested in everything and suggested pushing it forward to them to see what their cost threshold is. Motion made by member Franzen and seconded by member LaForce to move forward with option 3, provided that all of the additions to the revised scope change be clearly delineated so that they can have a discussion at the City Council workshop regarding what should be added or not added, including finance options. Aye: Franzen, Braden, LaForce, Whited, Nelson, Bass, Thompson, lyer Nay: Janovy Motion carried. MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA SPECIAL MEETING OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION EDINA PUBLIC WORKS & PARK MAINTENANCE FACILITY JULY 9, 2012 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Janovy, LaForce, Nelson, and Whited. APPROVE OF MEETING AGENDA Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member Braden to approve the agenda. Member LaForce asked if the meeting format would be the same as last time. Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member LaForce to go straight to discussion. All voted aye. Motion carried. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS France Avenue Intersection Enhancements Member Janovy asked how the project went from $2m to $10.3m. Consultant Chuck Rickart of WSB & Associates, said something closer to option 3 was assumed in the cost of the funding application which requires minimal right -of -way (ROW), bike boulevard, etc. He said option 1, the most expensive, includes significant intersection work and twice the amount of ROW which tripled the cost. Mr. Rickart described option 1 has having an off - street bike lane from W. 76th to Crosstown, with the exception of the Macy's and Byerly's location that will have a share - the -road until future redevelopment happens, separated by landscaped boulevard, a 2 foot buffer and a 7 foot walkway. Discussion: Member Janovy asked where the bike plan came from. Mr. Rickart said it was part of the rescoping and city engineer Houle said based on feedback from the first meeting, it sounded like people liked it. He said it would also be a natural connection the planned trail. Is there a funding source? Mr. Houle said there is the Centennial Lakes TIF funding. He said city manager Neal mentioned setting up a special funding district which would be special assessment but the earliest that a public hearing could be scheduled would be September. Member LaForce said he did not feel comfortable forwarding option 1 to the City Council if there wasn't a definite funding source. Member Janovy said there are many who are interested in the TIF funds and she cannot advocate for an extra $7m. Mr. Rickart said the direction from last meeting was option 1. Member Braden said they did not know the cost then and asked if they should scale back. Mr. Houle they should scale back. Mr. Rickart said he did not have all the cost ready for the other options. Chair Nelson said the original scope includes sidewalk on the eastside, improving access to transit, and getting people across safely. Member Janovy said she does not recall a dedicated bike lane in the original scope. She said in her research, she has found some items (cycle track, left turn and colored lanes) that are being proposed are recommended by FHWA International Program for further evaluation and she asked if this was a concern. Mr. Rickart said while they need approval from MnDOT, he is not concerned because these treatments are currently being used in other communities. 1 Member Janovy said Councilmember Sprague wanted to know what makes this specific design better for pedestrians. Mr. Rickart said the crossings are shorter and if needed, there is a refuge. The cycle track does not go all the way through on the west side because it is cost prohibitive (only at the intersections). Mr. Houle said other intersections would be completed at a later date (Hazelton, Gallagher, etc.). Member La Force asked if they are deciding the future of these other intersections now and Mr. Houle said yes. Mr. Houle said the proposed design is to have trees closer to traffic, then bikers, and a planter between bikers and pedestrians and this cannot be changed very much based on feedback from Hennepin County. Landscape architect Craig Churchward, said he may want the planter to be 5' high because this is better for plantings. Member Janovy asked if the County has given any feedback yet and Mr. Houle said no. Mr. Houle said they may want to consider a different option and change the schedule so that they go to City Council for approval in August instead of July 17. Mr. Houle was asked about bike parking options at bus stops and Nice Ride. He said they did not discuss parking with Metro Transit and regarding bus shelters, Metro Transit will install them if they have 25 boarding passengers per day. He said Nice Ride identified 501h & France as a location but they are currently out of funding. The commission was asked if they would like to move the curb over another 5 foot and eliminate the bike lane. Member La Force said this is incomplete but there is no funding for option 1. Mr. Houle said option 3 has bike lanes only at the intersections and they could reserve space for a future bike boulevard. Member Janovy asked if the sidewalk could be made wider to accommodate bikers also. She said she thinks the City Council was asking for sidewalk, benches, pedestrian lights, and planters. Chair Nelson asked if the intent was to have a north /south connection to the Promenade. Mr. Rickart said W. 66`h and W. 701h are the City's Comp Plan bike crossings. Chair Nelson asked if the goal was crossing safely. Mr. Churchward said he thought the bigger goal was to not have the orientation towards cars on the corridor. Chair Nelson said he liked option 1, if they had the money, but he does not want to change the design and then do a redo later. Mr. Churchward said if the north /south movement is no longer the desire and east /west is, then they can relook at the design. Chair Nelson said there is a bike lane on W. 70th that ends at the last roundabout and suggested continuing this to France Ave to connect with the Promenade. Mr. Rickart said whatever is done needs to accommodate crossings at W. 66`h and all other primary bike routes. Mr. Churchward said he feels responsible for creating the grand vision. He said he had Grand Ave, St. Paul, in mind but instead the bikers will remain secondary, while cars are primary on the corridor if his understanding is correct. Member LaForce said France Ave is not the same as Grand Ave because Southdale is set further back. It likely will be residents and employees who will be on France Ave so it should be made enjoyable and safe for them. Member Bass said this could be a catalyst for rezoning. She said option 1 is bold and she liked it. She said they do not have a shared vision for France Ave and that there also isn't a community vision. Member Whited asked if the businesses have been told that they are to get closer to France Ave and Mr. Houle said no. Mr. Churchward said ideally, they would bring the sidewalk closer to the businesses and this would be part of a vision of having a tree -lined boulevard. This would be done during redevelopments. Mr. Houle said Southdale is willing work on a sidewalk around their perimeter. Member Janovy said there is a vision for France Ave in the Living Streets Policy and for other streets. She believes however, that there will be resistance to spending $10.3m and this will make it difficult to get other bike lanes approved. 2 Member La Force said they need to reach a consensus on elements and he would like to see finished connections or connection to something that already exist (unlike the one block of sidewalk on Interlachen Blvd). Member Bass said the system is not perfect but it has to be built out bit by bit. Member La Force said there is no plan for future connection. Member Bass asked what they could do that could set them up for a five year plan. Member Janovy asked how they could reduce speed limit on France and if a speed study could be included. Mr. Rickart said they could request a speed study from the County but it would add additional cost. Continuing with his elements, member La Force suggested a sidewalk on the eastside that would be done correctly to avoid a redo later on, wide boulevard, refuge, free right turns, etc. Chair Nelson liked the idea of a sidewalk becoming a bike lane in the future. Mr. Rickart said 8 foot is the federal required width for a 2 -way, multi -use path. Mr. Churchward said this is the right size for three people. He said any wider would look like a lot of concrete based on today's usage. He said if they can reduce speed it will help, otherwise trees will help. He said he prefers 10 foot of soil area between the curb and sidewalk because of less maintenance to tree roots. He said 66`h & Lyndale in Richfield does have large trees in smaller areas so it can be done but it would require good soil, sprinkler, etc. Member Janovy asked if there are innovate ways to use runoff water to feed the trees and he said yes. Member Janovy asked about brand identify and how do you know what is right. Mr. Churchward said they need to know what the roadway is going to be for the next 30 years. Mr. Houle suggested leaving space for the monuments and creating a task force to work on branding. Chair Nelson said they should make crossings safe and easier, add sidewalk and make it as wide as possible and plant boulevard trees. He said even this is going to be more than $2m and the bridge was estimated at $6 -8m so it was known that additional funding would be needed. Member Whited suggested talking to businesses about sponsoring benches along the corridor. Member Janovy asked if the special assessment district would only be for beautification and Mr. Houle said he did not know the details but whatever is done has to show benefit to the properties. Member Braden suggested improving the three intersections, east /west crossings and continuing the W. 70`h bike lane from the roundabout to France. Member La Force asked if people would stroll on France Ave. Member Bass said maybe not now but hopes that the City will pursue zoning that brings building closer to the street. She said this would encourage strolling. She said also that land use and transportation are inextricably intertwined and she believes there should be formal collaboration between the ETC and the Planning Commission. Member La Force asked Mr. Houle to repeat to them what he had heard. Mr. Houle said the elements are finish the connections for the sidewalks and bikeways, design the 8 -foot sidewalks so they do not need to be reconstructed in the future, put in as much boulevard as possible, provide pedestrian level lighting, provide safe cross -walk markings, remove free rights from the travel lanes, enlarge the medians to provide refuge areas, and provide space for monuments. Member Janovy asked about pedestrian level lighting and Mr. Rickart said they will need to look into this. Regarding the monuments, Mr. Churchward said they need to be dramatic and look like a destination. Member Bass said there is one at Cahill and. W. 70`h that is a good example. She said it should also signal to drivers immediately that they have entered a different space. Mr. Churchward mentioned Fairview as a gateway playing of off this for the rest of the corridor. Member Braden asked Mr. Houle who much more he is comfortable spending and he said between $1 -2M. He said `here may be State Aid money available for ROW acquisitions. 3 Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member Bass to not recommend forwarding the current feasibility study to Council and to incorporate an alternative design for consideration at their August 6 meeting. All voted aye. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9 p.m. 4 Reviewer Agency Title Comment Date Response We agree that education will be a big aspect to I think these are great designs for intersections but this design. We anticipate signing and applying they are very unusual for the US as you mention the right messages to all users is important. We are planning to meet with State Aid /Federal Aid so it may take some education /getting used to. Are folks soon to discuss the design and be sure no these already approved designs? Be sure to check variances are needed and start applying for the bike planning, regional in sooner than later with State Aid and FHWA to variances if they are. We believe from a pure solicitation/TIP management/ find out if variances will be needed. lane width, reaction distance, clear zone, etc. thall Funding and Programming we are meeting all state aid and federal aid James Andrew Met Council staffer 6/27/2012 requirements. I hope they don't have any right- turning trucks or buses at these intersections. From what I've seen of the Dutch designs, the turning radii would need to be tightened considerably to accommodate the bike /ped pathway which would be problematic for large truck and bus right turns. Honestly, I think I'd have to see the actual designs to accurately comment .I'm sure the design engineers are cognizant of truck movements. Personally, I'm not a fan of Dutch intersections and wouldn't support them in my neighborhood, i.e., Snelling Avenue. If the corridor isn't even on a bike route, we shouldn't be making improvements The intersections are designed to accommodate that would attract a lesser experienced group of WB -62 vehicles. The trucks will be able to cyclists to the corridor. negotiate the turn without having to use the Steve Elmer Met Council freight planning, avid bicyclist 6/27/2012 biscuit islands. We met with Cindy Harper, Kristin Thompson Metro Transit - If you haven't done so already, we and Brad Smith of Metro Transit on Thursday, need to get their input soon. As far as I know, July 5th. We shared the design with them, and John Dillery Oohn.dillery@metc.state.mn.us) is still received positive feedback. They did not believe the sector planner for Edina /Bloomington. I'm there would be any issues with the design from a excited about the design options developed so far bus stop /bus route perspective. At this point, they don't believe they will be changing any and I hope the project continues apace and routes or bus stop locations, although depending doesn't encounter any fatal flaws along the way. on what alternative is chosen near the Byerly's /Macy's area, they may consider moving Ann Braden I Met Council I Senior Planner I 6/27/2012 the bus stop to a location that is more accessible. PM - EXISTING Intersection Total Delay by Level of Service LOS by LOS by Average & Maximum Traffic Queuein feet Forecast Volumes Movement by Movement Approach Intersection Left -Turn Through Right -Turn Appr (SeclVeh) (SeclVeh) (Sec /Veh) Appr c Location 0 V Abe Max A\e Max Aw Max L T R Total L T R L T R Delay LOS Delay LOS Queue Queue Storage Queue Queue Queue Queue Storage NB 153 806 279 1238 63 22 4 E C A 23 C NS 115 227 325 96 187 o d WB 224 309 246 779 53 40 3 D D A 32 C WB 86 160 325 99 185 27 C M 17: 66th Street & France Avenue SB 250 639 56 945 42 15 12 D B B 22 C SIB 183 30 300 81 209 EB 65 354 85 504 61 48 6 E D A 43 D EB 59 151 200 118 218 NB 124 1021 200 1345 39 16 5 D B A 16 B NB 87 181 160 75 174 v WB 171 145 81 397 60 80 8 E A 56 E WB 128 259 250 79 209 2 56 75 28 C M 37: 69th Street & France Avenue C SB 115 774 54 943 62 22 5 E C A 25 C SB 86 206 220 104 248 EB 46 274 189 509 61 57 14 E E B 42 D EB 32 140 150 104 312 38 166 200 NB 237 1086 125 1448 38 17 10 D B B 20 B NB 154 294 500 78 185 1 18 70 v m WB 122 233 91 446 34 38 28 C D C 35 C WB 76 15? 150 99 185 "—' 28 C M 52: 70th Street & France Avenue rn SIB 84 963 75 1122 73 23 22 E C C 27 C SB 80 152 290 117 252 U) EB 158 453 113 724 39 44 28 D D C 40 D EB 108 174 150 191 307 NB 6 1144 232 1382 56 15 6 E B A 14 B NB 8 78 180 104 213 45 105 300 d WB 154 22 219 395 47 41 14 D D B 28 C WB 101 170 150 25 180 66 184 N 17 B m 62: Hazelton Road & France Avenue C SB 245 1076 7 1328 60 6 4 E A A 16 B SB 116 124 100 106 328 rn EB 13 26 9 48 42 43 14 D D B 36 D EB 35 96 NB 18 1335 21 1374 70 5 6 E A A 6 A NB 16 61 265 12 114 WB 9 0 63 72 43 0 14 D A B 18 B WB 10 69 34 50 v N 7 A m 72: Gallager & France Avenue rn SB 23 1029 78 1130 60 4 4 E A A 5 A SB 18 74 245 35 105 rn EB 78 0 55 133 54 0 6 D A A 34 C EB 63 133 29 65 NB 74 1140 58 1272 55 26 4 E C A 27 C NB 62 165 325 168 379 19 49 v WB 79 43 137 259 60 41 11 E D B 31 C WB 64 100 31 125 44 125 N 28 C R 77: Parklawn & France Avenue C rn SB 89 982 22 1093 50 22 19 D C B 24 C SB 75 180 410 142 281 EB 97 47 95 239 80 40 19 D B 49 D EB 99 221 70 180 v v NB 58 911 159 1128 67 26 14 E C B 26 C NB 55 125 950 115 216 53 100 WB 199 157 65 421 58 45 2 E D A 44 D WB 83 154 200 57 127 10 100 34 C FU 82: 76th Street & France Avenue C m SB 102 1046 49 1197 64 26 7 E C A 28 C SB 91 195 460 162 328 2 134 310 EB 174 481 249 904 67 55 10 E E I B 44 D EB 80 175 200 189 342 57 250 0 NB 47 974 183 1 12041 74 26 5 E C A 24 C NB 46 161 240 143 296 32 335 WB 295 130 53 478 63 41 8 E D A 50 D WB 231 408 400 60 307 7 64 100 v "N 30 C m 97: Minnesota Drive & France Avenue C rn S B 48 1480 31 1559 55 21 12 E C B 22 C SB 47 132 150 98 344 U) EB 108 340 300 748 1 69 64 8 E E A 42 D EB 97 196 200 144 253 8 75 240 PM - ELIMINATE CHANNELIZED RIGHT -TURN LANES Intersection Total Delay by Level of Service LOS by LOS by Average & Maximum Traffic Queuein feet p Forecast Volumes Movement by Movement Approach Intersection Left -Turn Through Right -Turn Appr (SeclVeh) (SeclVeh) (SeclVeh) Appr C Location 0 v A`" Max A\oe Max Aw Max L T R Total L T R L T R Delay LOS Delay LOS Queue Queue Storage Queue Queue Queue Queue Storage NB 153 806 279 1238 63 24 27 E C C 29 C NB 109 217 325 114 262 a WB 224 309 246 779 58 41 9 E D A 36 D WB 87 159 325 102 166 56 138 31 C M 17: 66th Street 8 France Avenue C SB 250 639 56 945 43 16 14 D B B 23 C SB 174 304 300 73 175 in EB 65 354 85 504 60 47 14 E D B 43 D EB 54 131 200 122 216 47 148 150 NB 124 1021 200 1345 38 15 5 D B A 16 B NB 88 174 160 67 147 0 m WB 171 145 81 397 59 79 8 E E A 55 E WB 128 247 250 74 190 4 73 75 ~ 27 C M 37: 69th Street & France Avenue C SB 115 774 54 943 22 4 E C A 25 C SB 78 169 220 101 232 rn EB 46 274 189 509 56 15 E E B 41 D EB 30 125 150 102 291 43 199 200 NB 237 1086 125 1448 ]45 18 19 D B B 23 C NB 180 324 500 79 238 W B 122 233 91 446 40 27 D D C 36 D WB 75 167 150 107 202 29 C M 52: 70th Street & France Avenue C rn SB 84 963 75 1122 75 24 20 E C C 28 C SB 78 150 290 115 223 rn EB 158 453 113 724 38 42 40 D D D 41 D EB 109 174 150 187 303 NB 6 1144 232 1382 51 16 6 D B A 15 B NB 7 44 180 107 218 47 151 300 WB 154 22 219 395 47 40 14 D D B 29 C WB 108 174 150 26 246 72 170 m 17 B m 62:Hazelton Road & France Avenue SB 245 1076 7 1328 60 6 4 E A A 16 B SB 115 124 100 109 339 EB 13 26 9 48 49 45 18 D D B 41 D EB 39 97 0 NB 18 1335 21 1374 69 5 5 E A A 6 A NB 14 54 265 11 77 W B 9 0 63 72 58 0 13 E A B 19 B WB 13 68 35 50 m N 7 A 72: Gallager & France Avenue rn SB 23 1029 78 1130 60 4 4 1 E A A 5 A SB 17 69 1 245 34 102 rn EB 78 0 55 133 55 0 6 E A A 34 C EB 61 134 27 66 d NB 74 1140 58 1272 54 23 4 D C A 24 C NB 56 130 325 158 358 18 48 WB 79 43 137 259 52 41 9 D D A 26 C WB 59 122 100 26 99 39 112 N 25 C M 77: Parklawn & France Avenue C rn SB 89 1 982 1 22 10931 48 1 20 21 D C C 22 C SB 72 186 410 1 134 260 N EB 97 47 95 239 71 46 20 E D C 46 D EB 90 186 78 180 0 d NB 58 911 159 1128 66 29 34 E C C 32 C NB 46 106 950 124 243 W B 199 157 65 421 58 46 6 E D A 46 D WB 82 160 200 58 132 33 94 100 N 37 D m 82: 76th Street & France Avenue SB 102 1046 49 1197 63 27 8 E C A 29 C SB 87 185 460 152 313 20 215 310 C rn Cn EB 174 481 249 904 68 56 22 E E C 49 D EB 71 163 200 186 357 101 270 250 v w NB 47 974 183 1204 76 27 5 E C A 25 C NB 61 166 240 146 279 28 478 WB 295 130 53 478 59 43 8 E D A 48 D W B 228 402 400 54 160 11 108 100 ~ 97: Minnesota Drive 8 France Avenue 30 C SB 48 1480 31 1559 59 22 12 E C B 23 C SB 47 120 150 103 222 C m Cl) EB 108 340 300 748 67 64 8 E E A 43 D EB 96 208 200 150 262 17 181 1 240 PM - ELIMINATE ONE LANE EACH DIRECTION ON FRANCE AVE Intersection Total Delay by Level of Service LOS by LOS by Average & Maximum Traffic Queueing feet Forecast Volumes Movement by Movement Approach Intersection Left -Turn Through Right -Turn Appr (Sec /Veh) (SeclVeh) (Sec /Veh) Appr c Location 0 v Ave Max Aw Max Aw Max L T R Total L T R L T R Delay LOS Delay LOS Queue Queue Storage Queue Queue Queue Queue Storage 0 NB 153 806 279 1238 70 45 52 E D D 50 D NB 135 312 325 324 520 W B 224 309 246 779 56 41 12 E D B 36 D WB 86 158 325 104 183 76 229 d 39 D M 17: 66th Street & France Avenue C SB 250 639 56 945 44 17 14 D B B 24 C SB 183 309 300 113 217 EB 65 354 85 504 67 46 15 E D B 44 D EB 62 163 200 118 222 45 150 NB 124 1021 200 1345 41 22 6 D C A 21 C NB 86 184 160 144 283 9 122 220 WB 171 145 81 397 59 76 9 E E A 55 D W B 131 256 250 72 167 4 75 v N 32 C M 37: 69th Street & France Avenue m SB 115 774 54 943 68 31 5 E C A 34 C SB 97 209 220 175 375 18 168 200 EB 46 274 189 509 56 56 20 E E C 42 D EB 33 131 150 90 206 58 179 200 NB 237 1086 125 1448 41 1 27 30 D C C 29 C NB 144 283 500 236 539 v d WB 122 233 91 446 34 39 30 C D C 36 D WB 77 165 150 103 204 44 D M 52: 70th Street & France Avenue SB 84 963 75 1122 84 64 61 E E 65 E SB 114 314 290 414 570 rn EB 158 453 113 724 38 45 42 D D D 43 D EB 106 174 150 208 319 NB 6 1144 232 1382 56 25 9 E C A 22 C NB 5 36 180 204 357 54 169 300 w WB 154 22 219 395 47 41 18 D D B 31 C WB 105 174 150 16 99 80 165 23 C M 62: Hazelton Road & France Avenue rn SB 245 1076 7 1328 61 12 11 E B B 21 C SB 117 12f 100 179 446 r n EB 13 26 9 48 47 50 16 D D B 42 D EB 37 96 NB 18 1335 21 1374 66 6 6 E A A 7 A NB 19 65 265 25 118 m WB 9 0 63 72 48 0 13 D A B 17 B WB 8 51 34 50 N 9 A M 72: Gallager & France Avenue rn SB 23 1029 78 1130 63 6 5 E A A 7 A SB 21 74 245 86 172 fn EB 78 0 55 133 52 0 8 D A A 34 C EB 67 143 29 64 NB 74 1140 58 1272 60 34 4 E C A 34 C NB 68 292 325 315 655 38 378 0 m WB 79 43 137 259 62 38 16 E D B 34 C WB 71 124 100 35 159 51 138 N 33 C m 77: Parklawn & France Avenue rn SB 89 982 22 1093 53 28 27 D C C 30 C SB 72 153 410 251 428 y EB 97 47 95 239 64 36 19 E D B 40 D EB 83 161 76 168 NB 58 911 159 1128 62 35 21 E D C 34 C NB 45 122 950 177 295 WB 199 157 65 421 60 42 5 E D A 45 D WB 96 188 200 57 126 32 100 m 39 D M 82: 76th Street & France Avenue C SB 102 1046 49 1197 67 32 10 E C B 34 C SB 93 213 460 261 494 29 s 310 EB 174 481 249 904 69 54 29 E D C 50 D EB 75 175 200 175 324 116 27[: 250 0 NB 47 974 183 1204 81 29 6 C A 27 C NB 55 264 240 237 411 80 480 WB 295 130 53 478 65 44 9 E D A 53 D WB 249 400 400 58 272 9 20 100 m 33 C m 97: Minnesota Drive & France Avenue c rn SB 48 1480 31 1559 54 25 17 D C B 26 C SB 46 154 150 1 177 414 EB 108 340 300 748 68 64 9 E E A 42 D EB 94 205 200 146 248 r 14 209 240 PM - ELIMINATE DUAL LEFTS (westbound at 66th, westbound and eastbound at 76th) Intersection Total Delay by Level of Service LOS by LOS by Average & Maximum Traffic Queuein feet Forecast Volumes Movement by Movement Approach Intersection Left -Turn Through Right -Turn Appr (Sec /Veh) (Sec /Veh) (Sec /Veh) Appr c Location cj Ave Max Awe Max Aye Max L T R Total L T R L T R Delay LOS Delay LOS Storage Storage Queue Queue Queue Queue Queue Queue NB 153 806 279 1238 64 26 30 E C C 31 C NB 112 216 325 129 295 WB 224 309 246 779 188 43 9 D A 76 E WB 253 325 191 508 56 127 m N 41 D A 17: 66th Street & France Avenue rn SB 250 639 56 945 43 17 13 D B B 24 C SB 180 283 300 81 225 in EB 65 354 85 504 60 52 16 E D B 47 D EB 58 142 200 133 264 53 150 NB 124 1021 200 1345 36 15 5 D B A 15 B NB 83 163 160 68 140 2 49 220 WB 171 145 81 397 60 74 8 E E A 56 E WB 134 262 250 79 197 4 74 75 d 27 C 37: 69th Street & France Avenue c rn 115 774 54 943 60 20 4 E C A 24 C SIB 80 181 220 90 206 rn _SB EB 46 274 189 509 56 57 15 E E B 41 D EB 26 113 150 98 193 41 149 200 NB 237 1086 125 1448 37 18 20 D B C 21 C NB 147 274 500 87 251 o m WB 122 233 91 446 34 37 29 C D C 35 C WB 76 164 150 100 191 N 29 C A 52: 70th Street & France Avenue C .21 SB 84 963 75 1122 73 24 22 E C C 28 C SB 82 178 290 121 257 n EB 158 453 113 724 39 45 39 D D D 43 D EB 106 17c 150 208 310 m NB 6 1144 232 1382 50 15 6 D B A 14 B NB 6 40 180 106 202 48 145 300 WB 154 22 219 395 48 41 13 D D B 28 C WB 107 150 19 136 66 199 "-' 17 B m 62: Hazelton Road & France Avenue c rn 245 1076 7 1328 61 6 3 E A A 16 B SB 117 100 109 358 rn _SB EB 13 26 9 48 45 48 22 D D C 43 D EB 43 119 o NB 18 1335 21 1374 68 5 6 E A A 6 A NB 18 57 265 17 119 WB 9 0 63 72 53 0 14 D A B 18 B WB 8 44 36 50 W N 7 A 72: Gallager & France Avenue C rn SB 23 1029 78 1130 57 4 4 E A A 5 A SB 22 74 245 35 103 y EB 78 0 55 133 52 0 6 D A A 32 C EB 61 132 28 58 NB 74 1140 58 1272 52 25 4 D C A 26 C NB 58 171 325 167 342 17 53 WB 79 43 137 259 59 44 11 E D B 31 C WB 63 +2, 100 35 134 41 114 m "t! 27 C m 77: Parklawn & France Avenue SB 89 982 22 1093 57 22 18 E C B 25 C SB 77 180 410 147 272 c rn in EB 97 47 95 239 69 41 20 E D C 45 D EB 96 191 76 181 o a NB 58 911 159 1128 68 32 39 E C D 35 D NB 59 138 950 131 257 WB 199 157 65 421 188 47 6 D A 108 W B 198 225 200 176 380 39 123 100 N 47 D M 82: 76th Street & France Avenue C rn SB 102 1046 49 1197 68 28 8 E C A 31 C SB 94 198 460 154 343 13 112 310 rn EB 174 481 249 904 103 58 22 E C 57 E EB 166 225 200 211 380 88 275 250 y d NB 47 974 183 1204 77 26 4 E C A 25 C NB 49 145 240 142 252 22 387 WB 295 130 53 478 59 43 9 E D A 49 D WB 237 403 400 49 143 12 101 100 N m 97: Minnesota Drive & France Avenue 29 C _SB 48 1480 31 1559 55 1 20 10 E C B 21 C SB 43 113 150 90 196 c N EB 108 340 300 748 66 66 8 E E A 42 D EB 92 192 200 146 248 7 86 240 Location France Avenue Crash Summary - 66th Street to 76th Street (2007 -2011) Number of Crashes Total Fatalities Injuries Full Corridor - 66th Street to 76th Street 258 0 Vulnerable User Crashes Crash Rate Property Damage Pedestrians Cyclists Only MnDOT Metro District Average Crash Rate OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS FRANCE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS (PREFERRED CONNECTION) IVSBP -j,,, FRANCE AVENUE TE IMPROVEMENTS Pr jeer Linn: City of Edina IVSB Pr jeer No.: 1686 -30 Dare: 7112/2012 Opinion of Probable Cost Item Number D—i tton Unit Unit Price PREFERRED EAST SIDE BIKE/WALK CONFIGURATION Eminamed Estimated Qu-11ty Cost 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 550,000.00 1.00 $50,000.00 2031.501 FIELD OFFICE TYPE D EACH $8.000.00 1.00 $8,000.00 2104.501 REMOVECURB LIN FT $4.00 4400 $17,600.00 2104.505 REMOVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT SQ YD S5.00 2000 510,000.00 2104.509 REMOVE HYDRANT EACH $800.00 12 $9,600.00 2104.509 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE EACH $150.00 22 $3,300.00 2104.511 SAWING CONCRETE PAVEMENT (FULL DEPTH) LIN FT $5.00 4400 $22,000.00 I 2105.501 ICOMMON EXCAVATION (P) CU YD $12.00 160 $19,200.00 2105.525 TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) CU YD $20.0 800 $16,00.0 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5 (P) CU YD 522.0 20 $4,40.0 2557.603 FENCE DESIGN SPECIAL LIN FT 540.0 100 540.000.0 2360.501 TYPE SP 12.5 WEARING COURSE MIX (3.C) TON $64.00 Wo $6,40.00 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 306 CL V LIN FT $25.00 200 $5,00.0 2503.602 CONNECT TO EXISTING STORM SEWER EACH $1,00.00 22 $22,00.00 2504.602 HYDRANT EACH $4,00.00 12 548,00.0 2506.501 CONST DRAINAGE STRUCTURE TYPE CC48 LIN FT $350.0 132 $46,20.0 2506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH S500.0 22 $11.00.00 2521.501 4" CONCRETE WALK SQ FT S3.00 7520 $105,600.0 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN 8624 LIN FT $12.00 4400 $51800.00 2531,619 ITRUNCATED DOMES SQ FT 540.00 250 $10,00.00 2563.01 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMP SUM $5,000.0 1.0 $5,00.0 2571.504 SHRUB SHRUB S50.00 I60 $80,00.00 2571.503 ORNAMENTAL TRCE 6'HT CONT TREE 5250.0 90 $22,50.00 2572.607 ENGINEEREDSOIL CUYD 550.0 160 $80,00.00 2582.618 SIGNING AND STRIPING LUMPSUM $10.000.0 1 $10,000 . II $704,600.00 20% CONTINGENCY $141,000.00 Construction Total $845,600.00 R/W Permanent (sf) 32,00 C$35Af $1,120,00.0 Temp (4) 22,00 G$20 /sf $440,000.0 R/W Total $1,560,000.00 Total Cost $2,405,600.00 Page 1 K:\ 01686 - 300 \Quantity\ Preliminary\Engineers_Estimate(preferred connedions2)(REVISED).x1sx OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS FRANCE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS (INTERSECTIONS) (OPTION 3 ;VSB Pr Jere Fmncc Avenue TE Imp .... m- Pr je,, L-li,- City of Fdm. IVSB Pr jeer No.: 1696 -30 Dure; 7/13/2012 C)nininn of Prnhnhio C.nct Item Number Dererl lion Unit Unit Priee PROJECT TOTAL 16 596,000.00 76th 70th 2571.503 ORNAMENTAL TREEW11T CONT 66th S250.00 Estimated Estimated QuanBl' I Coll Estimated Estimated .. My Cost Eula,-d F.sli -tM .. lily Cmt F.stim.led I .. My Enlmmed Cmt SHRUB SHRUB 550.00 240 512,000.00 80 54,000.00 80 $4,000.00 80 1 54,00000 2540.602 BOLLARD IiAClI 5800.00 I 16 51200.00 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LUMPSUM S80,000.00 1.00 580.000.00 0.34 S27,20000 0.31 i 526,40000 0.73 ENGINEERED SOIL S26,40000 2031.501 FlIiLU OFFICE TYPE D F:ACII 58,000.00 1.00 0.34 1 0.]3 $304,600.00 S2,640 A0 i 2104 -501 REMOVECURB LIN FT 54.00 14600 S58,400.00 5000 $20,000.00 5600 527,400000 4000 I SI6,000.00 2104 -505 REMOVE: CONCRF'I'F PAVEMENT SO YD S5.00 4400 S22,0(0 -00 1500 57,500.00 1500 57,500.00 1400 I S7,0I)(1.00 2104.509 REMOVE IIYDRANT EACH S800.00 6 54,80000 2 $1,600.00 2 51,600.00 2 51,600.00 2104.509 REMOVE DRAINAGE STRUCTURE - EACH 515000 12 51,800.00 4 5600.00 4 560000 4 I 5600.00 21040511 SAW ING CONCRETE: PAVEMFNT(FU LL DEPT! I) LIN FT 55.00 14600 - S73,00000 500(1 S25.000.00 5600 5280110.00 4000 i 520,000.00 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION (P) CUYD 51200 3120 537,440.00 960 511,520,00 960 $11.520.00 1200 1 $14,400.00 2105.525 TOPSOIL BORROW (CV) CUYD S20.00 750 515,000.00 350 S7,000.00 150 S3,000.00 250 I 55,000.00 2211.503 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5(P) CUYD S22.00 300 1 56,600.00 100 S2,20000 100 $2,200.00 100 j 52.200.00 1 2503.541 15" RC PIPE SEWER DES 7006 CL V LIN FT 525.00 240 ! 56,000.00 80 S2,000.00 80 $2,000.00 80 1 S2.000.00 2507.602 CONNECr'I'O EKIS'rING STORM SEWER EACII 51,00000 30 I 530,000.00 10 SI0,00000 10 510,000.00 10 j SI0,1100,00 2504.602 IIYDRANT EACH 54,010.00 12 i 548.00000 4 516,000.00 4 516,000.00 4 ! S16.000,00 I 2506.501 CONST DRA INAGE STRUCTURE TYPE CC48 LIN Ff $350.00 180.00 563,000.00 60 521,000.00 60 S21.000.00 60 521,000.00 2506.516 CASTING ASSEMBLY EACH S500.00 30 ! 515.000,00 10 S5,1100.00 10 55,000.00 10 I 55.000,00 I 2521.501 4' CONCRETE WALK SQ FT 53.00 25700 577,10000 10500 S31,500.00 5200 515,600.00 10000 ( $70,000.00 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN 8624 LIN FT 512.00 11500 5138,000.00 3500 542,000.00 4000 548,000.00 4000 I 548.000.00 2531.501 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B660 LIN Fr $25.00 500 1 512,500.00 500 512,500.00 I 2571618 7'RUNCA'fED DOMES SQ FT 54000 420 $16,800,00 140 $5,600.00 140 55,600.00 140 I S5.600.00 i 2563.601 TRAFFIC CONTROL LUMPSUM 560,0110.00 1.00 1 560,000.00 0.74 520.400.00 0.33 S19,X00.00 0,73 I 519,800,011 2565.616 REV ISF.SIGNALSYSTEM SYSTEM $200,000.00 100 5600,000.00 100 5200,000.00 1 5200,000.00 I I 5200,000,00 I i 2581618 SIGNING AND STRIPING LUMPSUM SI0,000.00 3 I $30,000000 1 SI0,000 00 I q 510,000.00 I I SI0.000,(q I CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $1,403,440.00 $481,340.00 $458,860.00 5453,240.00 2545.511 LIGHTING UNITTYPE SPECIAL 2 EACH 56,000.00 49 I 5288,000.00 16 596,000.00 16 596,000.00 16 1 596,000.00 2571.503 ORNAMENTAL TREEW11T CONT TREE S250.00 120 S30,000.00 40 $10,00000 40 - SI0,000,00 40 1 516,000 -(0 2571.504 SHRUB SHRUB 550.00 240 512,000.00 80 54,000.00 80 $4,000.00 80 1 54,00000 2540.602 BOLLARD IiAClI 5800.00 48 $38400.00 16 51200.00 16 512,800.00 16 I 512,800.00 2540,602 MONUMENT EACH 5150,000.00 3 5450000.00 I 5150,000.00 1 5150,000.00 I i 5150,000.00 2572.607 ENGINEERED SOIL CU YD 55000 1920 596,000.00 640 572,000.00 640 $32,000.00 640 532,000.00 URBAN DESIGN SUBTOTAL $914,400.00 $304,600.00 $304,600.00 i $304,600.00 20%CONTINGENCY 5393.000.00 20%CONI'INGFNCY 515X,000.00 20%CONTINGF.NCY 592,000.00 20%CON7'INGI,NCY 593,000.00 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL Total $2,660,840.00 Total $944,140.00 Total $855,660.00 Total $861,040.00 WW Total $609,500.00 $285,500.00 $209,000.00 $115,000.00 Total Cost $3,270,340.00 $1,229,640.00 1 -T-$1,064,660.001 1 $976,040.00 Page 1 K:\01686- 300 \Quantity \PmliminaMEngineem_ Estimate (Inlersectlons)(revised2).xlsx FRANCE AVENUE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS S.P. 120 - 020 -037 CITY OF EDINA, MN SCHEDULE Based on a typical Scope of Work and the Federal funding process guidelines, the following schedule would be anticipated: Phase 1 — Project Development Notice to Proceed Phase 1 ............................................................. ............................... April 3, 2012 Data Collection / Survey .................................................................. ............................... In Progress Submit Agency Review Letters (MnDNR, SHPO, Etc) ................... ............................... Completed Meeting with Hennepin County ..................................................... ............................... May 7, 2012 Stakeholder Group Meeting # 1 .................................................... ............................... May 31, 2012 Draft PM / Prel Design Plan to City ..... ............................... ...........................Week of June 4, 2012 City Staff Review Meeting ................. ............................... ...........................Week of June 11, 2012 Stakeholder Group Meeting #2 .................................................... ............................... June 26, 2012 Draft PM / Prel Design Plan to Mn/DOT and County ................. ............................... June 29, 2012 Mn/DOT / County Review ............................................................ .............................Up to 6 Weeks Address Mn/DOT and County comments ........................ Weeks of August 6 and August 13, 2012 Final PM / Prel Design Plan to Mn/DOT and County ............ ............................... August 17, 2012 Final Mn/DOT and County Approval of PM ............................... .............................Up to 5 Weeks PMApproved ..................................................... ............................... ........................October 2012 Construction Limits Determined .................................................. ............................... June 29, 2012 Right of Way Plan to City and County ......................................... ............................... July 13, 2012 Initial Parcel Work and Landowner Notification ........... ............................... May / June / July 2012 Parcel Descriptions and Exhibits ........................................................ ............................... July 2012 Right of Way Appraisals ................... ............................... .........................August / September 2012 Right of Way Acquisition (Offers) .............................................. ............................... October 2012 Title and Possession .................................................................. ............................... December 2012 R/W Certificate # 1 ................................................................. ............................... December 2012 Phase 2 — Detail Design / Bidding Notice to Proceed Phase 2 .......... ............................... .........................August 7, 2012 Draft (60 %) Final Plan Submittal to City, County and Mn/DOT ..................... September 28, 2012 City Staff / County / Mn/DOT Review Meetings ..... ............................... Week of October 8, 2012 Mn/DOT, County and City Review ............................................... .............................Up to 8 weeks Address Comments .................................................................. ............................... December 2012 Final Plan Submittal to Mn/DOT / County and City .......... ............................... December 21, 2012 Final Mn/DOT Approval of Plans ................................................ .............................Up to 8 Weeks FinalApproved Plans .................................................................. ............................... March 2013 Advertisingfor Bids .................................... ............................... ...........................April / May 2013 BidOpening ....................................................................................... ............................... May 2013 Phase 3 — Construction Administration Notice to Proceed Phase 3 ............ ............................... ...........................June 4, 2013 BeginConstruction ...................................................................... ............................... June 15, 2013 Complete Construction ......................................... ............................... ........................October 2013 Scope of Services Page 1 N a 0 m i 0 a r s , . f I France Avenue South Cn as �, .�► ., 02-7 ' wr T i — nws 4 oil I Ar a � 41t =11 Y f � A � �G. I ` v 01 v d 4 c .r. 'Z .I do ti 0) N 4 U 3R �` N A 0 50 ft 100 i� I®I 0 Proposed Roadway 0 Bike Lane /Share the Road = Concete Median / Curb & Gutter = Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area M Future Bike Lane ® Crosswalk - - - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping b France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements July 27, 2012 e S.P. 120- 020 -037 Sheet 1 of 6 City of Edina Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements N 0 m a m r Q) L Cn co Q) C L U (0 WE �I France Avenue South I + R 4 m 1i 1 01 v ... IL ., ry M * ♦ _ ♦{'I� I _ I 04;11414.. �Y �� ' W W -D _ co CED 71 y 1 1 0 1' a' 141, PW AVO O 4 ' W +r� 49 'qU �w � - � t' �!"► '� �► X11 .�. 4 'VA \ �y -IV �rA m 1i 1 01 v IL ry U1 'VA \ �y -IV �rA AGAW ;. 4 1 w+� 1419C 11 1 : V *' £. y III •11 ,_ i # ` - / / /J / /A-_�__ ' 0 50 ff 100 f• 1i I AGAW ;. 4 1 w+� 1419C 11 1 : V *' £. y III •11 ,_ i # ` - / / /J / /A-_�__ ' 0 50 ff 100 f• f i /* f"T W, (D Q) AW L Q) Q) — Q) C L U I- A" Iwo ` l AV Af I� = Proposed Roadway Bike Lane /Share the Road = Concete Median 1 Curb & Gutter 0 Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area M Future Bike Lane ® Crosswalk — - - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping b a ^� France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements Duly 27, 2012 e Sheet 2 of 6 S.P. 120 -020 -037 City of Edina, Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements IL ' W W -D _ co CED f i /* f"T W, (D Q) AW L Q) Q) — Q) C L U I- A" Iwo ` l AV Af I� = Proposed Roadway Bike Lane /Share the Road = Concete Median 1 Curb & Gutter 0 Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area M Future Bike Lane ® Crosswalk — - - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping b a ^� France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements Duly 27, 2012 e Sheet 2 of 6 S.P. 120 -020 -037 City of Edina, Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements R O d O m .a nI 4 �w - -...� or IWO -04 qW France Avenue South w ism of 11131# r 4f MEM-A + +. r ♦. 0 C N N ti �► a �a N U L o t r� U r! �" � ,tea 4• � � � y Air i ANN" . - N A 6 �0 0 50 fi 100 f- = = Proposed Roadway = Bike Lane /Share the Road ® Concete Median I Curb & Gutter = Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area = Future Bike Lane ® Crosswalk - - - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping � France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements July 27, 2012 �e S.P. 120- 020 -037 Sheet 3 of 6 �3 City of Edina, Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements 1 K 1 +� �L 0 L (V l L N !� ' 14 P r U) _ C L OD 2 41 �w - -...� or IWO -04 qW France Avenue South w ism of 11131# r 4f MEM-A + +. r ♦. 0 C N N ti �► a �a N U L o t r� U r! �" � ,tea 4• � � � y Air i ANN" . - N A 6 �0 0 50 fi 100 f- = = Proposed Roadway = Bike Lane /Share the Road ® Concete Median I Curb & Gutter = Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area = Future Bike Lane ® Crosswalk - - - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping � France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements July 27, 2012 �e S.P. 120- 020 -037 Sheet 3 of 6 �3 City of Edina, Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements b 0 a a m b m ► co .• France Avenue South t J m m. W^^ U LAM W L L L A V e ip m, m x r -D - -D W s-- `low- LO Q) L co -- — C L U N A 0 50 ft 100 ft I�= Proposed Roadway = Bike Lane /Share the Road IIIIIIIIIN Concete Median / Curb & Gutter 0 Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area Future Bike Lane ®Crosswalk - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping oY France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements July 27, 2012 e S.P. 120 -020 -037 Sheet 4 of 6 City of Edina, Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements L7 4-4 • AW 4 N A 0 50 ft 100 ft I�= Proposed Roadway = Bike Lane /Share the Road IIIIIIIIIN Concete Median / Curb & Gutter 0 Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area Future Bike Lane ®Crosswalk - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping oY France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements July 27, 2012 e S.P. 120 -020 -037 Sheet 4 of 6 City of Edina, Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements ti o` m a m 0 0 11 D D D 0,14 N a� L U) ai a� Q) — c_ — L U 1� � a 1 T 111111 � 1111 I1t � W c / i V• (^ W 4e t x. France Avenue South '• ,..4 ` f'7 OL dIP it' d Al It t� 410' Fe- U) a> Cl) c_ L U @ /(NN 0 50 4t 100 f I� = Proposed Roadway = Bike Lane /Share the Road ® Concete Median 1 Curb & Gutter = Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area -, - Future Bike Lane ® Crosswalk — - - - Existing Right -of -Way Restriping b ^�� France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements July 27, 2012 E e S.P. 120- 020 -037 Sheet 5 of 6 < Improvements Proposed 3 Option O Pro :., City of Edina, Minnesota p p p -A G) 0') 0-) .0 LO (D I *. — I (D Cf) I 14 ; - t ppr. T ,111 W— M N, I I ■E111 4-4 lip, # A&61 t ti 4-- — — 'R- LP ff IT aw e- ::�42 4W 4M (D W It N A 62%;Z!T!n 0 so #+ 100 ft I1� = Proposed Roadway = Bike Lane/Share the Road = Concete Median / Curb & Gutter = Concrete Sidewalk = Landscaping Area — Future Bike Lane Crosswalk — - - - - Existing Right-of-Way — Restriping I tia July 27, 2012 France Avenue TE Intersection Improvements S.P. 120-020-037 Sheet 6 of 6 City of Edina Minnesota Option 3 Proposed Improvements , 6a. it 01 Ilu REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VI. B. From: Joyce Repya ® Action Discussion Associate Planner Information Date: August 6, 2012. Subject: Appeal the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for Construction of a New Home at 4524 Bruce Avenue Deadline September 18, 2012 for a City Decision: ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt the attached Resolution upholding the July 9, 2012 decision of the Heritage Preservation Board approving a Certificate of Appropriateness to build a new home at 4524 Bruce Avenue. I N F O RMATI O WBAC KG ROUND: The Heritage Preservation Board reviewed the preliminary plan for a replacement home at their June 12, 2012 meeting at which time the applicant presented their plan and comments were provided from the HPB as well as the public. The HPB agreed that the size, scale and massing of the proposed home was complimentary to the adjacent homes; and Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel opined that had this plan been presented to Samuel Thorpe during the districts period of significance, he would probably have approved its construction. That being said, the consensus of the board was that the design was too busy creating a home that appeared to overwhelm the adjacent homes. Board members identified the following architectural elements which they believed contributed to the busyness of the design: • Diamond grids on the windows Metal roofing material on the front porch • The height of the stonework along the foundation The wood trim on the stucco panel seams is busy in some areas. At the July 9, 2012 Heritage Preservation Board meeting a revised plan was provided that remained unchanged in size, scale and massing, as well as in the use of Hardi -plank stucco panels with Miratec wood trim and stone accents. Responding to the recommendations of the HPB, the applicant provided the following changes to the plans: • The diamond grid pattern on the front elevation has been replaced with a 6 pane pattern. • The copper roof on the front porch was changed to asphalt shingles to reduce the number of textures and materials visible from the front street. • The stone work on the south elevation was lowered to reduce the stone's impact. • The half- timbering has been reevaluated to enhance each elevation. The HPB voted to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness subject to the following conditions: 1. The plans presented dated July 2, 2012 with the window grids shown on front elevation continued on all elevations of the home. 2. Any changes to the approved plans must be brought back to the HPB. 3. A sign (not to exceed 6 sq. ft.) with a rendering of the approved home is displayed on the property. 4. A year built plaque is displayed on the home. 5. The HPB's staff liaison is provided a final inspection of the home prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. Photographs of all elevations of the new construction shall be provided once the house is completed. The findings supporting the approval included: 1. The applicant has met all of the procedural requirements required for the replacement of a non - historic resource in the Country Club District. 2. The proposed plan meets the criteria set out in the design review guidelines of the Country Club District Plan of Treatment. On July 18, 2012 an appeal of the decision of the Heritage Preservation Board to approve the subject Certificate of Appropriateness was received from Erik and Ann Wordelman, 4522 Bruce Avenue; and Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue. Some of the issues cited in the appeal materials include the following opinions: • The Hardi -board stucco panels proposed for the exterior cladding of the home is not appropriate, and stucco should be required. Regarding the use of Hardi -board stucco panels, since the HPB began reviewing Certificates of Appropriateness applications, three homes have been approved using the Hardi -board stucco panels (4601 Drexel Avenue, 4602 Bruce Avenue, and 4623 Bruce Avenue). • The 60 sq. ft. covered front entry (porch) is not appropriate. The addition of a covered front entry canopy with pillars and posts is a common street facing facade change the HPB has reviewed and approved through the Certificate of Appropriateness process. ATTACHMENTS: A. Notice of Appeal from Erik and Ann Wordelman, 4522 Bruce Avenue A.1. Response of Appeal from Property Owner's Attorney B. Notice of Appeal from Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue 2 I- - i C. Resolution 2012 -104 Upholding the Certificate of Appropriateness approved on July 9, 2012 for a new home at 4524 Bruce Avenue D. Certificate of Appropriateness for Construction of a new home at 4524 Bruce Avenue E. July 9, 2012 DRAFT HPB Minutes - Final Approval of Plans F. July 9, 2012 Staff Report and Revised /Final Plans G. June 12, 2012 HPB Minutes - Preliminary Review of Plans H. June 12, 2012 Staff Report and Preliminary Plans I. Certificate of Appropriateness Process and Requirements for New Homes J. Country Club District Plan of Treatment K. Certificate of Appropriateness Listing by Street L. Historical and Architectural Survey of the Country Club District - 1980 M. Correspondence 3 July 18, 2012 SEAL JUL 18 2012 Ms. Debra Mangen City of Edina , 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ms. Mangen, My wife, Ann Wordelman and I, Erik Wordelman, respectfully submit our desire to appeal the decision of the Heritage Preservation Board with regarding to the proposed home at 4524 Bruce Avenue, Edina. On July 9, 2012 the.Heritage Preservation Board voted. 5 -4 in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed house to be built at that address by JMS Homes. We respectfully wish to appeal this decision and ask the City Council to consider several points, which underscore why we believe the proposed house should not be granted a Certificate of Appropriateness in the beautiful, historic Country Club neighborhood. These points will be submitted separately. Sincerely, �J Erik J. Wordelman Ann B. Wordelman 4522 Bruce Avenue, Edina, MN 55424 July 30, 2012 Ms. Debra Mangen City of Edina SEAL 4801 West 50th Street J& 3 0 2012 Edina, MN 55424 Rg(;E,p Dear Ms. Mangen, I am writing as a follow-up to the letter my husband, Erik and I provided to you on July 18, 2012 indicating our desire to appeal the decision of the Heritage Preservation Board with regarding to the proposed home at 4524 Bruce Avenue, Edina. On July 9, 2012 the Heritage Preservation Board voted 5 -4 in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed house to be built at that address by JMS Homes. We respectfully request that the City Council have the opportunity to consider the attached rationale (9 pages in total), which underscores why we believe the proposed house should not be granted a Certificate of Appropriateness in the beautiful, historic Country Club neighborhood. We also request that the City of Edina provides the City Council members with the plans that were presented for approval to the Heritage Preservation Board on July 9, 2012 for reference as this rationale is discussed. Sincerely, �� G v, wv Ann B. Wordelman 4522 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 w July 30, 2012 CITY SEAL__`` Edina City Council — 2012 City of Edina JE 3 0 4801 West 50th Street AYE Edina, MN 55424 Dear City Council Members, My wife, Ann Wordelman and I, Erik Wordelman, respectfully submit our desire to appeal the decision of the Heritage Preservation Board with regarding to the proposed home at 4524 Bruce Avenue, Edina. On July 9, 2012 the Heritage Preservation Board voted 5 -4 in favor of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed house to be built at that address by JMS Homes. We respectfully wish to appeal this decision and ask the City Council to consider the following points, which underscore why we believe the proposed house should not be granted a Certificate of Appropriateness in the beautiful, historic Country Club neighborhood. 1) First the scale legend appears to be listed incorrectly in documents presented before the Heritage Preservation Board at the June 12 2012 and July 9 2012 meetings. Please note that in the first set of plans with an issue date of June 4, 2012, the drawings illustrating the front, rear, right side and left side elevations indicate: scale YV =1'0 ". The plans that were issued on July 2, 2012 and presented for approval to the Heritage Preservation Board on July 9, 2012 contained the same error, listing: scale YV =1'0 ". After very carefully reviewing these documents, we have determined that the correct scale on both sets of documents should read: 1/8" =1'0". We believe this incorrect labeling on both sets of plans could have been misleading to Heritage Preservation Board members as well as any other individuals including staff and /or neighbors who may have reviewed these plans. This would have been particularly confusing for those reviewing the documents who lack professional experience in reviewing architectural plans. We firmly believe that this incorrect legend may have led to incorrect assumptions about scale and proportions of multiple features of the proposed home. {Please see Exhibits Al, A2, A3 attached.} 2 econdly , the front porch featured in the documents approved on July 9 2012 is not compatible with the Country Club neighborhood or appropriate as evidenced by the lack of porches like this in the Country Club Neighborhood particularly among Tudor - revival style homes While smaller covered entryways may appear in some cases, and some Colonials may have columns, a covered porch measuring approximately 12 ft x 4.5 ft, as proposed by JMS Homes, would set a new architectural precedent for the Country Club neighborhood. Also, because the scale legend was incorrect on both sets of plans as noted above, and because the width of this porch was not specifically denoted in the plans, Board members, staff and /or neighboring home owners may not have been able to accurately conclude the intended width of this porch and may have misunderstood this porch to have been significantly smaller in size and scale that it is intended to be. Ms. Kitty O'Dea, a Bruce Avenue resident, attempted to present photographic images of approximately 100 Tudor style homes in the Country Club neighborhood at the July 9th Heritage Preservation Board meeting. Due to technical difficulties, the Board did not have the opportunity to review these images. Had they done so, the Board would have seen that Tudor -style homes in Country Club simply do not have porches of the size and scale proposed by JMS. In the Country Club District's Plan of Treatment, under Design Review r Guidelines, the section on Size, Scale and Massing states: "New homes should be compatible in size scale massing orientation setback color and texture with historic buildings in the District constructed prior to 1945. Facades should be architecturally similar to existing historic homes and visually relate to the historic facades of nearby homes: radically contrasting facade designs will not be allowed." We believe that the proposed home does not meet these guidelines and feel strongly that because the front facing facade is such an important aspect of any home in the Country Club district, particular care and attention must be given to maintaining appropriateness of design and architectural features. Reviewing existing Country Club homes is an objective means of assessing appropriateness and compatibility for proposed homes. Doing so will illustrate why a porch as proposed by JMS is not compatible or appropriate for the district. We believe the front porch feature should be removed before a Certificate of Appropriateness is granted. {Please reference Exhibits B1 and B2 attached.) 3) Thirdly. JMS Homes has proposed the use of a non - traditional exterior material namely cement panels which are intended to look like stucco. In The Plan of Treatment for the Country Club District in Design Review Guidelines, the section on Exterior Materials reads: "Traditional materials and exterior finishes (horizontal lap siding, stucco, brick, false half - timbering, wood shakes, stone) are recommended -or use on facades which are visible from the street The use otnon- traditional materials (such as Hardy -Plank siding and steel roofing) should be considered on a case -by- -case basis, wood or masonry finishes should duplicate the size shape color and texture of materials historically used in the st The product proposed by JMS, painted cement panels, is NOT a traditional material or exterior finish, and therefore should not be approved for use on the facades visible from the street, which include both the North and South sides of the home, as well as the front facade. In fact, our understanding of the product proposed is that it WILL NOT duplicate the texture of materials historically used in the District. Cement panels, which some individuals may refer to as "stucco panels" are NOT real stucco and simply do NOT replicate the traditional, authentic texture of real stucco. Please note that the proposed home for 4524 Bruce Ave. will be bordered on the North and South side by real stucco homes, #4522 and #4526. Also, the two homes directly across the street, #4525 and #4527 also feature real stucco (as does 4520 Bruce Ave). Surely, it will be quite clear that 4524 is not going to be able to duplicate the texture of these historic, authentic Country Club homes as called for in the Plan of Treatment. Additionally, there will be excessive timbering resulting from the use of these panels. This timbering is also incompatible with historic homes in the district. {Please reference Exhibit C1 attached.} Although cement panels may have been used elsewhere in the District, since the Plan of Treatment calls for consideration of non - traditional materials on a "case- by-case basis:' in THIS CASE it is not appropriate given the existing neighboring homes at this particular site. We are particularly concerned that the builder, JMS Homes, did not provide samples of this proposed non - traditional exterior material to the Heritage Preservation Board for review and consideration. We believe, therefore, that the Board did not have the opportunity to fully and carefully consider the significant contrast in texture between this proposed product and real, authentic stucco. In fact, other builders of new homes continue to use real stucco, and Donnay 4. l Y , Homes will be using real stucco on the new home being built at 4624 Bruce Avenue, so it would be misleading to suggest that stucco is not a reputable, quality product being used in the marketplace today. W e therefore request that the city councii: Request revised architectural elevations from JMS Homes, with the correct scale legend to Accurately depict all measurements and dimensions before a Certificate of 1. Appropriateness is granted. • Consider approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for.the proposed home at 4524 Bruce Avenue only after removal of the front porch element. • Consider approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed home at 4524 only after reviewing a sample of the proposed cement panels for the exterior material and after reviewing images of the existing stucco homes surrounding the property at 4524 . Bruce Avenue. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. We specifically sought out the Country Club neighborhood when we moved to Edina and bought our home here in 2005. We cherish the historic, character of this beautiful neighborhood and are passionate about protecting the architectural integrity of the Country Club district. Sincerely, Erik J. Wordelman 4522 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Ann B. Wordelman FRONT ELEVATION i eCAL-- 114•.x• -W sobry -„ �1eal -7 /?dI) A . o- E (,yardL t 1 m I W Z W UZ U4 (Q It N 1 I OF 4 MAIN LEVEL FLOO PLAN" [GI4• •°�•••.�� G9. scull 114•4_0. S,-C. F=� axa rw l 3�riy� n �o 0 It P n. X V iB JL---" f. T4524 BRUCE AVENUE Eow.a n+ 5 L,b,nn-1 gat bttu� '7 f3L� /2 C v .r. i-�- I L L.1h -,qCaa�g-Cccs eoAv -e. 41(o svL„m -,►' t�dl lath �. � C- Wcr�[Pl,'»�„1 �Gt.+rv� fJ Zsz S- L%� TuGIO►r'— 5 t~l_� ! � %�YYIQ S �' f� �YS��f Casec)Av-.e, W a��diJt 1 r" G.') --? d v / / 2- 4526 Bruce Ave. 4524 Bruce Ave. 4522 Bruce Ave. 4528 Bruce Ave., 4526 Bruce Ave. 4525 Bruce Ave. 4527 Bruce Ave. C J C � .11 FABYANSKE W ESTRA HART & THOMSON PROFESSION&ASSOOMoN August 2, 2012 The Honorable Mayor James Hovland Members of the Edina City Council City of Edina 4801 West 50'' Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Appeal of Certificate of Appropriateness Edina Heritage Preservation Board 4524 Bruce Avenue A. i. Gary C. Eidson Attorney Direct: 612.359.7621 gddson ®fwbtlaw.eom Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members: We are counsel to Jeffrey and Lohe Ericson, who have owned the property at 4524 Bruce Avenue (the "Subject Property") since 1989. We are writing in response to the appeal submitted by Erik and Ann Wordelman (collectively, the "Wordelmans ") to the decision of the Heritage Preservation Board to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new home that is proposed to be built on the Subject Property. The Ericsons are disappointed that the Wordelmans are pursuing this appeal. During the planning of the proposed new home for the Subject Property, it was determined by the Ericsons' buyer that a portion of the Wordelman's driveway, and certain fencing that was installed by the Wordelmans, encroach as much as eighteen inches upon the Subject Property. These encroachments are depicted in the survey attached hereto as Exhibit "A." The Ericsons' buyer contacted the Wordelmans in an effort to address and resolve the issues raised by these encroachments. Unfortunately, the Wordelmans have chosen to be unresponsive to these inquiries and requests. Instead, they have chosen to pursue this appeal. The Ericsons believe that the appeal is being pursued by the Wordelmans more as a response to objections the Ericsons have made to the Wordelmans concerning these encroachments than about any real serious objections the Wordelmans have concerning the design of the proposed new home. One reason that the Ericson are disappointed by their neighbors' pursuit of this appeal is the hardship it has caused them in the scheduling of the closing of the sale of their home and their ability to commit to an alternative residence. The Ericsons had made arrangements to relocate to a residence that they found very attractive and they had made an initial deposit to secure that opportunity. Because of the uncertainty and delay caused by this appeal, however, N.\PL\83686\83686- 001 \1552656.doo 800 LaSalleAvenue, Suite 1900, Mlnneapolls, Minnesota 55402 Main: 612.359.7600 Fax: 612.359.7602 www.fwhtlaw.com � P � 9 r � August 2, 2012 Page 2 the Ericsons have been unable to commit to move to this alternative residence, and that opportunity has now been placed in jeopardy. They have now been left with uncertainty and additional work concerning their living situation subsequent to the occurrence of the pending sale. The reasons advanced by the Wordelmans as the basis of their appeal are pretextual and constitute a wholly insufficient basis upon which to overturn the determination of the Heritage Preservation Board. The insufficiency of the reasons for the appeal that are advanced by the Wordelmans can be summarized as follows: (a) Project Plans. The argument that the Board's decision should be overturned because the plans submitted for review by the Board have an incorrect designation of the scale of the drawings is completely without merit. A full -sized set of those plans was submitted to the City for review by the Board and those plans had a correct designation of the scale of the drawings. Full -sized sets of plans are cumbersome to handle and distribute, so copies of those plans printed on a smaller format were evidently made and distributed by the City to facilitate the Board's review. Smaller copies would have the effect of diminishing the actual size of the depicted improvements with no corresponding change to the scale noted on the plans, but the reduction in size applied uniformly to all depicted improvements so it did not change their relative proportion, was not the result of any incorrect labeling on the plans, routinely occurs in the review of full sized plans submitted to the Board, and does not create confusion or have any other material effect on the ability of the Board to render its judgment on the nature and design of the depicted improvements. A full sized set of the plans remained available to the Board throughout its review of this matter. (b) Incomvatibility of the Front Entrance. The proposed new home includes a front entrance covering supported by pillars. As recognized by the Board, a front entrance covering is a design feature that is increasingly common and attractive to occupants of homes, especially in neighborhoods such as the Country Club District, with sidewalks and smaller front yards, and where neighbors frequently meet and converse. The Wordelmans argue that the proposed covered front entrance would "set a new architectural precedent" for the Country Club neighborhood, but I can personally attest that that statement is false. I own a home constructed in 1926 at 4604 Wooddale, just a couple blocks over, with a covered front porch or entrance with pillars that is larger than the covered front porch which the Board approved in this instance (and my uncovered front porch is considerably larger still). There are a number of other similar covered front entrances or porches in the Country Club neighborhood. The existence of the front porch on the proposed home is fully compatible with the Country Club neighborhood and certainly does not set a new architectural precedent. NAPL\83686\83686- 001 \1552656.doc August 2, 2012 Page 3 (c) Exterior Material. The final basis advanced by the Wordelmans for their appeal concerns their objection to the use of cement board panels for the exterior of the proposed home. Instead, the Wordelmans argue that the exterior of the home should be finished with "real stucco." Among architects and residential construction professionals, cement board is widely viewed as superior to stucco because of ease of application, uniformity of finish, superior warranties, resistence to cracking and leaks, and the avoidance of the negative stigma associated with traditional stucco applications in new homes resulting from the large incidence of recent claims and lawsuits alleging water infiltration and mold problems in houses finished with traditional stucco exteriors. The Board was quite familiar with the use of cement board on the exterior of the award winning Tudor style house that was previously approved by the Heritage Preservation Board and built by our buyer at 4601 Drexel. There is certainly a sound basis for the Board to conclude that the use of cement board and stucco panels for the exterior of the proposed home was compatible with exterior materials in other homes in the Country Club District. The tudor inspired home that is proposed to be built on the Subject Property is fully consistent with the historic homes in the Country Club district and will be a handsome addition to the neighborhood The Ericsons respectfully request that the determination of the Heritage Preservation Board to approve a Certificate of Appropriateness for the new home that is proposed to be built on the Subject Property be affirmed in all respects. Very truly yours, Gary C. idson GCE/ss cc: Jeffrey and Lorie Ericson N. \PLX83686183686- 001\1552656.doc r, Exist. Garage Existing House Slab= ±iB95.4 Stucco -Z -Z -Z -Z 4.522 Bruce Avenue — 4 — —� 34.6— ,- 15.b 894.fl''' —rte" — U 97, F \ r Y ^ilr Iron Fence Concrete �.Ivewc 12." Tree 894 P a,'es' t $82. r ; I � ; tj � 7 4 a►. �o 891.2 l 4 s � s v dor Row s 894.4 % :� 4524 Bruce Avenue " LL x'94.4 1•ree 36 o 894.3G t a a 89 4.E QnA z I $82. r ; I � ; tj � 7 4 a►. �o 891.2 l 4 s � s v � � a Y Date: July 18, 2012 To: Deb Magen Re: Heritage Board Appeal: 4524 Bruce Avenue I am appealing the Heritage Board's approval of the proposed new home at 4524 Bruce Avenue. I am pulling together a document for City Council's review. Please advise when that document is due. Sincerely, Kitty O'Dea SEAL 4610 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 PE E VED co RESOLUTION. NO. 2012-104 City Of Edina UPHOLDING THE HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD'S APPROVAL OF A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR A NEW.HOME AND ATTACHED GARAGE AT 4524 BRUCE AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the,City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 JMS Custom Homes, LLC is requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness to tear down and rebuild a new home and attached garage at 4524 Bruce Avenue. 1.02 On July 9, 2012, the Heritage Preservation Board approved a Certificate of Appropriateness for a new home and attached garage. 1.03 On July 18, 2012, Eric and Ann Wordelman, and Kitty O'Dea appealed the decision of the Board to the City Council. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The applicant has met all of the procedural requirements required for the replacement of a non- historic resource in the Country Club District. 2. The proposed plan meets the criteria set out in the design review guidelines of the Country Club District Plan of Treatment. 3. The final approved plans included'changes recommended by the Heritage Preservation Board during the preliminary review. 4. Since the HPB began reviewing Certificates of Appropriateness applications, three homes have been approved using the Hardi -board stucco panels (4601 Drexel Avenue, 4602 Bruce Avenue, and 4623 Bruce Avenue). 5. The addition of a covered front entry canopy with pillars and posts is a common street facing fagade change the Heritage Preservation . Board has reviewed and approved through the Certificate of Appropriateness process. 6. The proposed new house will be visually compatible with the historic period revival style homes in the neighborhood and should not detract from their historic character. Cit y Hall 952- 927 -8861 FAX 952 - 826 -0390 4801 WEST 50TH STREET TTY 952 826 -0379 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdina.com - RESOLUTION NO. 2012-104 Page Two Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, to uphold the decision of the Heritage Preservation Board to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness to tear down and build a new home and attached garage at 4524 Bruce Avenue, legally described as Lot 13, Block 4 Country Club District Fairway Section, subject to the following conditions: 1. Historical and architectural documentation of the existing house and garage is provided to include digital photographs and a written description of the house and its known history. 2. The home is built subject to the plans presented dated July 2, 2012 with the window grids shown on the front elevation continued on all elevations of the home. 3. A sign (not to exceed 6 sq. ft.) with a rendering of the approved home is displayed on the property. 4. A year built plaque is displayed on the home. 5. The HPB's staff liaison is provided a final inspection of the home prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. Photographs of all elevations of the new construction shall be provided once the house is completed. Adopted by the city council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on , 2012. ATTEST: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )SS CITY OF EDINA ) CERTIFICATE OF CITY CLERK I, the undersigned duly appointed and acting City Clerk for the City of Edina do hereby certify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of , 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2012. City Clerk 0 e EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION'BOARD City of �din� CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS . Pursuant to the requirements of Subsection 850.20 of the City Code of the City of Edina; no owner or contractor shall demolish any building in whole orin part;:move a building or structure to anotherlocation; excavate archeological features, grade or move earth in areas believed to ,contain significant buried heritage resources, or commence new construction on any property designated as an Edina Heritage Landmark without a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Heritage Preservation Board reviews applications for City permit's in relation to designated heritage landmarks. Criteria and guidelines used in reviewing applications for Certificate of Appropriateness are contained in Subsection 850.20, subd.10 of the City Code. Issuance of this Certificate of Appropriateness is subject to the plans approved. Any change in the scope of work will require a new Certificate of Appropriateness. File #: H -12 -3 Historic Property: 4524 Bruce Avenue Property Owner: JMS Custom Homes, LLC Proposed Work: Certificate of Appropriateness for construction of a new home and attached garage. Findings: Approved Conditions: Subject to: 1. The plans presented dated July 2, 2012 with the window,, grids shown on front elevation continued on all elevations of the home. 2. Any changes to the approved plans must be brought back to the HPB. 3. A sign (not to exceed 6 sq. ft.) with a rendering of the approved home is displayed on the:property. 4. A year built plaque is displayed on the home.. 5. The HPB's staff liaison is provided a final inspection of the home prior to the issuance of a Certificate'of Occupancy. 6. Photographs of , all elevations of the new construction shall be provided once the house is completed. . Date: July 10, 2012 Joyce Repya, Associate Planner irepya(UdinaMN.Gov 952- 826 -0462 City Hall 952- 927 -8861 4801 WEST 50TH STREET FAX 952- 826 -0390 EDINA, MINNESOTA, 55424 -1394 www.CityofEdiria.com TTY 952 - 826 -0379 DRAFT Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes July 9, 2012 Ben Baechler, 4601 Wooddale Avenue explained that his family is excited to move into this home which they recently purchased; and they are looking forward to undertaking the proposed project. Mr.. Baechlerpointed out that, the project has.been designed to correct structural deficiencies and safety . issues; increase'the livability of the home with an added family room and master bedroom suite; while also enhancing the home's historic architecture. Public Comments /Questions: Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue observed that the proposed attached garage would project in front of the building wall of the home and questioned whether that was in keeping with:the homes in the District. Board Member Comments /Questions: Member Mellom questioned whether, cladding the chimney in stone was in keeping with the Mediterranean architectural style. Members Anger and Christiaansen echoed the concern. Mr. Baechler responded that the natural stone is proposed for the chimney, and while they have I esearched other homes in the District and found stone incorporated with stucco - homes, they have gone back and forth whether to include it in the design. Consultant Vogel pointed out that while the District may have Mediterranean style stucco homes with stone work, it is unlikely that the stone was part of the original design, and was more than likely added at a later date without design review 3.—H_L2- 3_4524_Br_uce Avenue — Final Review of a New'Home with Attached Garage Planner Repya explained that the preliminary. plan for the proposed home was reviewed at the June 12, 2012 HPB meeting at which time the applicant presented their plan and comments were provided from the Board as well as the public. Board members expressed their opinions that that the size, scale and massing of the proposed home was complimentary.to the adjacent homes; and Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel opined that had this plan been presented to Samuel Thorpe durink.the districts period of significance, he would probably have approved of the plan. That being said, the consensus of the board was that the design was too busy creating a home that appeared tobverwhelm the adjacent homes., Board members identified the following architectural elements which they believed contributed to the busyness of the design: • Diamond grids on the windows • Metal roofing material on the front porch The height of the stonework along the foundation • The wood trim on the stucco panel seams is busy in some areas. A revised plan has been provided that remains unchanged in size, scale and massing, as well as in the use of Hardi -plank stucco panels with Miratec wood trim and stone accents. Responding to the recommendations of the HPB, the applicant provided the following changes to the plans: • The diamond grid pattern on the front elevation has been replaced with a 6 pane pattern. • The copper roof on the front porch was changed to asphalt shingles to reduce the number of textures and materials visible from the front street. 5 DRAFT Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes July 9, 2012 The stone work on the south elevation was lowered to reduce the stone's impact. The half- timbering has been reevaluated to enhance each elevation. The final plans subject to review at this time have reduced the busyness of the design by incorporating some of the recommendations provided by the HPB during the preliminary review in June. Furthermore, Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel has determined that the proposed new home is appropriate new construction in the Country Club District. Approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the new home is recommended with the following conditions: 7. Historical and architectural documentation of the existing house and garage is provided to include digital photographs and a written description of the house and its known history. 8. The home is built subject to the final approved plans — any changes must be brought back to the HPB. 9. A sign (not to exceed 6 sq. ft.) with a rendering of the approved home is displayed on the property. 10. A year built plaque is displayed on the home. I I. The HPB's staff liaison is provided a final inspection of the home prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 12. Photographs of all elevations of the new construction shall be provided once the house is completed. The following findings support the recommendation for approval: 4. The applicant has met all of the procedural requirements required for the replacement of a non - historic resource in the Country Club District. 5. The proposed plan meets the criteria set out in the design review guidelines of the Country Club District Plan of Treatment. 6. The proposed new house will be visually compatible with the historic period revival style homes in the neighborhood and should not detract from their historic character. Applicant Comments: Matt Hanish, representing JMS Custom Homes informed the Board that at their suggestions the building plans were revised. Hamish highlighted for the Board the revisions: • Eliminate the diamond grid pattern on the front elevation by replacing it with a 6 pane pattern. • The height of the stonework on the south elevation was lowered. • The porch roof is no longer copper. It was changed to asphalt singles to reduce the "busy" appearance of the different textures and materials from the front street. • The timbering has been revaluated and reduced to enhance each elevation. Hanish introduced Kathy Alexander, architect and Jeff Schoenwetter of JMS Custom Homes and stood for questions. Public Comments /Questions: 9 DRAFT Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes July 9, 2012 Ann Wordelman, 4522 Bruce Avenue addressed the Board and requested that the Board take additional time to review samples of the proposed stucco panel boards and to review the exterior finishes of other similar historic homes in the District. Wordelman said she doesn't want the Board to feel pressured in their decision making without adequate time to study the new materials and similar housing types within the District. J Continuing, Wordelman referred to the Plan of, Treatment highlighting. portions 'of the Plan she is concerned the applicant,isn't following; especially with regard to-'exterior materials. She said in her opinion the proposed stucco'panel boards shouldn't be approved; they're not real stucco. Wordelman acknowledged that stucco panel boards have been used elsewhere in the District; however, she pointed out if JMS was allowed to use the panel boards the exterior of the new house wouldn't "match" the immediate homes surrounding it (all stucco). Wordelman pointed out that the Board's review and their decision should be on a case by case basis, adding just because this product was used elsewhere doesn't mean it's appropriate here. With regard to the proposed timbering Ms. Wordelman noted that in her opinion its use is excessive and not appropriate. She also noted that it was unclear to her from the plans submitted if the stone on the front fagade was real or manufactured. Wordelman stated she also doesn't feel the proposed "porch" is consistent with the architecture of Tudor homes. Concluding, Wordleman introduced Steve Donnelly, of Donnelly Stucco to explain the difference between real stucco and stucco (cement) panel boards. Mr. Donnelly briefed the Board on stucco vs. stucco panel boards. He explained that when this product is used the seams need to be covered; which may be the reason one sees so much trim board. Board Members asked Mr. Donnelly his opinion on why' someone would use the stucco .panel boards instead of real stucco. Donnelly responded that cost could be a factor. Kitty O'Dea, 4610 Bruce Avenue, told the Board she had taken photos of Tudors in the ,District and noted as mentioned by Ms. Wordelman that Tudors traditionally don't have front porches. O'Dea also agreed with comments from Ms Wordleman that the timbering was excessive: Continuing, O'Dea also commented on the window placement on the third floor, adding that was "also untypical. Concluding, Ms. O'Dea.volunteered to develop a "field guide"!ofall the homes in the District. In response to comments from neighbors Mr. Hanish explained' that at this time JMS Custom -Homes does not use real stucco, adding that stucco has a higher failure rate and the use of this type of stucco board is common and 'more "green ". Hanish explained their intentr was to design a complementary home; not duplicate one. Hanish said the design of the proposed house emulates a Tudor Revival style. Board Member Comments /Questions: Member Sussman commented that it appears to him from the revised plans that on the side and rear of the house the windows no longer had subdivided light (panes). Sussman asked if that was the preference of the homeowner. Hanish responded at the previous meeting he believed that the Board felt the exterior materials created a "busy" look, adding much of that "busy look" was eliminated. Sussman said in his opinion the look of proposed home is now inconsistent; especially comparing the front elevation with the side and rear. DRAFT Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes July 9, 2012 Mr. Hanish responded that he would be happy to add the panes and trim features. Chair Carr asked Mr. Hanish if the proposed stone was "real" or manufactured. Hanish responded that the stone is natural. Carr questioned if stone was traditionally used on Tudor style homes. Carr asked Consultant Vogel if stone is a common element found on Tudor homes. Consultant Vogel responded that stone is found throughout the District and was used on Tudor homes. Continuing, Vogel explained what's significant about the Country Club District was Mr. Thorpe's vision of the District; its streetscape and the layout of the 550 single family home lots. Vogel pointed out not all "styles" of homes built in the District are "text book" correct. Many of the homes were built to a client's specification with approval from Thorpe, adding Thorpe knew what he liked. Continuing, Vogel acknowledged it's easier for Boards to pinpoint massing; however, aesthetics is another issue. Vogel noted that the Plan of Treatment doesn't dictate duplication ,of a specific style of house, just compatibility. The Plan of Treatment acknowledges changes could occur and guides the Board in making decisions combining these 21St century changes in a historical district. Concluding, Vogel acknowledged the process can require subjective decisions by the Board. Member Christiaansen said she doesn't have an issue with the entrance/porch; however the stucco panel boards are a big issue for her. Member Christiaansen said in her opinion it appears they are using modern materials trying to achieve a "dated" look. Member Stegner reminded the Board the proposed house is a brand new house; adding in viewing this application on a "case by case" basis he has no problem with the revised plans as submitted and would include in any approval Members Sussman's suggestion on the window panes and trim. Member Curran pointed out that the homes surrounding the subject property are all stucco; not stucco panel boards, adding that she understands the position of those against the stucco panel board product and those in support. Member Anger said he respects the sincerity of the designer; however, feels that the design could be enhanced to respect the sophistication of the street. Jeff Schoenwetter, JMS Custom Homes addressed the Board and informed them; as mentioned previously by Mr. Hanish that he would be using stucco panel boards ( Hardi Board) on the new house. Schoenwetter acknowledged that a number of surrounding homes are stucco; however, they were built in a different era and if Hardi board was available at that time it is possible that product would have been used. Schoenwetter asked the Board to look at this from a global perspective, adding building science has changed. With regard to the Plan of Treatment Schoenwetter said he views the Plan as a guide and respectfully tries to emulate the character of the existing house; not by being identical but by being complementary. Concluding Schoenwetter said his design team also works to respect the surrounding homes. Member Mellom said she doesn't like the house in this location, adding in her opinion the proposed house doesn't match the surrounding homes. Mellom also added she can't support the 3rd floor with the oblong front window. E DRAFT Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes July 9, 2012 Member Davis said he fully respects and appreciates all the comments from the neighbors; however, believes the house as proposed is appropriate for this. neighborhood and meets the criteria established in the Plan of Treatment. Consultant Vogel said the proposed house, is not a replica of,an historic house and:it doesn't pretend to be. He added that. what the Board needs to determine is if the proposed_ . home is an appropriate substitute that.. combines . old word design with'modern building practices and building codes; and does no harm ". "Concluding, Vogel said if the Board sees measureable' harm in the. design, of the home it should be. denied. If not it should be approved. Motion Member Stegner moved approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness based on the revised plans dated July 2, 2012, to include the duplication of the window pane detail on all elevations, and additional timbering on the front and side to better match the front fa4ade; as well as the conditions recommended by Staff. Member Davis seconded the motion. Ayes: Sussman, Curran, Stegner, Davis, and Carr. Nays: Mellom, Anger, Christiaansen, and Moore. Motion carried. 11. OTHER BUSINESS A. Southdale - Center Determination of Eligibility (DOE) for Heritage Landmark Designation Planner Repya reminded the Board that at their June meeting they considered adding Southdale Center to the list of those properties in Edina that have been determined eligible for landmark designation. Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel provided a DOE study which explained Southdale's history and significance to.the community. In the study, Mr. Vogel concluded that Southdale Center has been evaluated as historically significant and should be included in the city's inventory of heritage resources worthy of consideration in community development planning: Board members welcomed 'Mr. Vogel's report noting that the HPB has struggled with recognizing the significance of Southdale:for decades; and a motion was made and seconded to add Southdale to the list of properties designated eligible for landmark designation. Prior to the vote, concern was raised as to how the City. Council would view taking this action in lieu of the negotiations they have had with Southdale's owners as of late. It was agreed that the motion would be tabled to the July meeting, and in the meantime, Planner Repya would meet with City Manager Scott Neal to get his opinion as to whether the City Council would support adding Southdale to the list of historic resources determined eligible for landmark designation. a F. 11rr HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD 04 1 ? CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT Originator Meeting Date Agenda # VI. A. 3. Joyce Repya Associate Planner July 9, 2012 H -12 -3 APPLICANT: JMS Custom Homes, LLC LOCATION: 4524 Bruce Avenue PROPOSAL: Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to demolish existing home and construct a new home and attached garage RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval DECISION DEADLINE: July 25, 2012 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the west side of the 4500 block of Bruce Avenue. The existing home is a Contemporary style constructed in 1973. A 2 -stall front loading attached garage is located on the south side of the home. The COA request involves demolishing the existing home with the intention of building a new home with attached garage which meets the district's plan of treatment criteria. The existing home is not classified as an historic resource since it was constructed after the District's period of significance (1924 — 1944), thus its demolition is not an issue; however the construction of a replacement home is subject to the HPB review and approval. FINAL PLAN EVALUATION: The Heritage Preservation Board reviewed the preliminary plan at their June 12, 2012 meeting at which time the applicant presented their plan and comments were provided from the HPB as well as the public. The HPB agreed that the size, scale and massing of the proposed home was complimentary to the adjacent homes; and Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel opined that had this plan been presented to Samuel Thorpe during the districts period of significance, he would probably have approved of the plan. That being said, the consensus of the board was that the design was too busy creating a home that appeared to overwhelm the adjacent homes. Board members identified the following architectural elements which they believed contributed to the busyness of the design: Diamond grids on the windows Metal roofing material on the front porch The height of the stonework along the foundation • The wood trim on the stucco panel seams is busy in some areas. A revised plan has been provided that remains unchanged in size, scale and massing, as well as in the use of Hardi -plank stucco panels with Miratec wood trim and stone accents. Responding to the recommendations of the HPB, the applicant provided the following changes to the plans: • The diamond grid pattern on the front elevation has been replaced with a 6 pane pattern. • The copper roof on the front porch was changed to asphalt shingles to reduce the number of textures and materials visible from the front street. • The stone work on the south elevation was lowered to reduce the stone's impact. • The half- timbering has been reevaluated to enhance each elevation. ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATION: The final plans subject to review at this time have reduced the busyness of the design by incorporating some of the recommendations provided by the HPB during the preliminary review in June. Furthermore, Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel has determined that the proposed new home is appropriate new construction in the Country Club District. Approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for the new home is recommended with the following conditions: I. Historical and architectural documentation of the existing house and garage is provided to include digital photographs and a written description of the house and its known history. 2. The home is built subject to the final approved plans — any changes must be brought back to the HPB. 3. A sign (not to exceed 6 sq. ft.) with a rendering of the approved home is displayed on the property. 4. A year built plaque is displayed on the home. S. The HPB's staff liaison is provided a final inspection of the home prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 6. Photographs of all elevations of the new construction shall be provided once the house is completed. The following findings support the recommendation for approval: I . The applicant has met all of the procedural requirements required for the replacement of a non - historic resource in the Country Club District. 2. The proposed plan meets the criteria set out in the design review guidelines of the Country Club District Plan of Treatment. 3. The proposed new house will be visually compatible with the historic period revival style homes in the neighborhood and should not detract from their historic character. JMS Custom Homes, LLC "gie sensible way1o.budd' To: Joyce Repya From: Matt Hanish Date: July 3, 2012 Re: Certificate of Appropriateness Application 4524.Bruce Ave 'This project contemplates the removing a non heritage preservation resource home and replacing it with a new home. The existing home is a stucco, contemporary two story constructed in 1973 with an attached, front load, garage. The proposed new home is two and one half stories with an attached garage to the rear. It is designed in the Tudor Revival style that is prevalent throughout the Country Club District. The size, scale, and massing are similar to other homes in the district and on the same street. With respect to the preliminary plan submitted for the June 12, 2012 Heritage Preservation Board meeting, the City of Edina's consultant stated that "this house probably would have been approved by Sam Thorpe when his realty company controlled development in the district.". There were, however, some recommendations for change made by members of the Board and meeting attendees. In response to these recommendations, we made several changes to the design. The grid pattern on the windows on the front elevation of the home was changed to a more common, traditional pattern. Window grids were completely eliminated on the side and rear elevations. To reduce the number of textures and materials visible from the street, the copper roof on the front porch was changed to shingles to match the remainder of the home. The impact of the stone was reduced byJowering the height of the stone on thesouth elevation of the home. The plans and renderings have been drawn to reflect these changes, and also to show the expected half- timbering,,that will be required on each elevation. The color rendering has been redrawn to show the home as viewed from the northeast to give a better feel.of how nicely the covered entry ties into the front elevation design. In summary, we have designed a home that not only meets the requirements for the district, but that will also. bean asset to an already beautiful neighborhood. 5250 West 74th Street * Suite 8 * Edina, MN 55439 -952- 949 -3630 Builder License # BC392462 fx sa _ Y 1� I STREET SCAPE AT 4524 BRUCE AVE. I eaaie. �w•.r -m• COPYRIGHT 2012, ALEWWDER DESIGN GROUP, INC. RRST RJ7OR a REAR ELEVATION z WAM V.'-I' C.OPYRIG14T 2012, ALEXANDER DESIGN GROUP, ING SME 6W x--" x oFl� =AR I FRONT ELEVATION �a f� TOF _ TOP STa z RIGWT SIDE ELEVATION 3 ecai.E, va•.r -W TOP OF + SECClID BOOR y� TOP OF 61®iR m COPYRIGHT 20u, ALEXANDER DESIGN GROUP, INC. x 6' FRS BD. S -5 0 ooiiii 000aoii talon 1 TAMC N TASE suwrs.Es s�5 W. Lp � 6-7"W& W& slag G 3I LEFT SIDE ELEVATION SC 1 F• v4•.r -0' L-5 s -5 o• sauw ccLus+s G. MINUTES Regular Meeting of the Edina Heritage Preservation Board Edina City Hall — Community Room Tuesday, June 12, 2012 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL Answering roll call was Chair Carr, and Members Stegner, Davis, Curran, Moore, Christiaansen, Mellom, Sussman and Ellingboe. Absent were Members Anger and Copman. Staff present was Planner Joyce Repya. Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel was also in attendance. III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Member Curran moved to approve the meeting agenda. Member Moore seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. IV. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Regular meeting of May 8, 2012 Member Stegner moved approval of the minutes from the May 8, 2012, meeting of the board. Member Moore seconded the motion. All voted aye. The motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT None VI. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS A. Certificates of Appropriateness Planner Repya explained that the Board was hearing two requests for the teardown and new construction of homes in the historic Country Club District. Both homes were built after the period of significance (1924 -1944) thus the teardown of the homes is permissible. The responsibility of the Board is to approve the design of the new homes taking into consideration the Secretary of the Interior's Standards as well as the design guidelines provided in the District's plan of treatment. Ms. Repya also explained that the process for design review is completed in two meetings; the first which is this evening entails a presentation of the design proposal by the applicant with comments and possible suggestions for changes provided by the HPB and interested parties — No vote is taken at this time. The second meeting (one month later) involves a presentation of the final design of the new home, which should take into account the comments and suggestions provided at the first meeting. It is at the second meeting that the HPB will take action on the Certificate of Appropriateness application. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes June 12, 2012 1. H -12 -3 4524 Bruce Avenue — New Home with Attached Garage Planner Repya reported that the subject property is located on the west side of the 4500 block of Bruce Avenue. The existing home is one of the few remaining Contemporary style homes in the District; constructed in 1973. A 2 -stall front loading attached garage is located on the south side of the home. The COA request involves demolishing the existing home with the intention of building a Tudor Revival inspired home with attached garage at the rear of the home accessed by a driveway on the south side of the property. Ms. Repya shared the streetscape comparing the proposed home with the homes on either side; as well as all elevations of the proposed home and detached garage. She then introduced Matt Hanish, with JMS Custom Homes who provided a detailed explanation of the proposed replacement home pointing out that the new structure has been designed to complement the size, scale and massing of the surrounding homes. The attached garage has been located on the rear of the home to not only ensure that it is not visible from the front street, but to also provide a home that blends with the existing streetscape. Mr. Hanish added that the exterior finish of the home has been designed in the traditional Tudor style and color typical with the historic Tudor homes in the Country Club District. Board Member Comments /Questions: Member Mellom commented that in her opinion the home is be but there is too much detailing and it appears to overwhelm the homes on either side. She questioned the use of diamond shaped window panes on the front elevation; and added that the proposed stone base and trim board are "a bit much ". Member Mellom suggested deleting the diamond shaped window panes, reducing the height of the stone base, and eliminating some of the trim. Member Christiaansen questioned the width of the new driveway; and commented that the material used on a portion of the front porch roof appears to be some type of metal- adding that typically a roof like this is copper. She also noted the proposed dormer on the south elevation looks awkward when viewed from the front street. Concluding, Christiaansen suggested eliminating one of two design trim elements. Mr. Hanish acknowledged that the new driveway was narrower than the existing driveway, and agreed copper roofs are seen throughout the District. Hanish said he would consider the suggested changes. Member Moore commented that while he likes the intentions, he feels too much is "going on "; adding in his opinion the exterior design is very busy. Member Curran agreed with the comment from Member Moore and added that it may be possible for the applicant to eliminate some of the timbering trim to reduce the "busy" look of the home's exterior. Member Davis stated that he likes the house; the scale and mass are good. Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes June 12, 2012 Public Comments /Questions: Leo and Marilyn Pert1, 4525 Casco Avenue, Mrs. Pertl told the Board she lives on Casco directly behind the subject property and would like the applicant (if at all possible) to save the pine trees that are located along the common property line. Mrs. Pertl explained that the evergreens provide year round screening between their homes. Mr. Hanish responded that a decision hasn't been made on all trees; however he acknowledged some trees would be removed and additional trees planted. Ann Wordelman, 4522 Bruce Avenue, addressed the Board and informed them she is the northerly abutting neighbor, adding her comments relate to the guidelines. Ms. Wordelman said she has a concern with the proposed stucco panels adding in her opinion a "real" stucco finish meets the intent of the preservation guidelines and is in keeping with the true character of finishing materials found within the District not stucco panels. Concluding Wordelman said she is also concerned that extensive timbering would be used to cover the seams, adding she surveyed the area and didn't view excess timbering on other homes in the District; most notable the sides of houses. Bruce Leslie, 4526 Bruce Avenue, southerly abutting neighbor told the applicant he has a question on an encroachment issue and asked to details. Mr. Hanish told Mr. Leslie he would set up a time to discuss that issue with him. Paul Runice, 4624 Bruce Avenue, explained that he lives one block south, next door to the other COA replacement home the Board will address this evening, but he wanted the Board to know that his block has had a less than desirable experience with JMS in the past, so there maybe a "hangover" effect r with this project. Kitty O'Dea, 4510 Bruce Avenue, commented that she is concerned with the proposed porch extension into the front yard setback area, adding in her opinion it's not consistent with the District and intrudes on site lines. Continuing, O'Dea said she agrees with past comments on timbering adding that the total look of the proposed house is too busy with too many windows. O'Dea also agreed with previous comments that the stone base is too much. Concluding, O'Dea suggested that the applicant provide a scaled "straight on" sketch to be viewed at the next meeting. She pointed out the illustration presented is angled; reiterating she wants to see the facade straight on. Chair Carr thanked the public for their input. A discussion ensued with Board Members indicating that the scale and mass of the proposed home is good; however, there are some details they would like the applicant to reconsider; such as: • Remove the diamond shaped window panes on the front elevation • Shorten the stone base • Somehow reduce the amount of timbering trim and make the best use of the stucco panels to reduce the "busy" appearance of the exterior • Consider using copper on the porch roof extension 3 Edina Heritage Preservation Board Minutes June 12, 2012 Jeff Schoenwetter, JMS Homes, addressed the Board explaining that the proposed home is complementary to the District. As required in the plan of treatment, this replacement home is not an exact replica, but a contemporary Tudor Revival Style that complements the surrounding historic homes. Schoenwetter pointed out that the drivet, hardy board, and stucco panels on the exterior of the home is a product that has been very successful for him- in fact he has used in on new homes he has constructed in the District; inviting the Board to view the Tudor style his company built at 4601 Drexel Avenue. Concluding, Schoenwetter said he would take into consideration the comments heard this evening when designing the final product for submittal. Chair Carr thanked the applicant for their presentation and the public for their comments. She added that the Board looks forward to reviewing the final plan at the July meeting. No formal action was taken. 2. H -12 -4 4624 Bruce Avenue — New Home with Detached Garage Planner Repya explained that the subject property consists of an American Colonial style home constructed in 1950. A front loading, tandem, attached garage is located on the south side of the home. The COA request involves demolishing the existing home with the intention of replacing it with a new home and detached garage and new driveway on the north side of the property. Ben Nelson, of Nelson Residential Design Inc. explained that Donnay Homes is proposing to construct a 2 story Tudor inspired home that has been designed to complement the surrounding homes, abiding by the district's plan of treatment. The natural stucco cladding is not aggressive and will not include any wood timbering. The home will have a long ridgeline paralleling the street with clean, simple lines. The eave lines are consistent with the neighboring homes. The front entry door will have a 2 inch stone veneer surrounding the doorway; and the same stone is continued along the front foundation on the south side. Addressing the garage plan, Mr. Nelson pointed out that the plan is consistent in materials to the proposed home and the height provided is the average of the neighboring detached garages — no taller. Board members responded very favorably to the proposed plan expressing the following comments: Member Sussman stated that he was impressed with the design providing a creative interpretation of a Tudor Design. Members Moore, Stegner and Curran were in agreement. Member Mellom stated that she liked the use of real stucco rather than the stucco panels which allowed them to forgo the wood trim. She also complimented the plan for limiting the use of stone and providing a nice transition with the pitch of the roof. Chair Carr stated that she liked the plan, but questioned the bank of windows on the second story of the front elevation — commenting that the four windows so close together is not commonly seen on the original Country Club Tudors. 4 N. HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF REPORT Originator J Meeting Date Agenda # Vl. A. 1. Joyce Repya June 12, 2012 Associate Planner HA 2 -3 APPLICANT: JMS Custom Homes, LLC LOCATION: 4524 Bruce Avenue PROPOSAL: Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to demolish existing home and 'construct a new home and attached garage DECISION DEADLINE: July 25, 2012 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the west side of the 4500 block of Bruce Avenue. The existing home is a Contemporary style constructed in 1973. A 2 -stall front loading attached garage is located on the south side of the home. The COA request involves demolishing the existing home with the intention of building a new home with attached garage which meets the district's plan of treatment criteria. The . existing home is not classified as anr historic, resource since it was constructed after the District's'.period of significance (1924 - 1944), thus its demolition is not an issue; however the construction of a replacement home is subject to the HPB review and approval. PLAN OVERVIEW: The proposed replacement home is two -story, Tudor Revival inspired with an attached 2- car garage located in the rear of the home, and accessed from. 12 foot wide driveway on . the south side of the property. The proposed height of the home at the peak is 31'with a peak elevation of 926. The adjacent homes on the north and south are comparable in height with the home to the north (4522);having a peak elevation of 925.9; and the home to the south (4526) a peak elevation of 924. The variance in peak heights is indicative of the differences in the elevation at grade. When implementing the HPB's process for calculating the maximum height allowed at no more than 10% higher than the average height of the home, the proposed building height of 31 feet and peak elevation of 926 is permissible. The exterior materials proposed for the home include Hardi -board stucco wall panels with �. 1 'a Miratec wood trim covering the panel seams, and 4.5' of natural stone running along the foundation on the front and south elevations. A 60.75 square foot covered front entry with posts is proposed. The front entry roof has a gable end with wood trim and cedar bracket over the door and a sheet metal roof over the remainder of the porch. A wood front door /trim is also proposed. Additionally, Miratec fascia, soffit and trim with cedar brackets are proposed with asphalt shingles on the roof. PRESERVATION CONSULTLANT ROBERT VOGEL'S ANALYSIS: Consultant Vogel reviewed the subject plans and provided the following opinion: A COA is required for the new house even though the existing house is not historic. The City of Edina has adopted the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the general standards for design review. The Country Club Plan of Treatment contains guidelines for new home construction in the district. The standards and guidelines call for new construction to be designed to be compatible in scale, color, building materials, and texture with historic buildings in the neighborhood. Imitation of period revival style houses is not required —the applicable treatment standard is: contemporary designs are appropriate when they are compatible with the historic architectural character of the historic district. The applicant proposes to construct a new two -story house that I would characterize as an example of "Neo- traditional" architecture. This is essentially a contemporary house that borrows features from the past but is built using modern materials. The designer has had to make his client's space needs and aesthetic tastes fit within the current building and zoning codes, while at the same time treating the neighborhood's historic character with sensitivity. In this case, the stylistic inspiration is Tudor Revival and in some ways it resembles the vernacular Tudor homes built in the Country Club District during its period of historical significance (1924- 1944). More to the point, this house probably would have been approved by Sam Thorpe when his realty company controlled development in the district. (The architectural controls contained in Thorpe's restrictive covenants addressed size, massing, setbacks, and building orientation but did not prescribe any particular stylistic requirements —Mr. Thorpe knew an appropriate house. when he saw it, apparently.) Assuming that it meets applicable building and land use codes, I do not see how the new house would do great harm to the preserved historic homes in the neighborhood. Notwithstanding its distinctively modern proportions, pseudo- historic ornamental detailing, and non - traditional materials, this is actually a very attractive house and we might as well be .open- minded about allowing designers to experiment with New Urbanist concepts for infill construction, even in historic districts. I would like to suggest to the applicant that the half - timbering on the side elevations could be eliminated (most Country Club Tudors have stick work only on the fagade which faces the street). The plans I have seen do not call out the exterior color scheme, but the traditional Tudor palette is muted earth tones. In my professional opinion, the proposed new home would be appropriate because, while the design certainly has been inspired by historic styles, it does not reproduce the exact form and detail of an authentic Country Club period revival style home. The overall impression is of a contemporary home embellished with Tudor style detailing — the historic trappings are only a skin -deep embellishment, and I do not believe this house would be mistaken for a 1920s -1940s vintage Country Club house. Therefore, I recommend approval of the COA with the usual conditions. STAFF COMMENTS: The review process for a replacement of a non - historic resource home in the Country Club District entails a 2 -step process. The plans under consideration at this time are fulfilling the first step. Preservation Consultant Robert Vogel has opined that the proposed home meets the Country Club District's plan of treatment and recommends approval subject to the HPB's approval of the final plans. Staff recommends that the HPB provide the applicant with feedback on the proposed plans, identifying any desired changes. The applicant will then take into consideration the information received when drafting final plans to be presented for approval at the July HPB meeting. C, e 1 0 o. • °a°°t'°i "� EDINA HERITAGE LANDMARK Case Number: ' a 3 Date: 5- Fee: 9 .a,Co. e Planning Department 4801 West Fiftieth Street. Edina, MN 55424' (952) 826 -0462 FAX (952) 826.0389 Application for: CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FEE: $600.00 'I $1.200.00 New House Property Address: `! �/5 _ Zy 9/'ute HVe. APPLICANT: ! ,I Name: �1 S Address: S7!so Q 79' PROPERTY OWNER: Name: I I rry rf r* C!;On Address: q% Zq g, ,,w five• EL, !t'lll OIL Phone: Legal Description Of Property: L 13 6y Covni't,,j 0,6 D 4,iui- rme jjy ! r I-r+ Zoning: /P.I.D. #:lF3- bZ�- 2y- r2 -oo�2 Explanation Of Request (^ons%w -F new N��e• (Use Reverse Side Or Additional Pages If Necessary) Is A Variance Required: Dyes RNo Architect Name: Phone: ure (Date) plc nt's Signature I (Date Revisad: 68010 JMS Custom Homes, LLC "7the seitsi6Ce way to buiCd" Certificate of Appropriateness Application Narrative 4524 Bruce Avenue JMS Custom Homes has entered into an agreement to purchase the property at 4524 Bruce Avenue in Edina's Historic Country Club District. The contemporary styled home that is currently on the property was constructed in 1973. It is the intent of JMS to remove this existing structure and replace it with a new two - story, Tudor design. The new structure will be similar in size, scale, and massing to existing homes in the district. The garage will be located to the rear of the home to maximize the effective use of the front elevation in blending into the existing streetscape. The exterior finish of the home will of traditional Tudor style and color that is commonly seen throughout the Country Club District. 5250 West 74th Street - Suite 8 - Edina, MN 55439 - 952 - 949 -3630 Builder License # BC392462 OV, . *vk; AM a tow. �-5z� T �t y i Existing Front Elevation i+ Existing Rear Elevation Rear Yard Looking North Rear Yard Looking South Rear Yard Looking West JW. rwIv ILI ILI :t — ,• jo r - w a- f _ O Mir . Ali • H - dF - s. �y —i p:i ' PF Ji },t� it Y >•, ,;�,. ��'M� "�� �. p opl�k,Amdil OAVI 0 10 T 'A aj, . "' I I ��I • .� �' ..:, I ,� �� � �` � psi .-• •�� - .�.'- gib'. _ s � �- �j ti - .�• lri. =" a ' ; � (' 1 -�: � '_ �:�i/ i` � -•. � v�•'SS �4 1 iii n AO C mgr y� l gyp". Vii. _ R low a ��.� i �_ ! � � 'Eye - ts,F, Jr F _ �' •Y t ,A t ^. ;���. IT IL ,y '�'� � 91r f ) �' 4 V .l'f -� •"S � y "i7�1 C i 1 p�'�"`yy It r �y >�I A �'}i � �� t _�'Y'r,yt•.'{ 4.524 Bruce Ave, Edina.. M554 4, US 4 N'� A � �'.` '�. {��T.�.►1a �� � +4 Nd ,� a '14th/,:' s�i�� r .r� •+ `yr y .._ .F-� ';.e r . #,,fi�`±r++.:aiw.�� -y ^ � � ",� r_?.�� �•„� -» R -fit 4 gg ,�� �' � 1 � �- �ti.t " -' '�. k. >nl.. '• '��' .ter' �'. - r,�.:r '"�Yt,:. ^�4.' ttt S o y� i. �_: 1.,� "�• 4 w n`; i'F'i Google'earth 92012 Guu in � y �+w' » z ` r � Y'9 *� • 71 t w-Sa YM N hM. h IL i!f S lye 1r� � Yt.:• •. ''Vay'` � •1 Irv' 4, 1 f mow ' YM N hM. h S 1r� � Yt.:• •. ''Vay'` � •1 I STREET SGAPE AT 4524 5RUCE AVE. $CALF. �I$•.r.o• COPTRIGWT 2012, ALEXANDER DESIGN GROUP, INC. L.f J rIWW e�avat�oN .ews w.n. cor,MOV too, a BXOkVM xmoisear, M !Jllxlmml lvlml��l NMI nN LlWr GM ELEVATION uws W%T v �J O O L0 Ln rn L _ v , �- A Z M T r x lL1!.1111� i J ------ 134.5 ------- Vrn L I/iAl \ /1 '' v V N Ln � I/ GARAGE I m /� r\ I/ / /l /I T Ir 7 A c z L U I Lt m = [11111 Yr ------f34.,----- 11i/ n m /I LLQ i I - -- C- Carlson McCain ENVIRONMENTAL - ENGINEERING • SURVEYING 248 Apollo Dr, Suite 100, Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Phone: 763- 489 -7900 Fax: 763 - 489 -7959 4036.001 PROPOSED BUILDING ELEVATIONS Lookout Elevation: Lowest Floor Elevation: Top of Foundation Elevation: Garage Slab Elevation (at door): Vi_rst Floor Elevation: 1-1-1 I LIJ `I I LIJ (Y-\ -J Site Plan for: JMS CUSTOM HOMES, LLC I House Address: 4524 - Bruce Avenue, Edina, MN Bearings shown ore assumed GRAPHIC SCALE 0 10 20 40 (IN FEET) PARCEL DESCRIPTION (PER HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX RECORDS): Lot 13, Block 4, COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT, FAIRWAY SECTION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subject to all easements of record, if any. I hereby certify to JMS Custom Homes, LLC. that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly licensed land surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Doted this 25th day of May, 2012. Signed: Carlson McCain, Inc. By. Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. Reg. No. 40361 LEGEND O Denotes Existing Manhole MH PP Lo, Denotes Existing Power Pole — -he — Denotes Existing Overhead Utility Line(s) — — — — Denotes Existing Fence x 000.o Denotes Existing Elevation x(3000.0 Denotes Proposed Elevation — Denotes Direction of Drainage — — Denotes Utility Easement, per Final Plat —s— Denotes Found Iron Monument ---92o-- Denotes Proposed Contour r'-9 i jo /Denotes Existing Contour X 000.0 Denotes Existing Elevation "gp-YD Denotes Existing Hydrant pd Denotes Existing Gate Valve \Ulm Denotes Existing Tree, as noted XDenotes Existing Tree to be Removed PARCEL DESCRIPTION (PER HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX RECORDS): Lot 13, Block 4, COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT, FAIRWAY SECTION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subject to all easements of record, if any. I hereby certify to JMS Custom Homes, LLC. that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that 1 am a duly licensed land surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Doted this 25th day of May, 2012. Signed: Carlson McCain, Inc. By. Thomas R. Balluff, L.S. Reg. No. 40361 PROP05ED FENCE 70" STEPPERS SET IN SOD E ] n .___ SOD I �:__I On n cl 50D PLANT DEC) MULCH ' I I ® DRAIN BOX I C' c DOWN SPOUT — Q DRAIN TILE — I — p CONCRETE — / ri Q o I I \ p \ J I EXISTING FENCE NEIGHBOK'5 CANT 5. GRILL 1`055101LE VACUUM BREAKER LOCATION TBD ON UTILITY ROOM LOCATION I p _ P05510LE AG LOCATION r1 CONCRETE C I JOil < ' � I \ L �I PROPOSED GATE I f IRREGULAR 57EPPING ��� STONES MULCH I MULCH 1 1 � °- socq Q - I � N r. GONGRETE I GONGRETEI (' ° 500 4 I 0c) I\ • 1� 1 ,1 X1..1 t"',f if •• vj" —CORY 5TALK.1 NATURAL STONE titi'ALLS \ TAIRS p 50D SOD ( p G soD � soD LANDSCAPE DESIGN FOR DESIGN INFORMATION SCALE e,° SOTHS — — Thb prawlnq - .1.1n. prvWNW Nformallon NvEii GROVE H3GHf"+ •— '— ,hlch bdonq. m S..thZ� o. °7qn : ca.,.f. REVISIONS III = 81 b*+fsoT� °aon JMS - SPRING PREVIEW 2013 trl.Uy p o„rot.d ".°° ° °° ° " °" °` °• °'' DESIGN /SALES REP:TIM JOHNSON PMOE SOUT IEW 4524 BRUCE AVENUE DESIGN ASST:ABBY BLUMHARDT 05.27.12 �d ° R.'—.d BY ENC tiD N� EDINA, MN 55424 0 °l° R.1 .... °.J i DATE:05.24.12 �� °� °" corners 2M ALEXAMO a PUM 40". 64M nAi •-------------------------- - - - - -- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- --- - - - -,1 1, II 1 I 11 ; I II 1; 11 t'--------------- - - - - -� II I I� ',"f -- -- '1 1 I I I I I i ------------ J 1 I I I I I I I I I I I u� I I I L I 1 I I L COPYWAM 2012, ALMC44D ! DOWN OR01, W- � I II , I / I II I II 'I '1 I I L --j 1 I II I .I I II I II I 1 11 I li I li i' i �I I' II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I i i 1 1 1 1 ----------- ------------------------------------------- 1 1 I N I i f, N 1 I .J GWMroom+ ; • rw 1 1 / ►`,� I i � � �1S1i ° a� i 1 / 1 1 / 1 i 1 I 1 1 I N I i f, N 1 I .J GWMroom+ ; • rw EDINA HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT NEW HOME REQUIREMENTS & PROCESS A Certificate of Appropriateness ( "COA ") is required prior to granting a permit for demolition, moving a.building and new construction within the Edina Country ;Club Historic District. The following summary is intended to illuminateAhe COA process and to reflect the minimum documentation'required from applicants. Each case is specific;, the Heritage Preservation HPB ( ".HPB ") may require further information and documentation from the applicant in addition to those items listed below prior to approval of a COA. Additional information regarding the COA application and review process may be obtained from Planning Department staff and the City website. Applicants should expect to work closely with the Associate Planner, specializing in heritage preservation matters throughout the. COA process. REQUIREMENTS Application: Applications are submitted to the Planning Department. Offices are open Monday through Friday, 8 AM to 4:30 PM. The deadline for submissions is a minimum of three weeks prior to the HPB monthly meeting considering the application. The application will be placed on the HPB agenda for formal review and public comment at its regular monthly meeting. (The regular meeting of the HPB is on the 2nd Tuesday of the month at 7:00 p.m. Meeting- dates and application deadlines can be obtained from the Planning Department.) The City will send notices to neighboring property owners and other appropriate parties; as determined by the City. Detailed Application Requirements: All of the following items must be included with this application. An incomplete application will not be accepted. Application fee (non - refundable) Make check payable to "City of Edina" 1,200.00 - Non - heritage resource properties 600.00 - Heritage Resource properties. (If not redesignated, process ends.) 600.00- If redesignated to NON - heritage resource, process continues., Two (2) large scaleable copies ' /a" = 1'; one (1) electronic copy, and one (1) 11X17 copy of the following drawings or plans: 1. Registered survey showing existing and proposed structures, lot lines, existing and proposed grade, pertinent dimensions, and lot coverage. 22 Aerial photograph of the site (minimum 1:32 scale) or scaled drawing, with the location of all existing buildings, structures and other improvements, driveways, parking areas, sidewalks, landscape features and other defining physical features of the subject property and any neighboring structures within 50 feet of the property, lines clearly identified. 3. Landscape plan and schedule in accordance with Subsection 850.10. 7 � 4. Elevation drawings of all sides of the new buildings or additions and enlargements to existing buildings including a description of existing and proposed exterior building materials. 5.. Exterior scale front facade elevation of the proposed work and the immediately adjacent neighboring homes, accurately depicting the grade, roof and eave lines of neighboring structures in relation to the grade, roof and eave lines of the proposed work, driveway locations and the distances between the structures. Digital photographs of the existing structures on the property and neighboring properties, including: 1.— Front or main facade, as viewed from the public right of way. 2� Adjacent neighboring structures, photographed in such a way that shows the relationship of these structures to the structure in question, as viewed from the public right of way. 33 Adjacent neighboring structures, as viewed from the rear yard of the subject property. Streetscape photographs depicting the existing home and the other properties on both sides of the street on the same block (for context). (These need not be in 8 "x 10" format.) Building material sample board that shows the type of building materials that will be used on the building exterior, including the selection of colors. A narrative summarizing how the proposed home meets the requirements of the Country Club District Plan of Treatment. Design Review Guidelines: The HPB's review of the COA application will be based on the Design Review Guidelines detailed in the Plan of Treatment for the District, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, the Comprehensive Heritage Preservation Plan, and the heritage landmark preservation study of the District. The general aim of the guidelines for new construction is to encourage visual compatibility of the project with the historic architectural significance and visual character of the district. PROCESS Heritage Preservation Resources: Any building, site, structure or object that has been so designated by the Heritage Preservation Board on the basis of its historic associations or historic architectural qualities which add to the significance of the District as a whole. In addition, Any home constructed in the Country Club District from 1924 to 1944 is identified in the Plan of Treatment as Heritage Preservation Resources. An updated inventory of heritage preservation resources in the Country Club District is maintained by the Planning Department. No Certificate of Appropriateness will be approved for the demolition, in whole or in part, of any heritage preservation resource in the District unless the applicant can show that the subject property a) is not a heritage preservation resource, OR b) no longer contributes to the historical significance of the District because its historic integrity has been compromised by deterioration, damage or by inappropriate additions or alterations. 2 Prior to any review of a COA application for demolition or removal of a Heritage Preservation Resource, the HPB will accept evidence and documentation supporting an applicant's claim that a property is not a Heritage Preservation Resource at a regular monthly meeting; the applicant will be charged a $600 fee., If the HPB determines the property is not a Heritage Preservation Resource, the applicant may then move forward with an application for a COA. . COA Application Review? Meetings: Because of the significant potential impact new construction can have on the historic'character of the District, and to allow adequate time for public comment and review of the initial submitted plan and any subsequent revisions, a COA application.1or demolition; -removal and new home construction in the District requires at least two mandatory public meetings, held during the HPB's regular monthly meeting times at least one month apart. (This does not include the meeting required to redesignate a heritage resource property to non - heritage resource.) First COA Review Meeting: The HPB will consider a) plans and supporting materials presented by the applicant, b) staff report and recommendation, c) public comment. The HPB. may request additional information from the applicant and staff at the second meeting, and will clearly identify any concerns or conditions that must be met prior to the second public meeting or final approval. During the meeting, the applicant or an appointed representative of the applicant will be Asked to summarize the project, present any samples or other materials, and answer questions. Any representative of the applicant should be qualified to answer questions or the application may be delayed. The applications for demolition and new construction are reviewed by the HPB simultaneously. In some complicated cases, the HPB may decide that a site visit is required to fully consider the proposal. Site visits are made outside of the normal meeting time, at a time determined during the public meeting. Second COA Review Meeting: If it finds the application meets the requirements and review standards, the HPB may grant approval of the COA at this meeting. All plans must be complete and in final form, including dimensions and selected building materials. Once the application has been reviewed and questions have been answered,. a vote will be taken. All motions and business of the HPB--are carried by majority vote. The following actions may be taken: • Approved as presented; grant the COA. • Approved with modifications and/or conditions. • Continuation or tabling of an application. In cases where insufficient information is provided or if the applicant and the HPB agree to continue the case, the application process may be continued to a future named date; if both parties do not agree to the continuance, then the HPB. must act by approving or denying the proposal. • Denial of the application. Appeals: Any party aggrieved by a decision of the HPB may appeal by filing a written appeal with the City Clerk no later than ten days after the decision of the HPB. If no appeal is filed, the right of appeal shall be deemed waived and the decision of the HPB will be final. The City Council will hear and decide all appeals in the manner provided by City Code. 3 NOTE: Any changes to the plans approved for the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) will require a new COA application. The changes from the approved plan must be specifically listed by the builder or architect in that application. OPTIONAL MEETING: Sketch Plan Review: Prior to filing a complete application (no application fee is required), an applicant may request to meet with the HPB for an informal exchange for the HPB to review the basic concept of a proposed project and to offer suggestions to the applicant which might be of assistance in resolving problems or meeting requirements during final consideration. In this manner, the HPB may provide preliminary, non - binding guidance on the suitability of the project with a minimum burden of expense on the applicant. Such consultation shall bind neither the applicant nor the HPB, and statements made by HPB members shall not form a basis for invalidating any subsequent action taken. Materials presented for this discussion should include site plans, drawings, photographs or other sufficient information to allow for a meaningful understanding of the intended conceptual design. Sketch Plan Review does not require formal notice to neighboring properties, but must take place only at regular (formal) meetings of the HPB and is subject to available time on the agenda. 4 J• EDINA'S HISTORIC COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT PLAN OF TREATMENT PLANNING OBJECTIVE The primary objective of the Country Club Heritage Landmark District is preservation of the existing historic house facades and streetscapes. Certificates of Appropriateness from the Heritage Preservation Board will be required for demolition, moving buildings, and new construction within the district. In fulfillment of this responsibility, the City has adopted the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties as the basis for the Board's design review decisions. The preferred treatment for heritage preservation resources in the Country Club District is rehabilitation, which is defined as the act or process of making possible a compatible use for a property through repair, alterations, and additions while preserving those portions or features which convey its historical, cultural, or architectural values. SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS The Secretary of the Interior's standards for rehabilitation are neither technical nor prescriptive, but are intended to promote responsible preservation practices. They are regulatory only with respect to Certificates of Appropriateness for demolition and new construction; for work that is not subject to design review, they are advisory. The standards for rehabilitation are: a) A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships. b) The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. c) Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. d) Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. e) Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. f) Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new s feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. g) Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. h) Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. i) New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. j) New additions and adjacent new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment will be unimpaired. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A Certificate of Appropriateness will be required before any City permit is issued for the demolition and new construction of any principal dwelling or detached garage within the district boundaries. Definitions: Demolition - For purposes of design review and compliance with City Code §850.20 subd. 10, demolition shall mean the physical alteration of a building that requires a city permit and where: (a) 50% or more of the surface area of all exterior walls, in the aggregate, are removed; or (b) 50% or more of the principal roof structure is removed, changing its shape, pitch, or height; or (c) A front porch, side porch, vestibule, dormer, chimney, attached garage, or porte - cochere is removed or destroyed. This definition does not include removal of existing siding, roofing, trim, fascia, soffit, eave, moldings, windows, and doors. Heritage Preservation Resource or Historic Building — Any building, site, structure, or object that has been so designated by the Heritage Preservation Board on the basis of its historic associations or historic architectural qualities which add to the significance of the district as a whole. Heritage preservation resources may lack individual distinction but must possess historic significance Fa { and integrity of those features necessary to convey their heritage preservation value. An updated inventory of heritage preservation resources in the Country Club District is maintained by the City Planner. Heritage preservation resources include those homes built from 1924 — 1944, the period , when the .developer enforced rigid architectural standards on new home .construction through restrictive covenants. I No Certificate of Appropriateness will be. approved for the demolition, in whole or in part, of any heritage preservation resource in the distr ict unless; the applicarit- can'show that the subject. property, is not a heritage preservation resource, or, no longer contributes to the historical significance of the district because its historic integrity has been compromised' by deterioration, damage, or by: inappropriate additions'or alterations. • Except in extraordinary circumstances involving threats to public health or safety, no Certificate of Appropriateness will be issued for the demolition of an existing heritage preservation resource in the district without an approved design plan for new construction. DESIGN REVIEW GUIDELINES New home construction will be limited to existing residential lots and their design will be compatible with the original (1924 -1944) Country Club District deed restrictions relating to architecture. The following guidelines generally reflect the principles of the deed restrictions and will be applied by the Heritage Preservation Board to design review of plans for new houses: • Size, Scale & Massing - New homes should .be compatible in size, scale, massing, orientation, setback, color, and texture with historic buildings in the district constructed prior to 1945. Facades should be architecturally similar to existing historic homes and visually relate to the historic facades of_ nearby homes; radically contrasting facade designs will not. be allowed. Entrances, porches, and other projections should relate to the -pattern of existing adjacent historic homes, and respect the rhythm and ,continuity of similar features along the street: ;Roof Tdrms should be consistent with typical roof forms of existing ' historic homes in terms of pitch, orientation,: and complexity. New homes should be 'constructed to a height compatible with' existing adjacent historic homes, and the maximum height of new construction should be within 10% of the average height of. existing homes on adjacent lots, or.the average of the block measured from the. original surface grade to the highest part of the roof. • Exterior Finishes - Traditional materials and exterior finishes (horizontal lap. siding, stucco, brick, false half - timbering, wood shakes, stone) are recommended for use on facades which are visible from the street. The use of non - traditional materials (such as Hardi -Plank siding and steel roofing) should be considered on a case -by -case basis; imitative wood or masonry finishes should duplicate the size, shape, color, and texture of materials historically used in the District. Aluminum and vinyl siding are not appropriate for street facades. • Accessory Mechanical Equipment - Mechanical equipment, solar panels, air conditioners, satellite dishes, and antennae should be concealed whenever possible or placed in an inconspicuous location so as not to intrude or detract from historic facades and streetscapes. • Decks & Accessory Structures - Contemporary designs are acceptable for decks and accessory structures so long as they are not visible from the street. • Landscaping Elements - Landscaping such as retaining walls, planters, fences, planting beds, and walkways, should be visually compatible with the historic character of the district in size, scale, material, texture, and color. Retaining walls should follow the grade of the lot and blend with the historic streetscape. • Impervious Surfaces - Construction of large areas of impervious surface for driveways, patios, and off -street parking should be discouraged in favor of permeable pavement systems and other "green" alternatives to solid concrete, brick, or bituminous paving. • Building Code Requirements - Building code requirements should be complied with in such a manner that the architectural character of the new home is compatible with the historic character of the neighborhood. • Year Built Identification - New homes should be clearly identified as such by means of a plaque or inscription (to be placed on an exterior surface) bearing the year of construction. GARAGES Modernistic designs for new detached garages will be discouraged. New detached garages should match the architectural style of the house on the same lot as well as the historic character of the neighborhood. The following guidelines will be applied to design review of plans for new garages: The new garage should be subordinate to the house. The preferred placement is at the rear of the lot or set back from the front of the house to minimize the visual impact on adjacent homes and streetscapes. Front facing attached garages are discouraged. No new detached garage should be taller, longer, or wider than the house on the same lot. The roofline should have a maximum height within 10% of the average height of existing detached garages on adjacent lots, or the average of the block. • Undecorated exterior walls longer than 16 feet should be avoided on elevations visible from the street or adjacent properties. :! • New garages should be clearly identified as such by means of a plaque or inscription (to be placed on an exterior surface) bearing the year of construction. DRIVEWAYS • Driveways should be compatible in width and material with historic driveways in the district and should be designed in such a manner that they, do not radically change, obscure, or destroy the historic character= defining spatial organization and landscape features of residential lots, yards, and streetscapes. New curb -cuts should be avoided whenever possible. CITY RESPONSIBILITIES • Thel City will develop and implement plans for the preservation, maintenance, and replacement of all public infrastructure within the district, including streets, trees, sidewalks, street lighting, signs, parks, and open space areas that give the neighborhood its distinguishing character. • The distinguishing original qualities and historic character of the district will not be damaged or destroyed as a result of any undertaking funded or assisted by the City. The removal or alteration of any historic building or landscape feature should be avoided whenever possible. VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE • The City, will promote .voluntary compliance with historic preservation standards for the rehabilitation of individual historic properties by encouraging repairs, additions, or alterations which make possible an efficient contemporary use of older homes in the district while preserving those features that are historically and architecturally significant. • Although not ordinarily subject to Certificates of Appropriateness, small additions or minor alterations should be done in such a manner that they do not destroy historically significant architectural features. New additions should. be differentiated from historic architecture and designed to be compatible with the, size, scale, color, material, and character of the property. NATURAL DISASTERS • When historic properties are impacted by man-made or natural disasters, every reasonable effort will be made to avoid total loss. If demolition must occur, historic buildings should be recorded so that a body of information about them (photographs, drawings, and written data) will be preserved for the benefit of the public. 5 DISTRICT RE- SURVEY • The City will arrange for a re -survey of the Edina Country Club District every ten years to document changes in the appearance and historic integrity of historic properties; to revise the list of heritage preservation resources and non - heritage preservation resources present within the district boundaries; and to revise the district plan of treatment as needed. The next re -survey will take place circa 2017. Resolution No. 2008 -41 Adopted: 4 -15 -2008 0 COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS BY STREET ARDEN AVENUE 4505 H -10 -1 Decertify Heritage Resource- Denied 4508 H -04 -1 New Detached Garage 4517 H -04 -4 'New Detached Garage 4519 H -10 -2 New Detached Garage & Front Entry Portico 4523 H -05-7 Move Detached Garage 4528 H -09 -3 New Detached Garage 4609 H -07 -3 New Detached Garage 4611 H -09 -7 New Detached Garage .& Front Entry Portico 4624 H -04 -2 New Detached Garage 4907 H -11 -8 New Front Entry Canopy 4910 H -03 -7 New Detached Garage' 4912 H -07 -4 New Detached Garage BRUCE AVENUE 4506 H -03 -8 New Detached Garage 4511 H -11 -9 New Detached Garage /Ad i iond 4524 H -12 -3 Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New 4602 H -09 -2 Demolish House (non - heritage resource) — Build New 4604 H -05 -1 New Detached Garage 4608 H -66 -2 Demolish House (non - .heritage resource) — Build New 4608 H -06 -8 Revisions to Plan approved with H -06 =2 4609 H -09 -4 New Front Entry Portico 4623 H -10 -3 New Detached Garage 4,626 H -12 -4 Demolish House (non- heritage resource) — Build New, 4626. H -07 -9 New Detached Garage 4629 H -08 -2 New Detached Garage 4903 H -04 -11 New Detached Garage CASCO.AVENUE w 4501 H -10 -4 Remove Detached, Garage/New Attached. - corner lot . 4512 H -08 -8 New Detached Garage /Front Facade 4512 H -10 -5 New Detached Garage /Front Portico — change from H -08 -8 4523 H -07 -6 New Detached Garage 4526 H -06 -6 New Detached Garage 4527 H -06 -1 New Detached Garage ,4600 H -11 -5 Change to Street Facade 4615 H -05 -4 New Detached Garage 4622 H =07 -5 .. New Detached Garage 4623 H -11 -1 New Detached Garage /Addition 4625 H -09 -8 New Detached Garage ,4628 H -0141 New Detached Garage 4631 H -07 -2 New Detached Garage July 2012 Page 1 4634 H -09 -1 New Detached Garage i DREXEL AVENUE H -08 -11 4507 H -06 -4 Demolish Detached Garage — Build New 4512 H -06 -3 Demolish Detached Garage — Construct Attached Garage 4517 H -08 -13 New Detached Garage 4526 H -04 -7 New Detached Garage 4601 H -05 -8 Demolish House — Build New — corner lot 4619 H -04 -10 New Detached Garage 4620 H -04 -8 Demolish Detached Garage — Construct Attached Garage 4622 H -06 -5 Demolish House — Build New 4622 H -08 -1 Change in COA #H -06 -5 4622 H -08 -3 New Construction 4623 H -08 -12 New Detached Garage 4624 H -06 -7 New Detached Garage 4625 H -03 -4 New Detached Garage 4633 H -08 -7 New Detached garage WOODDALE AVENUE 4501 H -03 -3 Demolish Detached Garage - Construct Attached Garage -VOID 4501 H -03 -6 Demolish House — Build New — corner lot 4508 H -07 -7 New Detached Garage 4512 H -07 -8 New Detached Garage 4600 H -09 -5 New Detached Garage — corner lot 4605 H -07 -1 New Detached Garage 4607 H -11 -6 Move Detached Garage /Change to Street Facing Fagade 4615 H -08 -14 Demolish Home /Garage to Build New 4615 H -09 -6 Change side to James Hardie Artisan Lap 4625 H -03 -5 Demolish Detached Garage — Construct Attached Garage EDINA BOULEVARD 4511 H -08 -11 New Detached Garage -VOID 4515 H -03 -2 New Detached Garage 4600 H -08 -4 New Detached Garage — corner lot 4621 H -11 -7 Change to Street Facing Fagade — Variance Required MOORLAND AVENUE 4513 H -08 -5 New Detached Garage 4602 H -04 -3 New Detached Garage 4603 H -05 -3 New Detached Garage 4607 H -05 -2 New Detached Garage 4619 H -03 -1 Demolish House — Build New 4620 H -12 -2 New Detached Garage /Addition July 2012 Page 2 s i BROWNDALE AVENUE 11 4405 H -03 -9 New Detached Garage — corner lot ,4603 H -12 -1 New Front Entry Can p 4627 H -08 -10 Demo. Hot Tub House EDGEBROOK PLACE - None SUNNYSIDE ROAD 8 4600 H -04 -06 New Detached Garage. 4805 H -11 -4 Change to Street Faca p 4901 H -10 -6 Demolish House (coin- heritage resource) — Build New COUNTRY CLUB ROAD 87 4408 H -10 -7 Demolish House (non heritage resource) — Build New RIGHT OF WAY — CITY PROJECTS *HWY 100 — WESTERN BOUNDARY H -04 -09 Sound Wall From Creek North to W. 44th St. *RECONSTRUCTION OF DISTRICT SEWER, WATER AND STREETS H -05 -6 Conceptual Plan Approved *RECONSTRUCTION OF DISTRICT SEWER, WATER & STREETS H -07 -10 Traffic calming improvements *RECONSTRUCTION STREETS & CROSSWALKS H -0$ -6 Traffic Calming deleted — crosswalk changes only Total by year: 2003 9 2004 11 2005 8 2006 8 2007 10 2008 14 2009 8 2010 7 2011 7 2012 5 87 Needs final inspection July 2012 Page 3 HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL SURVEY OF THE COUNTRY'CLUB DISTRICT L. u City of Edina and the Edina Heritage Preservation Board By Heritage Preservation Associates, Inc. November 7, 1980 TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . MAP OF COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT . . . . . . SURVEY METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT ARCHITECTURE . NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION . . APPENDIX A. Dates of Construction APPENDIX B. Survey Form . APPENDIX C. Selected Bibliography PAGE 1 2 3 6 17 39 40 41 0 Heritage - Preservation Associates, Inc. 1024 Goodrich Avenue / Saint Paul. Minnesota 55105 (612) 291 -7431 November 7, 1980 Mayor James Van Valkenburg City of Edina Edina City Hall 4801 West Fiftieth Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Van Valkenburg and Heritage Preservation Board Members: Edina Heritage Preservation Board City of Edina Edina City Hall 4801 West Fiftieth Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 I am pleased to present the results of the historical and arch- itectural survey of the Country Club District to you in this report and in the attachments. The report includes a description of the survey methodology em- ployed; an indepth discussion of the architecture in the district; a district nomination to the National Register of Historic Places; and a bibliography of sources that were studied. Accompanying this report is a district nomination to the National Register, for submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer, including over eighty photographs, a sketch map, and a United States Geological Survey map; color slides of a selection of buildings and streetscapes in the district; completed survey forms for each building in the district; and photo copies of interes- ting articles and pamphlets relating to the history and arch- itecture of the district. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to con- tact me. Sincerely,.. �L Lynne VanBrocklin Spaeth President 1 N 1 P b 3 0 2 i z G Y/L L AGE OF I/ T-= • � 1 N LEGEND A - EDINA MORN /NOS /DE SCHOOL B • TRACT OFFICE C • SECOND VOTING PRECINCT D • GOLF CLUB E • GRANGE .HALL PARK COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT «ASE Or Me.•N/N49s/oE Mnoww J1ier/or iw,AwwY •ter,o/v Yi ,! SAO � Orl rR /Cr S ti, n o..■Cw .. .. Sr j'j'• M P I rr • M •RT rN � r • � s'M a • • f rI • ~ •I J r r I J I• • N . / ,N • II I • I , A f , + • I •• II Jr • • � + E • 11 I► • r J I f N • 11 ! I , • u N ` + > •• I � N • � • v • f 1i N � + y + 1• M ` J. + � N • � f 11 M • r A •• r M A n + , N ► N ! r M j N A 1I n A + N i •� I • I B ��G sr ' •I , • N J J• • • A I • ■ If ! N ' ■ A J • • N • r • • V N J A V • � u • N f •• • r i • b � • t J r• � r • � r r H I O J r • f• t • ~ O k w 4 r • �� • NUMBER 172 Ar sr d V V • 'A •r r � .. O ti I� q • N A • n N { ~ • N n n [� f+ i ~ e • / •I r I. •• N N N N �• „ I• ,I A !I r 1+ 'k- �- •- e. 491'"1 •' fI r r r B /6 r � Il • ,+ n N • ! J• M Arw.N.S Y.4 • r• • ° ~ ~ AMA ■r M NAtt sC rN _.. _ _. Jr _. _ s. rN .90 50'w 6 sfbPP/NG O /S7 y V r I /VCE R/Cr iV r � -3- The survey of the Country Club District, conducted from .' July through October, 1980, was undertaken in five phases: 1) windshield survey, 2) pre -field survey preparation and general historic research, 3) intensive field survey and photography, 4) site - specific historic research and 5) anal- ysis and preparation of a district nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. The windshield survey was conducted to familiarize the sur- yeyor with the geography and architecture of the district by walking each street and noting general characteristics, such as condition of buildings, architectural styles, size of buildings, orientation of buildings on lots, and distinctive natural, landscape and manmade features. Pre -field survey preparation and historic research included a literature and document search at the following locations: Edina City Hall; Edina Historical Society; Edina Public Library; Hennepin County Government Center; Hennepin County Historical Society; Minneapolis Public Library; Minnesota Historical Society; Architecture Library, University of Minnesota; Wilson and Walter libraries, University of Minne- sota; Northwest Architectural Archives; St. Paul Public Library; and Thorpe Brothers Realty Company. After checking the available sources at each location, it was determined that the sources dealing generally with the history of Edina and the Country Club District and sources relating to- historic revival architectural styles and the development of country club districts and contemporary suburbs throughout the United States should be investigated prior to conducting the field survey. This research, and the subsequent preparation of a general outline of the history and architecture of the district, provided the surveyor with a context and intelligent perspective from which to determine the historical and arch- itectural significance of the district. Those sources that were determined to contain more specific information, such as the Country Club Crier, the Country Club Directory, the Register of Titles, Hennepin County Government Center, and the Northwest Architectural Archives, were noted and were inves- tigated during phase four -- site - specific historic research. The field survey of the district was conducted during a three - week period. Prior to conducting the field survey, a letter explaining the survey was sent to each property owner within the district. The following information was noted for each building on an individual survey form: Address; and physical description, including style, definitive style characteristics, number of stories, roof shape and roofing materials, building materials and predominant colors, location of additions and /or alterations, size and spacing of windows and doors, location =4- " of garage and /or outbuildings,- approximate setback from sidewalks, scale in relationship to adjacent buildings, condition, and distinctive landscape features. Black and white 35mm photographs were taken of each building and street within the district. Three by five photographs of individual buildings were affixed to the back of the appropriate survey form. In addition, 35 mm color slides were taken of each street in the district and of a representative sampling of building conditions and architectural styles found in the dis- trict. The field survey was followed by in -depth research of liter- ature, documents and records that were determined during phase one to yield site - specific historic information, such as dates of construction, past and present ownership, names of arch- itects and /or builders,and alterations and /or additions to buildings.' The Assessor's files at the Edina City Hall were checked and yielded the following information for each build- ing: property identification number; legal description; approximate date of construction (noted for approximately 80% of the buildings -- dates do not appear to be reliable); builder and /or architect (noted for approximately 103 of the buildings); current owner; previous owners (not noted consist- ently); and the dates of additions and /or alterations (do not appear to have been noted consistently); An examination of the C_ountrv'Club Crier (issued monthly from 1930 to 1941) and the Country Club Directory and Metropolitan Edina Directory (referred to for the years 1930 to 1940), the majority of which are located at the Edina Historical Society, provided information that aided in the determination of names of builders and /or architects, ownership and occupations of owners, and dates of construction. In addition, the Country Club Crier provided a wealth of general historic information about the district and its residents. Since there appeared to be a great deal of discrepancy between the dates of construction noted in the Assessor's files and in the Country Club Crier, all dates of construction for buildings determined to be con- structed between 1924 and 1934 were checked in the Register of Titles indices at the Hennepin County Government Center. This research not only revealed dates of construction, but also yielded for buildings constructed after 1930, the names of builders and property owners. Other sources that were .researched for site - specific historic information included files, newspapers and photographs at the Edina Historical Society, the Minneapolis Public Library,.the Minnesota His- torical Society, and the Hennepin County Historical Society. The Fire Insurance Maps, published by the Sanborn Map Company, located at the Hennepin County Historical Society by Jeff Hess, were invaluable for substantiating dates of construction. s An.analysis of the research and.field survey data statistical breakdowns were tabulated for dates of architectural styles, and the names of architects In addition, each building within the district was as pivotal, complementary or intrusive. M'E was made.and construction, and /or builders. categorized A narrative description.of the district. (see 47, National Reg- ister form) was prepared and included the total number of buildings in the district; a general. description of the natural and manmade elements of the.district; general description of types, styles, and periods of architecture represented in the district ; general physical relationships' of buildings. to each other and to the environment; general description of the dis- trict during.the period when it achieved significance; general condition of buildings; qualities.that make the district distinct from its surroundings; and a list of all pivotal, complementary, and intrusive buildings. A narrative discussion of the historical and architectural significance of the district (see #8, National Register form) was prepared and included a summary of the importance of the district as it relates to a "broad historical, architectural and cultural context;" the origins and historical development of the district; the architectural styles represented in the district; the sense of historic and architectural cohesivenes represented in the district; and the historic development of the district. Several sketch maps were prepared to accompany the National Register nomination. In addition, a United States Geological Survey map, required by the National Register, was prepared with the following information: name of the district; boundaries enclosed in a four -sided figure; north,arrow'; and Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) references and computations. -6- Categorizing the 554 buildings in the Country Club District into architectural styles was difficult...This task was hampered by a dearth of recent analytical literature deal- ing with historic revival styles. Although there are num- erous publications of the 1920s and 30s that present "examples of typical historic architectural styles for modern homes," with accompanying style descriptions, there is little agree- ment to be found among the sources. Agreement does exist in the literature dealing with Pueblo, Mediterranean (Spanish Colonial Revival), English Tudor, English Cottage, Norman, and French Provincial architectural styles. The greatest. disagreement exists in the literature dealing with Colonial and Georgian styles. The task was further hampered because many of the buildings within the district represent variations or modifications of "pure" historic revival styles or they exhibit design characteristics of several styles. A thorough examination of all available literature, listed in the bibliography, and with the aid of Bill Scott's exten- sive study of the district's architecture, it was possible to categorize the buildings into twenty architectural styles. 97% of the buildings represent historic revival styles;.the most popular designs are English Cottage (32%), American Colonial Revival (29 %), and Mediterranean (12 %). Following is a discussion of the most popular architectural styles in the district. ENGLISH COTTAGE The old cottage in England, usually a little farmhouse, low lying, and with a background of trees, a well kept garden and flag walks, is the prototype of our English Cottage (Julius Gregory, page 147.) In England the variety of English Cottage styles was popularized by the work of such British architects as Luytens, Voysey, Baillie -Scott and Dawber (Frank Forster, page 141)• The tremendous variety in the types of English cottages is due to the fact that England was divided into small counties and each county seemed to have its own tra- ditions and of course its own local materials (Leland Hubbell Lyon, page 33 ). The English Cottage has been characterized. as a "confused jumble of gables, dormers, roofs and chimneys, covered with vegetation and consisting of haphazard arrange- ment of rooms pitchforked together; all described as "pic- turesque"'(Russell Whithead, page 33). 180 houses in the district, constructed between 1924 and 1940, exhibit the following variety of design features characteristic of the English Cottage style: -- Usually two stories in height, occasionally one -and- three- quarters stories.. -,7_ It -- Use of stone, brick or stucco as the principal construc- tion material. -- Steep triangular gables projecting above a gable or hip roof, and usually not continuous with the plane of the wall. Often one side of the gable "swoops" to a main entrance or garden gate. -- Use of decorative brick or stone around semicircular door and garden gate openings, on the foundation and front steps. -- Impressive chimneys, usually decorated with brick or stone. Frequently, the chimney is placed on the front facade. COLONIAL REVIVAL Colonial Revival styles, including American Colonial Revival, New England Colonial Revival, Cape Cod Colonial Revival, Southern Colonial Revival, and Georgian Revival, were enor- mously popular in the design of residences after the First World War to the present. 39% of the buildings in the district were designed in one or more Colonial Revival styles. . The American Colonial Revival style house in the district is typified by: -- Usually two stories in height, pccasionally two -and- one -half stories. - Second stories overhang the first story, usually with drops or pendants. -- Facades are strictly symmetrical. -- Roofs are gabled and usually have a steep pitch. -- Chimneys are usually placed at one end of the gable. -- The principal building material is narrow horizontal siding. F -- Windows are double hung and usually have louvered shutters. The New England Colonial Revival style, which was popular in the design of houses in the district after 1930, is characterized by: -- Usually two - and - one -half stories, occasionally two stories. -- The principal building material is brick, occasionally -8- narrow"hori.zontal wood siding. -- Gable roof, often with dormers. -- Strictly symmetrical facades. -- Double hung windows with.shutters. -- Side wing or wings. =- Cornices often have dentils. -- Chimneys are placed at both ends ", occasionally at one gable end. -- Principal door is centrally located and has sidelights. The Cape Cod Colonial was the-earliest type of house built by American Colonists that is still popular today. Six houses in the district exhibit the,f ollowing charac- teristics of the earlier Cape Cod Colonial: -- Usually one - and -one -half stories in height. -- Roofs are gabled, with the chimney centrally located on the ridge. -- The principal door is centrally. located, usually simple in design. -- The principal building material is narrow horizontal.. wood siding, occasionally. wood shakes. -- Windows are double hung' and..have , shutters . The.Southern Colonial: style, the ;best known example of which is Mount Vernon, was.reintroduced, into American res- idential architecture after.the,First World War. Southern Colonial Revival houses contain.the same features as the. New England Revival style; but are7 "characterized by the addition of a'colonnade extending across the front of the house. The district has'one example of'this 'style, located at 4616 Moorland Avenue. The architects of the Georgian.Revival` style found inspir- ation for their designs from the Adam or Federal (1820- 1850) style and from the Georgian Colonial (1800) style. There are no distinguishing features of this style that will help to distinguish it from its historical predecessors. In the Country Club District, six houses represent the following American Georgian - Revival features: -- Usually two stories in height. -- Facades are strictly symmetrical. -- Roofs are usually hip with dormers. -- Eaves are detailed as classical cornices, usually with dentils. -- Chimneys are placed to contribute to overall symmetry- -- There is usually a central bay, occasionally with a portico. -- Windows are usually rectangular and double hung, often with louvered shutters. -- Doors are centrally located and usually have classical trim and a fanlight. -- Brick and occasionally narrow clapboard siding is the principal construction material. MEDITERRANEAN (SPANISH COLONIAL REVIVAL) The Spanish Colonial style originally.evolved to accommodate a hot, dry climate. Windows were small and walls were white to keep out the sun's rays. In the 1920s and 30s, southern California, with a climate similar to that of the Mediterranean, created a residential architecture that featured white stucco walls, flat or low hipped roofs of red clay tile, small wood or wrought iron balconies or balconets, twisted Chur- rigueresque columns, heavy wooden shutters, and ornate wooden doors (Scott and Hess, page 27). The design of Spanish Colonial Revival and Mission Revival houses throughout the United States in the 1920s was popularized by such California architects as Irving Gill, Wallace Neff and Bern- ard Maybeck. 66 houses and the Wooddale School were con- structed in the District between 1924 and the mid -1930s in- corporating the following Mediterranean design characteristics: -- Two stories in height. -- White or cream colored stucco walls, usually smooth. -- Roofs are hipped with a slight pitch, and usually are composed of barrel- shaped clay tile. -- Wrought iron grilles are extensively used as decoration -- window boxes, mock balconets, and railings. -10- -- Use of semicircular openings, semicircular mock arcades, - and semicircular recessed panels. y ENGLISH TUDOR (TUDOR REVIVAL) This revival style, sometimes referred to as Jacobethan (the eminent architectural historian Henry- Russell Hitchcock first coined the term) was popular in residential architecture in the United States from the First World War through the 1930s. The name Tudor is derived from the surname of the English royal family of Henry VII through Elizabeth. The style was prominent in England from 1485 to 1603. The stylistic details were revived in small scale buildings and became popular in Minnesota during the 1920s and 30s. Although the Country Club District does not contain any "pure" examples of the English Tudor style, numerous houses were designed with Tudor details and massing. Many of the English Cottage style houses in the district contain features of the English Tudor style. Characteristics of the style found in the district include: -- Height of two stories, occasionally two - and - one =half stories. -- Extensive use of half timbering with cement stucco or brick. -- Multiple triangular projecting gables above the roof line, but continuous with the plane of the wall. Impressive chimneys, usually dec stone, and containing projecting Doorways and occasionally window Arch," a distinctive, very wide, arch. Oriel windows, occasionally with panes. Sharply pitched roofs. -- -- Projecting bays. NORMAN Drated with brick and chimney pots. openings with the "Tudor almost flat, but pointed tracery or diamond shaped The Norman imprint.upon architecture made itself felt in England after the Norman conquest, and in the more sincere adaptations of the English country house in America certain Norman traits are discernible, not only in general design but in details as well (Frank J. Forster, page 139). In the strictly Norman style houses the roof pitch is generally steeper than in the English.Tudor, there are smaller over- hanging cornices; the placing of windows and doors in Norman -11- architecture, has a character quite its own. The Norman is an ._.archtecture of towers, roof masses and picturesque compositions; history.and feudalism are suggested in its whole spirit, which is strongly expressive of romance (Frank J. Forster, page 1,39). Another distinctive detail of Norman buildings is the patterned treatment of brickwork, expressed in interesting designs of friezes, quoins, belt and band courses -- with frequently an entire wall surface laid up in squares or diaper patterns. Twenty five houses in the district represent the Norman style; numerous English Cottage and English Tudor houses contain Norman style fea- tures. Norman designed houses in the district generally contain the following design characteristics: - -- Use of a combination of exterior building materials, 4 including stone, brick and stucco. -- Usually two stories in height, occasionally two -and- one -half stories. -- Multiple triangular gables project above the roof. -- Roofs are steeply pitched, and often are a combination hip /gable. -- Impressive chimneys with decorative brick or stone, and capped with chimney pots. -- Extensive use of half timbering with stucco or brick. -- Main entrance is located in a round tower capped with a conical roof. -- Extensive use of patterned brick or decorative stone. FRENCH PROVINCIAL The French Provincial style is based on those houses of 17th and 18th century rural France that were more substan- tial than peasant's cottages, but less imposing than cha- teaux (Setter, Leach and Lindstrom and Jeff Hess, page 26). The district contains eleven examples of the French Provincial style. These houses contain.the following characteristics of the style: -- Usually two stories in height. -- Deep hip roofs. -- Segmentally arched windows, dormers and doors. -- Vertically symmetrical placement of windows, dormers and doors, often decorated with shutters. -12- -- Brick or stucco is the predominant construction material. -- Quoins often appear at cbtners­and around door openings. ITALIAN RENAISSANCE REVIVAL Among the foreign historic revival styles which have served as precedents for American residential architecture, the Italian Renaissance is one frequently used (Russell White- head, page 37). Italy, rich in ancient Roman monuments,was naturally the pioneer in the Renaissance movement which began in Florence in the fifteenth century. The architectural character of the Florentine palaces and villas consisted in concentrating on pronounced features, with a sparing use of detail, producing boldness and simplicity of style (Russell Whitehead, page 371. The reintroduction of the Italian Renaissance to America is largely credited to the firm of McKim, Mead and White (M.L. Ferro, page 32). The style evolved throughout the first two decades of the twentieth century and became popular in public and residential ar- chitecture throughout the United States in the 1920s and 30s. Seventeen houses in the district, constructed between 1924 and 1927, exhibit the following Italian Renaissance Revival style characteristics: -- Height of two stories. -- Rectangular or square plan. -- Vertically symmetrical door and window openings. -- Smooth stucco walls. -- Low hip roofs, often composed of barrel shape tiles. -- Use of semicircular arches, lintels and recessed panels. -- Projecting cornices. -- Second story windows are generally placed close to the cornice. -- Doorways are. centered and contain classical trim. ARCHITECTURAL STYLES American Colonial Revival: 158 American Georgian Revival.: 6 Bungalow: 1 Cape Cod Colonial Revival: 6 Contemporary: 4 Craftsman: 2 Cubiform: 1 Dutch Colonial Revival: 4 English Cottage: 180 English Georgian Revival: 3 English Tudor: 20 French Provincial: 11 Italian Renaissance Revival: Mediterranean: 67 New England Colonial Revival: Norman: 25 Prairie: 3 Pueblo: 1 Rambler: 6 Southern Colonial Revival: 1 TOTAL: 554 17 38 -13- -14- _ARCHITECTU.RAL STYLES. -BY DATE OF CONSTRUCTION Bungalow Style 1924 - 1 Colonial Revival.Styles 1924 - 9 -1925 - 16 1926 - 7 1927 - 9 1928 - 2 1929 - 3 1930 - 6 1931 5 1932 - 4 1933 - 2 1934 - 7 1935 - 15 1936 - 31 1937 - 19 1938 - 15 1939 - 4 1940 - 13 1941 - 16 1942 6 1943 - 3 1945 - 3 19,46 - 2 1947 = 1 19,48 - 2 1949 - 2 1950.- 6 1951 _ 4 19.56 - 1 1957 - 2 1966 - 1 Contemporary 1972 - 1 1973 - 1 1974 - 1 1977 - 1 -15- Craftsman Style 1925 - 1 1926 - 1 Cubiform Style 1927 - 1 English Cottage Style 1924 - 4 1925 - 29 1926 - 21 1927 - 24 1928 - 17 1929 - 17 1930 - 20 1931 - 10 1932 - 3 1933 - 3 1934 - 5 1935 - 9 1936 - 5 1937 - 5 1938 - 4 1939 - 2 1940 - 2 English.Tudor Style 1925 - 2 1926 - 2 1928 - 1 1929 - 2 1930 - 3 1931. - 3 1933 - 1 1935 - 3 1936 - 2 1937 - 1 French Provincial Style 1926 - 2 1927 - 1 1928 - 1 . 1935 - 1 1936 -- 3 1937 - 1 1938 - 1 1941 - 1 Italian Renaissance Revival: Style 1924 - 5 1925 - 4 1926 - 4 1927 - 4 Mediterranean Style 1924 - 3 1925 - 14 1926 - 10 1927 - 10 1928 - 5 1929 - 6 1930 12 1932 - 1 1934 . - 2 1935 - 2 1936 - 2 Norman Style 1924 - 1 1930.- 2 1931 - 3 1932 - 1 1934 5 1935 - 2 1936 - 6 3 197 - 2 1938 - 1 1939 - 1 1940 - 1 Prairie School Style 1924' - 2 1926 - 1 " Pueblo Style 1928 - 1 Rambler 1945 - 1 1947 - 1 1948 1 1950 - 2 1952 - 1 -16- Joyce Repya From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 10:07 AM To: Joyce Repya Subject: FW: Letter to Mayor and City Council - RE: 4524 Bruce Avenue Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 4 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 �Jr IbiunnoCrDEdinaMN.aov I www.EdinaMN.gov \/ ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families &Doing Business From: daniel and cheryl dulas jmailto:dulas001 @msn.com1 Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 10:04 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Letter to Mayor and City Council - RE: 4524 Bruce Avenue Dear Mayor Hovland, and Council Members Bennett, Brindle, Sprague, and Swenson, We are writing to express concerns about the Certificate of Appropriateness granted to the proposed new home at 4524 Bruce Avenue. We are long- standing residents of Bruce Avenue, and were involved with giving input into revising Edina's Historic Country Club District Plan of Treatment, adopted in 2008. Under the Design Review Guidelines for New Home Construction, the Plan of Treatment states: 1. Exterior Finishes — "Traditional materials and exterior finishes (horizontal lap siding, stucco, brick, false half - timbering, wood shakes, stone) are recommended for use on facades which are visible from the street." The immediately adjacent homes at 4522 and 4526, and the neighboring homes at 4520, 4526, and 4527 Bruce Avenue feature real stucco exterior finishes. Therefore, in addition to the guidelines supporting the use of real stucco, the proposed home will be more compatible to the existing historic homes on the block if real stucco exterior finishing is used as opposed to the proposed prefabricated cement faux stucco panels. 2. Size, Scale & Massing - "Entrances, porches, and other projections should relate to the pattern of existing adjacent historic homes and respect the rhythm and continuity of similar features along the street." The proposed home has a covered front porch, which measures 12 feet wide by 4.5 feet deep. There are currently no other covered porches on the 4500 block of Bruce Avenue. We reviewed the front fagade of every Tutor home (90+ homes) in the Country Club District, and found that no other historic Tutor -style home has such a large covered front porch. Furthermore, "A Field Guide to American Houses" by Virginia and Lee McAlester, used as a reference by the Heritage Preservation Board, states in the chapter on Tutor homes that, "Front - facade porches are generally either small entry porches or are absent entirely" (p. 358). Therefore, a large covered front porch is not only incompatible with the existing historic homes, but such a design detail is also incompatible with the Tutor architectural style. 3. Size, Scale & Massing — "Facades should be architecturally similar to existing historic homes and visually relate to the historic facades of nearby homes...." A few homes on Bruce Avenue have third floor /attic living spaces; however, none have a large window in the gable or on the third story of the street - facing fagade. Of the handful of other original historic Tutor homes in the neighborhood with a street- fagade window in the third story, the windows are also in a smaller scale relative to the first and second story windows. Therefore, eliminating or reducing the size of the third -story front window would make the proposed home more compatible with the other homes in the neighborhood. To ensure that the new home is compatible with the other historic homes on the block, we suggest the following: squire use of real stucco, instead of prefabricated cement faux stucco panels. - Remove the proposed covered front porch, and re- design with a smaller front entry porch, or no porch. Remove or scale -down the proposed third -story window on the street - facing facade. We are grateful to have guidelines and a process to ensure that new homes are compatible with existing historic homes, and.that the integrity of the Country Club Heritage Landmark District is preserved. Thank you for your time and consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, Daniel and Cheryl Dulas 4609 Bruce Avenue Edina, MN 55424 2 1 Joyce Repya From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 1:57 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: FW: Proposed house at 4524 Bruce Avenue Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.Rov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - -- Original Message---- - From: Amy Gustafson (mailto:eustoboys @gmail.coml Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 201211:15 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Proposed house at 4524 Bruce Avenue Dear City Hall Members, We are writing to you with concerns about the home that is proposed to be built at 4524 Bruce Avenue which is just a few houses down from our house at 4518 Bruce Avenue. Approximately 10 years ago, we decided we wanted to move to the Country Club neighborhood because of the character, age and feel of the homes. It also reminds us of a neighborhood back home in Milwaukee. We feel so blessed to walk and drive through the neighborhood daily and see the quality of these older homes. We understand that homes need and should be torn down from time to time but consider this a great opportunity for the City of Edina to have complete control over what and should be built. Since this is considered a "historical neighborhood ", it is our hope that new houses are not approved quickly and are well thought out. We have concerns about the proposed JMS house. If a stucco house is being built it should be made with REAL stucco not panels or other imitation materials. Let's not approve something that convenient or that less expensive materials. In addition, if front door porches are not common, let's not add them to our neighborhood now. Lastly, if the full size windows are not common on a third floor, let's not approve them either. We would like to think the City of Edina takes the taxpayers and current neighbors input first and not those of builders. Milwaukee (where we are from), specifically the City of Whitefish Bay, has done a wonderful job in restoring their homes and neighborhoods and never would allow improper materials to be built or homes that do not fit the look of the neighborhood. We hope Edina can live up to these standards. It is our hope Edina doesn't allow builders to take control of the new homes and current neighbors and homeowners have opinions that count. If you should have any questions about thoughts, please feel free to contact us. Rick and Amy Gustafson 4518 Bruce Avenue (952)929 -4969 Jovice Repva rom: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail jent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 1:57 PM To: Joyce Repya Subject: FW: 4524 Bruce Lynette Biunno, Receptionist e_ 952-927-88611 Fax.952- 826 -0389 4- rI IbiunnoAEdinaMN.00v I www.EdinaMN.gov �•r ';xr .::For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Donald McCormick ,[mailto:dmcICbme.coml Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 10:29 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: 4524 Bruce This note is in reference to the Monday, August 6th at7pm Edina City Council meeting to hear an appeal filed regarding the Certificate of Appropriateness for the new home proposed at 4524 Bruce Avenue by JMS Homes. We support the appeal. We live behind the proposed house on Casco Ave. It came to our attention that the new home will be using fiber cement siding rather than stucco. This is a less costly option and one that differs greatly for the current rchitecture of other Tudor style homes like ours because of the additional frame boards required. When we remodeled our garage, we also considered using this product, but the Heritage Board wouldn't approve it and required us to use regular stucco instead because of the architectural integrity standards of the historic district. I don't believe if you disapprove of a garage you can approve an entire house. There needs to be a standard that is consistent and in keeping with the historic nature. The only reason to use this product is to cut costs. 1. Also, there is a third floor window facing the street that is not common to the traditional Tudors in the neighborhood and should be reconsidered. The covered porch is uncommon and we believe may detract from the block. Thanks for your consideration, The McCormicks 4523 Casco Ave Jackie Hoogenakker From: Susan Howl Sent: Friday, August 03,'2012 10:45 AM To: Jackie Hoogenakker Subject: FW: Forward to Jennifer B at Edina CIty Hall FYI It's 10:45 AM. Yours or correspondence? Susan Howl, Executive Assistant 952- 826 -0403 1 Fax 952 - 826 10390 �yI showl0Edina1VlN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov For Living, Learning, Raising Families &Doing Business From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 6:36 AM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Forward to Jennifer B at Edina CIty Hall f' Jennifer Bennerotte Communications & Technology Services Director > Ni 952- 833 79520 1 Fax 952- 826 -0389 Jl3ennerotte(ccDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov �..,; ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.town ... working to make the healthy choice the easy choice! From: Bill Jadkowski r mailto:billjadkowskiOgmail.coml Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 8:37 PM To:(Jennifer Ben nerotte Cc: kodea.mn(ftmail.com Subject: Fwd: Forward to Jennifer B at Edina,CIty Hall Dear Jennifer, Please see the email below. Bill Jadkowski --- 71 Forwarded message'----.-- - - -- From: Kitty O'Dea <kodea.mnngmail.com> Date: Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:36 PM Subject: Forward to Jennifer B at Edina CIty Hall To: Bill Jadkowski <billiadkowskiggmail.com> Jennifer, please forward to City Council for me. Thanks To: Edina City Council 1 RE: 4524 Bruce Avenue I appealed the HPB's decision on the proposed homes at 4524 Bruce. I am in Denver this weekend and, in the event I don't make it back in time for the meeting, wanted to share my thoughts with you. I will be presenting pictures of the Country Club Tudors at the meeting. Please take a look at the pictures before the meeting by clicking on the following link: Country Club Tudors Username: HPB Password: preserveCCD The Board did not have all the information they needed to make an informed decision. The vote was close (5 to 4 for approval) and I am confident that the decision would have been different if they had more complete information. After the 1 st review meeting, it was clear to me that the some of the Board members weren't very familiar with the neighborhood or with the Tudor -style homes in particular. As a result, I photographed the 95 Tudor -style homes in the neighborhood that had the same distinguishing characteristics as the proposed home (2- story, stucco, wood timbering, gables & brick/stone accents). I was prepared to present the pictures of the Country Club Tudor homes to the HPB at the 2nd meeting. Unfortunately, we were in Council Chambers instead of the Community room (laptop) and Joyce didn't know how to run the equipment. I shared the following findings, but wasn't able to show the pictures. Here's what I learned: Porticos, Pillars & Porches >The original Country Club Tudors DID NOT have front porticos, pillars or porches. 92% still have the original entries while 8% have been modified to add porticos. These modifications occurred prior to the COA process. > None of the 95 Country Club Tudors have porches. In fact, there are only 2 homes in the entire neighborhood with open front porches and both are remodeled homes on Sunnyside and Edgebrook). 3rd Story Windows > Many Country Club Tudors have small decorative attic windows in large front facing gable, but only 3 have separate gables in the roof large windows facing the street. The predominant design is to have 3rd floor windows face the sides or rear of the home. > The color schematic that the builder presented were not consistent with the detailed plans for the attic/bonus room windows. The schematic shows one small south facing window and the large front gable /window. On the actual plans, there will be three south - facing windows. Had the HPB seen this, they may have felt differently about the front gable /window. The Wordelman's raised concern about using cement panels versus stucco on the home at the first meeting. I've been to other HPB presentations where materials were presented to the HPB and neighbors to review and discuss. Given the strong concerns raised at the 1 st meeting, the proponent should have presented the proposed materials at the 2nd meeting. How can the Board approve a material they haven't seen? In the end, only 2 members of the Board said they liked the house. There was confusion on how to evaluate the home and there was concern that the changes didn't go far enough. Please uphold the appeal and give the Board the opportunity to get all the facts and make an informed decision on this home. I hope to see you on Monday. Please check out the photos online. Thanks for your consideration. Kitty Joyce Repya From: Sent: 'o: Subject: Hi Joyce, This is one of yours ?? Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Monday, August 06, 2012 3:02 PM Joyce Repya FW: JMS home at 4524 Bruce Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 IbiunnoPEdinaMN.sov I www.EdinaMN.eov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - -- Original Message=--- - From: Kirsten Rewey fmailto:kirsten scott(@earthlink.netl Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 2:57 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: JMS home at 4524 Bruce Hello- TT, We live on the 4500 Block of Bruce Avenue where JMS homes plans to tear down and build anew home at 4524. We are delighted to know that progress is being made to create a better home in this location. The current structure is not a fit for our block; and we are concerned that the same mistake may be made in the current plan. We feel so grateful there is a preservation board in place to oversee the new remodels and building projects throughout our neighborhood. We are invested in the mission of keeping any new structures within strict guidelines to preserve the integrity of our narming and unique neighborhood. When we were looking at homes 10 years ago we knew we wanted to live in an area with sidewalks and older homes. We hope that you will uphold the values of preservation when looking at the plans in place. The current plan JMS is proposing raises a few concerns. For starters, the size of the home feels too large in comparison with the lot (scale is off). We are also concerned about the stucco "materials" being used. We would hope that the building materials blend with the current materials used in the vast majority of our homes rather than the newest (cheaper) products available. All we ask is that the home does not' stick out like a sore thumb ". We hope to continue feeling proud of our historic neighborhood. Thank you for considering our thoughts on this matter. Sincerely, Kirsten & Scott Rewey REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.A. From: Members Bennett & Brindle ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Student Appointments To Advisory Boards & Commissions ACTION REQUESTED: Make the suggested appointments as outlined below. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Members Joni Bennett and Mary Brindle interviewed student applicants for appointment to Edina boards and commissions and make the following recommendations. Sixteen students (all but one at Edina High School) applied for sixteen positions for 2012 -13. One student was not available for an interview at any time and opted to withdraw his application. In this unique circumstance, we are recommending appointment from the 2011- 2012 wait list of a student whom we contacted and who is eager to serve. For two students, we are recommending reappointment to the commissions on which they served last year. For both commissions, Planning and Transportation, the issues are complex and varied. We think that reappointment will allow the students familiar with the work and the process of the respective commissions to work as a team with and mentor the younger, newly - appointed students as they review the meeting materials. In response to comments by a couple of student commissioners, we recommend consideration going forward of mentor relationships among student commissioners and between student commissioners and regular board and commission members. For 2011 -2012, the Council appointed two students to the Edina Housing Foundation. After hearing from both students and the staff liaison to the EHF, we recommend that, going forward, no student be appointed to the EHF for two reasons. First, the EHF's meetings take place during the school day and are not able to be rescheduled. This makes student members choose either regular attendance at school or regular attendance at EHF meetings. Second, the EHF's work does not provide opportunity for active student participation. Our recommendations for student appointments to City of Edina boards and commissions for 2012 -13 are as follows. For students serving a second year, their 2011 -12 appointment is included. Edina Art Center Board Anna Ellingboe (senior, HPB 2011 -2012) Melissa Stefanik (senior, Planning 2010 -2011) Energy & Environment Commission Andrew Brandt (junior) Elana Sokol (junior) Edina Community Health Committee Kaia Lindquist (senior) Helen Risser (junior) Heritage Preservation Board Sarah Good (junior) Nathan Johnson (junior) Human Rights & Relations Commission Tara Mohtadi (senior, ACB 2011 -2012) Maggie Stang (senior, CHC 2011 -2012) Park Board Yasmeen Almog (senior, EHF 2011 -2012) John O'Leary (senior) Planning Commission Emily Cherkassky (senior, Planning 2011 -2012) Ben Kilberg (junior) Transportation Commission Steven Schweiger (senior, ETC 2011 -2012) Caroline Sierks (junior) ill Ow e rt4, Cl) �aaa REPORPRECOMMEN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item VIII. B. and C. From: Scott Neal City Manager ® Action Discussion Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Ordinance No. 2012 -15 Franchise Ordinance for CenterPoint Energy and Ordinance No. 2012 -16 Franchise Ordinance for Xcel Energy ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt first readings of Ordinance 2012 -15 and Ordinance 2012 -16 creating franchise fees for the City's natural gas and electric utilities. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: At the Council's retreat meeting in February I introduced the idea of implementing a modest franchise fee of the Edina customers of Xcel Energy and CenterPoint Energy to create a new revenue stream that would be specifically dedicated to funding new improvements sidewalk, trail and non - motorized transportation projects around the city. Currently, are funded from the City's annual Capital Improvements Plan or from special assessments. The Council expressed interest in the franchise fee concept and asked staff to research the issue in more depth. At the Council's June 5 Work Session, in addition to conducting a review of the City's Special Assessment Policy, the Council also considered a more formal proposal to fund a new sidewalk, trail and non - motorized transportation improvement program through the adoption of utility franchise fees. Council and staff reviewed a proposed model and discussed the idea of linking the fee and the improvements, and that we will be including a new staff position as part of the proposal, if it were to be adopted by the City Council. The Council will formally consider two new ordinances at the August 6 Council meeting that implement new utility franchise fees for the purpose of funding for new sidewalks, trails, lighting, street markings and related costs that will increase the safety of the City's pedestrian, cyclist and non - motorized transportation. system. If the two new ordinances are adopted by the City Council, the City will create a new fund called the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund (PACS Fund) to account for the new franchise fee revenues. The franchise fee revenues will be a dedicated revenue to the PACS Fund. The PACS Fund will be used to fund construction and maintenance activities, lighting, right -of -way acquisition, consulting and staff costs related to the expansion and improvement of the City's sidewalk, trail and non - motorized transportation system. The proposed franchise fee for a residential utility account is $1.45 /month for both Xcel and CenterPoint customers for a total of $2.90 /month. According to data supplied to the City by the two utilities, the average residential customer natural gas bill is $90.25 /month and average residential electric bill is $89.17 /month. The addition of the proposed franchise fees raises the monthly bill in each case by approximately 1.6 %. There are higher monthly fees for commercial accounts that are described in detail in the ordinances. In all classes of customers, however, the new franchise fees are flat fees that do not vary with the consumption. Franchise fees are applied to each customer meter regardless of the property tax status of the customer. Non - profit organizations, schools, churches and government utility customers will be assessed franchise fees based on the type of meter /service status they have through their respective utility companies. If adopted by the Council, the proposed franchise fee structure in the new ordinances will create approximately $1.1 million each year in new revenue for the purpose of increasing the safety of the City's pedestrians, cyclists and drivers at a financial impact to our residents of $2.90 /month. If the Council wishes to proceed with the adoption of the franchise fees, the first step in the process is to adopt the two ordinances (2012 -15 and 2012 -16) on first reading at the August 6 meeting. Following adoption on first reading, the City will provide an official 60 day notice to each utility of the City's impending action. During that 60 day period, the utilities may comment on the proposed ordinances. When the 60 day time period has been completed, the Council may proceed with second reading of the ordinances. RECOMMENDATION: I believe the goal is worthy and the cost is modest. I recommend the City Council adopt the two new franchise fee ordinances on first reading. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance No. 2012 -15 Ordinance No. 2012.16 ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -15 AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A GAS ENERGY FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNESOTA GAS ( "CENTERPOINT ENERGY ") FOR PROVIDING GAS ENERGY SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF EDINA.;. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY EDINA, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS. (a) Definitions. for the purposes of this . 0rdinance, the following terms shall have the following meanings: (1) City means the City of Edina,.County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. (2) Company means CenterPoint. Energy Minnesota Gas ( "CenterPoint Energy "), its successors and assigns. (3) Franchise Ordinance means Ordinance No. 2003 -2. (4:) Notice means a writing served by any party or parties on any other party or parties. Notice to Company shall be mailed to CenterPoint Energy, Minnesota Division Vice President, 800 LaSalle Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Notice to City shall be mailed to the City Clerk at 4801 W. 50th. Street, Edina,. MN 55424. SECTION 2. PURPOSE. The Edina City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on.those public utility companies that provide natural gas and electric services within the City. Pursuant to the Franchise Agreement the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Company. SECTION 3. FRANCHISE FEE STATEMENT AND SCHEDULE. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Company commencing with the., , 2012 billing month, and in accordance with the following fee ,schedule Customer Classification Amount per Account per Month: ($) Residential $ 1.45 Firm -A $, 2.90 Firm B $ 9.00 Firm C $40.00 Sm Vol, Dual Fuel A (SVDF A) $40.00 Sm Vol, Dual Fuel B (SVDF B) $40.00 Lg Vol, Dual Fuel (LVDF) $40.00 SECTION 4. ACCOUNT FEE-. This fee is an account based fee and not a meter -based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this Ordinance has more than one meter, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. In the event any entities covered by this �., • y Ordinance have more than one account, each account shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any account, the highest possible fee amount shall apply. SECTION S. PAYMENT. Franchise fees are to be collected by the Company and submitted to the City as follows: January — March collections due by April 30. April —June collections due by July 31. July — September collections due by October 31. October — December collections due by January 31. SECTION 6. RECORD SUPPORT FOR PAYMENT. The Company shall make each payment when due and, if requested by the City, shall provide a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total made to account for any non - collectible accounts, refunds or error corrections. The Company shall permit the City, and its representatives, access to the Company's records for the purpose of verifying such statements. SECTION 7. PAYMENT ADJUSTMENTS. Payment to the City will be adjusted where the Company is unable to collect the franchise fee. This includes non - collectible accounts. SECTION 8. SURCHARGE. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission may allow the Company to add a surcharge to customer rates to reimburse the Company for the cost of the fee. SECTION 9. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. If either party asserts that the other party is in default in the performance of any obligation hereunder, the complaining party shall notify the other party of the default and the desired remedy. The notification shall be written. Representatives of the parties must promptly meet and attempt in good faith to negotiate a resolution of the dispute. If the dispute is not resolved within 30 days of the written notice, the parties may jointly select a mediator to facilitate further discussion. The parties will equally share the fees and expenses of this mediator. If a mediator is not used or if the parties are unable to resolve the dispute within 30 days after first meeting with the selected mediator, either party may commence an action in District Court to interpret and enforce this ordinance or for such other relief permitted by law. SECTION 10. EFFECTIVE DATE OF FRANCHISE FEE. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after sending written notice enclosing a copy of this adopted Ordinance to Company by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. SECTION 11. RELATION TO FRANCHISE ORDINANCE. This ordinance is enacted in compliance with the Franchise Ordinance and shall be interpreted as such. SECTION 12. PERMIT FEES. The Company will administer the collection and payment of franchise fees to the City in lieu of permit fees, or other fees that may otherwise be imposed on 4. the Company in relation to its operations as a public utility in the City so long as the following requirements are met: (1) The Company applies for any and all permits, licenses and similar documentation as though this provision did not exist. (2) The Company requests the fee to be waived at the time of application. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Edina on the _ day of , 2012, and finally read and adopted and ordered published in summary form as attached hereto at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on,the day of , 2012. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two Affidavits of Publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. 2012 -16 AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING AN ELECTRIC SERVICE FRANCHISE FEE ON NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, D /B /A XCEL ENERGY, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, FOR PROVIDING ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE CITY OF EDINA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. The City of Edina Municipal Code is hereby amended to include reference to the following Special Ordinance. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The Edina City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to impose a franchise fee on those public utility companies that provide electric services within the City of Edina. (a) Pursuant to City Ordinance No. 1995 -4, an ordinance granting a Franchise to Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d /b /a Xcel Energy, its successors and assigns, the City has the right to impose a franchise fee on Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d /b /a Xcel Energy, its successors and assigns, in an amount and fee design as set forth in Section 9 of the Northern States Power Company Franchise and in the fee schedule attached hereto as Schedule A. Subdivision 2. Franchise Fee Statement. A franchise fee is hereby imposed on Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d /b /a Xcel Energy, its successors and assigns, under its electric franchise in accordance with the schedule attached here to and made a part of this Ordinance, commencing with the Xcel Energy 2012 billing month. This fee is an account -based fee on each premise and not a meter -based fee. In the event that an entity covered by this Ordinance has more than one meter at a single premise, but only one account, only one fee shall be assessed to that account. If a premise has two or more meters being billed at different rates, the Company may have an account for each rate classification, which will result in more than one franchise fee assessment for electric service to that premise. If the Company combines the rate classifications' into a single account, the franchise fee assessed to the account will be the largest franchise fee applicable to a single rate classification for energy delivered to that premise. In the event any entities covered by this Ordinance have more than one premise, each premise (address) shall be subject to the appropriate fee. In the event a question arises as to the proper fee amount for any premise, the Company's manner of billing for energy used at all similar premises in the City will control. Subdivision 3. Payment. The said franchise fee shall be payable to the City in accordance with the terms set forth in Section 9.3 of the Franchise. Subdivision 4. Surcharge. The City recognizes that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission allows the utility company to add a surcharge to customer rates to reimburse such utility company for the cost of the fee and. that Xcel Energy will surcharge its customers in the City the amount of the fee. Subdivision S. Record Support for Payment. Xcel Energy shall make each payment when due and, if required by the City, shall provide at the time of each payment a statement summarizing how the franchise fee payment was determined, including information showing any adjustments to the total surcharge billed in the period for which the payment is being made to account`for any uncollectibles, refunds or error corrections. Subdivision 6. Enforcement. Any dispute, including enforcement of a default regarding this Ordinance will be resolved in. accordance with Section 2.5 of the Franchise Agreement. Subdivision. 7. Effective Date of Franchise Fee. The effective date of this Ordinance shall be after its publication and ninety (90) days after the sending of written notice enclosing a copy of this -adopted Ordinance to Xcel Energy by certified mail. Collection of the fee shall commence as provided above. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk Please publish in the Edina Su,n Current on: Send two Affidavits of Publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk. James B. Hovland, Mayor SCHEDULE A Franchise Fee Rates: Electric Utility The franchise fee shall be in an amount determined by applying the following schedule per customer premise /per month based on metered service to retail customers within the City: Class Residential Sm C &I, Non -Dem Sm C &I, Demand Large C &I Amount Per Month $ 1.45 $ 2.90 $ 9.00 $40.00 Franchise fees are to be collected by the Utility at the rate listed below, and submitted to the City on a quarterly basis as follows: January — March collections due by April 30. April —June collections due by July 31. - July — September collections due by October 31. October — December collections due by January 31. ►1 Z-) A, r� 0� e 0 • �CORPOiil''S� // 1888 REPORPRECOMMEN DATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item VIII. D. From: Scott Neal City Manager Action Discussion Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Special Assessment Policy Revision ACTION REQUESTED: Approve proposed revision to the Special Assessment Policy INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: At the 2012 Council Retreat in February, the Council expressed support for a study of the City's special assessment policy and practices in order to make the policy less burdensome on property owners. City staff engaged the public finance consulting firm Northland Securities to study our special assessment policy and to develop alternative special assessment financing models. Representatives from Northland and City staff presented the Council with the results of the study and the alternative financing models at the June 5 City Council Work Session. After considerable discussion, Council directed staff to prepare a revision to the City's special assessment policy which included the following changes- 1 . Extend repayment period for special assessments from 10 to 15 years. 2. Restructure the payments from a declining principal formula to a level payments formula. 3. Decrease the spread between the interest rate of the City's project financing and what is added to the special assessments that are financed by the City from 2% to 1%. 4. Exclude sidewalk, trail and lighting costs from Project Costs subject to the cost share formula. These costs would be paid from a new revenue source.. utility franchise fees. 5. Evaluate the potential impact on utility rates of shifting the cost share burden from the property owner to the City for the costs of replacing the sanitary sewer lateral from the home to the main. The attached policy revision incorporates all of the policy directives suggested by the City Council except the directive 5. Staff have evaluated the concept of shifting the cost burden of all underground utility repair and replacement to the City. The estimated cost of that proposal, however, was excessive and would require an increase in our utility rates of more than 50 %. In lieu of that proposal, staff have proposed the inclusion of underground utilities, including the ability to special assess sump pump removal or redirection, into the proposed policy revision with a repayment period proposed of 15 years. The policy changes in directives 1, 2 and 3 are beneficial to property owners at a modest impact to the City. Taken together, the extension of the repayment period; the restructuring of the payment formula; and the reduction of the interest rate spread will have the effect of reducing the annual payment on a $10,000 special assessment from $1,375 per year for ten years to $868 per year for 15 years. The total repayment under the current policy in this scenario is $13,750. Under the proposed revised policy, the total repayment in this scenario is $13,020. Finally, the creation of the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund with new utility franchise fees will provide the City with the ability to remove the costs of new sidewalks and other pedestrian improvements from special assessment projects, but also enables the Council to realize an important goal of expanding and improving the City's non - motorized transportation facilities and infrastructure all over the City. RECOMMENDATION: Any City's special assessment policy can be a lightning rod for negative attention. But, the City could not make necessary infrastructure improvements to the City and keep its competitively low property tax rate without a special assessment program. I believe the proposed policy revision will allow the City to continue its infrastructure improvement program and provide a moderated impact to impacted property owners in the future. I recommend the Council approve the proposed revision. ATTACHMENT: Proposed Revision to the City of Edina's Special Assessment Policy PROPOSED REVISION TO THE CITY OF EDINA'S SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY EDINA CITY COUNCIL POLICY POLICY: Special Assessment Policy DATE CURRENT POLICY APPROVED BY COUNCIL: September 7, 2010 DATE CURRENT POLICY REVISED BY COUNCIL: August 6, 2012 POLICY PURPOSE: Establish an assessment policy for typical assessments that include local roadways, sidewalks, alleys, sound wall's, water utility lines, sanitary sewer utility lines, sump pump removal or redirection, garbage and debris removal, aquatic weeds, weed mowing, tree removals, and maintenance districts. POLICY: 1. Utility Pun »> Allocated Costs: The cost of curbs and gutter for a Non -State Aid Residential Street Reconstruction Project will be paid from the City's Storm Water Utility Fund. The cost of replacing and repairing the publicly -owned portions of underground water and sanitary sewer utility lines will be paid from the City's Utility Fund. The cost of sidewalks, trails, lighting and pedestrian /cyclist related street markings will be paid from the City's Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund. 2. »> Assessable Costs: 100 %'of the costs incurred for the reconstruction of a Non -State Aid Residential Street, excluding allocated costs, shall be assessed to the directly benefitting properties of the project, pursuant to a formula based on a Residential Equivalent Unit (REU). Assessable costs include the following: mobilization, direct construction costs, construction finance costs, City and contracted engineering costs, scientific and technical consulting costs, printing and mailing, legal and other project related costs. Construction finance costs are the cost of funds used to finance the project construction until the adoption of the resolution imposing the speciol,assessment. 3. Unit of Assessment: The assessable unit for non -state aid residential street projects will should be the residential equivalent unit' (REU). FatheF *ha^ the fFent feetag ^f the An REU shall be one residential lot, regardless of lot size or amount of street frontage. For publicly owned or undeveloped parcels with'developable residential 'potential, the number of REU's shall be computed based upon the maximum residential development; potential of the parcel based upon the density allowed under the applicable Zoning Code and Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 4. Corner Cots: If a corner lot is subject to multiple street reconstruction assessments, the total assessable cost should be the equivalent to 1 residential equivalent unit. The address of the lot shall determine if the corner lot is assessed at 1,1/3, . 2/3, or 0 REU's for that project: • If the address of the lot is on the roadway being reconstructed and no previous roadway assessments have been levied for that lot, the REU shall be 1 REU. • If the address of the lot is on the roadway being constructed and a roadway assessment has been levied previously for that lot, the REU shall be 2/3 REU. • If the address of the lot is not on the roadway being constructed, but the side or rear yard is and no previous roadway assessment has been levied for that lot, the REU shall be 1/3 REU. • If the address of the lot is not on the roadway being constructed, but the side or rear yard is and a roadway assessment has previously been levied for that lot of 1 REU, the REU shall be 0 REU. 5. Multiple Assessments: Lots subject to multiple assessments cannot be treated differently than lots subject to a single assessment. 6. Capitalized iRteFest, eRgineeFing eests, have been ffiR6UFFed f9F that paFtieular- speeial assessment. All engineeFiRg costs and etheF pFejerA Felated costs shall be diFeetly Felated te that paFtiGulaF sperzial assessment. Capitalized iRteFest is the special assessment. 7. Repayment Periods: Repayment periods for special assessments levied by the City of Edina vary depending on the purpose for which the assessment was levied. Repayment periods and terms are as follows: The teFFn of °^^G"' assessmeRtS aFe as felle w Maximum Repayment Periods: i. Local roadway reconstruction - 10 years. 15 years. ii. Sidewalks (stand alene prejeEt) 3 years. III. Dec^vr atiye street Iightmg (stand alene prejest) 3 yea=s. iv. Sound walls —15 years. V. Garbage and debris removal, aquatic weeds, weed mowing, and, and maintenance districts —1 year. vi. Tree removals - 1 year if under $500, 2 years if $500 to $1000, and 3 years if over $1000. vii. underground utility line replacements —15 years viii. sump pump removal or redirection — 5 years b. Assessment Interest Rate —The interest rate for a special assessment shall be 210A 1% higher than the estimated tFue ORteFest "net interest" rate of the bonds that have been to be issued for the project. If a bond is not issued for a project, the interest rate shall be 2°61% higher than the true interest rate of the most recent bonds sold by the City prior to ordering the public improvement. The interest rates for 7.a.v., 7.a.vi., 7.a.vii and 7.a.vii above shall be 6.5 %. C. The City will accept both partial pre - payments and full pre - payments on assessments before certifying the assessment to the County. For ease of administration, a minimum of 25% of the assessable cost must be applied for a partial payment. d. The City shall inform all property owners of properties receiving a special assessment of the City's Senior Deferral Program. will be aeciepted as nt. Payments shall be amortized using a level prinGipa' d^re"^i^^ total annual payment schedule. 8. The new policy will not be retroactive to projects that have already been assessed. Special assessment policy revisions approved on August 6, 2012 shall become effective for projects with final assessment hearings after January 1, 2013. o e „0 Teo. o \N� 28888 REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER, To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. VIII.E. From: Solvei' Wilmot, Environmental Health Specialist I Recycling Coordinator Date August 6, 2012 Subject: Residential Curbside Recycling Contract Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: April 18, 2012 NA Company Bid or Quote Allied Waste Systems $326,595 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Allied Waste Systems, 7 year contract, estimated annual cost $326,595 GENERAL INFORMATION: The current residential curbside recycling collection contract expires, December 31, 2012. As a result a Request For Proposals (RFP) was developed. At the recommendation of the Energy and Environment Commission (EEC) and the approval of City Council at the February 21, 2012 work session, rankings were determined using the best value process. The best value weighting for the proposals was divided into four categories: Environment 40 %, Economics 40 %, Education 15% and Qualifications 5 %. In addition, Council supported EEC recommendation to hire a consultant to aid in the development of the RFP and - analysis of the proposals. Dan Krivit, Senior Project Manager, Foth Infrastructure and Environment, LLC was contracted to provide these services. The RFP included questions developed by the EEC and the Recycling and Solid Waste Work Group. The questions were to determine the Best Value ranking for Environment, Economics, Education and Qualifications. The RFP for Residential Curbside Recycling Collection Service was presented to the City Council on March 20, 2012 and was approved by Council for release. Four companies submitted Residential Curbside Recycling proposals: Allied Waste Services (Allied), Randy's Environmental Services, Tennis Sanitation and Waste Management. None of the proposals included weekly dual stream collection, only every other week single sort collection service was offered. The Environment, Education and Qualifications portion of the proposals were reviewed by a review committee consisting of Sherry Engelman, Community Health Administrator; Lt. Mike Nibbe, Police; and Solvei Wilmot, Environmental Health Specialist and Recycling Coordinator. The Economic analysis was provided by the consultant, Dan Krivit. Mr. Krivit compiled the outcomes from the review committee and economic analysis. The Best Value ranking determined that Allied ranked number 1. They had the best Environmental, Education and Qualification score, but ranked 2 "d on the Economic score. At the May 15, 2012, City Council meeting, staff was authorized to enter into contract negotiations with the top ranked Best Value company in order to negotiate the Economic portion to a better score. During the negotiations, Allied Waste Services reduced the cost for processing the recyclables from $95 /ton to $74 /ton. In addition, it was discovered that the company that had received the best Economic score (Waste Management) had discrepancies in their proposal regarding the revenue share formula. A clarification from Waste Management revealed their intent to use an alternate revenue share formula. The alternate formula results in less revenue back to the City. When the formula is applied to the Economic analysis process, Waste Management no longer has the best Economic score. The final score results in Allied Waste Services having the Best Value score in all categories: Environmental, Education, Qualifications and. Economics. Staff recommends Allied Waste Services for the Residential Curbside Recycling Service contract. This report was accepted by the Recycling and Solid Waste Work Group on July 17, 2012 and the Energy and Environment Commission on July 19, 2012. The contract has been reviewed by the City Attorney. J) Police Si ture Department The Recommended Bid is w within budget not within budget John Wallin, Finance Director City Manager Attachments: Single Stream Residential Curbside Recycling Collection Agreement SINGLE STREAM RESIDENTIAL CURBSIDE RECYCLING COLLECTION AGREEMENT AGREEMENT dated , 2012, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a 1 Minnesota municipal corporation ( "City "), and Allied Waste Services of North America, LLC, a Delaware limited. liability company, d/b /a Allied Waste Services of the Twin Cities, Eden Prairie (the "Contractor ") RECITALS. A. The Contractor desires to provide single stream recycling collection services to residents of the City of Edina. B. - The City desires to provide these services for the health, safety and welfare of its residents. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THEIR MUTUAL COVENANTS, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The following documents shall be referred to as the "Contract Documents," all of which shall be taken together as a whole as the contract between the parties as if they were set verbatim and in full herein: A. This Agreement. B. Addendum A to the City of Edina Request for Proposals (RFP) for Residential Curbside Recycling Services dated April 11,.2012. C. Request for Proposals (RFP) for Residential Curbside Recycling Services March 13, 2012. D. Contractor's Proposal for the City of Edina, MN for Residential Curbside Recycling Services In the event of a conflict among the provisions of the Contract Documents, the order in which they are listed above shall�control in resolving any such conflicts with Contract Document "A" having the first priority and Contract Document "D" having the last priority. 2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR. The Contractor shall provide the goods, services, and perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents: 3. DEFINITIONS. A. Recyclable Materials: Means all items of refuse designated by Contractor and City to be part of an authorized recycling program, and which are intended for transportation, processing, and re- manufacturing or reuse and include the following: • Boxboard packaging: except for boxes that are made for storage in refrigerator or freezer. • Corrugated cardboard: unless contaminated with food, wax- coated or plastic coated. • Glass containers: all glass food and beverage containers. • Metal containers: aluminum, steel, bimetal food and beverage containers, foil and foil trays. • Mixed paper:. direct mail, envelopes, school an d office paper, receipts and bills, hard and soft- covered books, paper bags, notebooks; magazines, catalogs and phone books, and shredded paper. • Newspaper: including all paper inserts. • Other Recyclable Materials may also include other materials as mutually agreed upon by the City and Contractor. Recyclable materials also includes any and all solid waste items designated by the Hennepin County Environmental Services Department to be part of an authorized recycling program and which are intended for transportation, processing, and re- manufacturing or reuse. • Plastic: plastic containers #1 - #7, i.e. bottles, cups, food containers, yogurt cups milk jugs except plastic containers that had hazardous waste. • Aseptic, gable — topped and wet strength beverage packaging. • Any additions or exclusions as agreed upon by Contractor and City. B. Recycling Container: Means a cart with a lid, and wheels, minimum size of 30 gallon in which recyclable materials can be stored and later placed at the curb or alley for collection as specified by the City. The container shall be properly marked for recycling. C. Single Stream Recycling Collection Service: Residents will be instructed to commingle all recyclable materials in one container that will be picked up every other week by Contractor. Contractor will pick up all recyclable material placed in and next to recycling containers at Certified Dwelling Units and other City designated collection stops in the City of Edina. D. Certified Dwelling Unit (CDU): Means a single family home and each residential unit in a building up to an eight -plex, or townhouse complex. Residential units in structures (other than townhouses) containing more than eight dwelling units may be designated as CDU's upon mutual agreement by the City and the Contractor, Exhibit D. E. Contractor: Means person or persons authorized by the City to perform recycling collection services on prescribed routes within collection districts within the City of Edina, which for purposes of this Agreement is Allied Waste Services of North America, LLC. F. Collection Hours: Means the time period during which collection of recyclable material is authorized in the City. G. Missed Collection: Means the failure of the Contractor to provide recycling collection service to a CDU or other City designated collection stop within the recycling district during collection hours on the scheduled collection day. H. Holidays: Means any of the following: New Year's Day, President's Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. I. Scheduled Collection Day: Means the day or days of the week on which recycling collection service by the Contractor is to occur, as specified in the contract with the City, see Exhibit C. If a Holiday occurs on a weekday, the collection for each day of that week after the Holiday will be made one (1) working day later. Except if a Holiday falls on a weekend day, then collection will be provided on the scheduled collection day. 4. CONTRACTOR'S COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS. A. Residential Curbside Recycling Collection Program. 1. Frequency of Residential Collection: Residential recycling collection shall occur biweekly. 2. Residential Collection Hours: Collection shall commence no earlier than 7:00 a.m. local time and shall be completed by 7:00 p.m. collection day. Residents will be required to have materials placed at the collection point by 7:00 a.m. on the scheduled collection day. 3. Compliance with Laws and Regulations: In providing services hereunder, the Contractor-shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations pertaining to .the provision of services to be provided hereunder. Any violation shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement.' This contract shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota, and ordinances of the City of Edina. 4. Weiahiniz of Loads. Renortinu Reauirements and Promotional Material: The Contractor will keep accurate records. consisting of an approved weight slip with the date; time, collection route, driver's identification, vehicle number, rate and gross weight, net weight and number of route stops for each loaded vehicle. A detailed monthly report shall be provided to the City that identifies total tonnage activity by commodity. In addition an annual "report shall be provided. (See Exhibit A). This report should include all curbside recycling activity. Promotional Material: The Contractor and the City will cooperate in developing a comprehensive on =going promotional program to encourage participation in the recycling program of the City. The Contractor will be responsible for providing and incur the production and printing . costs of informational material outlined in the Proposal submitted by the Contractor during the change from a weekly bin collection to an every other week single stream collection. The Contractor will be responsible for providing and incur the production, printing and mailing costs of an annual public education piece. The Contractor shall confer with the City on any draft publications that are distributed within the City regarding the curbside recycling program. The City will have final approval before printing. The Contractor shall submit a draft of any public education literature for approval by the City, at least one (1) month before printing and - release of any such literature: (a) The education piece will contain at least the following information: a: The Collection Week'for each Dwelling, b. The Collection Point, c. The Recyclables to be collected and manner of preparation, d. Holiday and Missed collection information, e. Telephone numbers to call for,information or service problems (b) Informational tags for distribution by drivers to those'residents who have place . non- recyclables or improperlyprepared'recyclables for collection. 5.. Recycle Cart Purchase; Delivery and Bin Collection: The Contractor agrees to, at its expense, purchase,, deliver, service' and repair, and maintain sufficient cart inventory to. meet'supply and demand needs for the'City of Edina Recycling CDU's, estimated to be 14,250 in number, Exhibit D. The Contractor shall initially deliver one 65- gallon cart to each CDU and have a sufficient inventory of30- gallon and 90- gallon carts available for delivery and switch -out with the 65'- gallon carts per. resident/customer request. The standard 65- gallon cart shall be smooth for ease in cleaning. The cart shall be blue with a green lid and be uniform and consistent in color and design and approved instruction label imbedded into each lid, so as to be easily, identified by the resident and the Contractor driver as the, container for recyclable materials. Recycling Bin Collection: The Contractor agrees to collect and recycle the 18 gallon bins previously used for recycling. The Contractor will collect bins from mutually agreed upon residential drop -off locations during the month of October 2012, and provide roll -off dumpster. 6. Recycling Cart Maintenance /Replacement: The driver is required to report to the Contractor the location of any cart that is damaged. The Recycling Coordinator will notify the Contractor by email of any cart damage or request for change of cart size that is reported/requested to them by customers /residents. Any damaged cart or cart request will be repaired or replaced by the Contractor within two (2) weeks of the report. 7. Point of Collection: Most residential recycling collection will occur at the same location from where the regular refuse is collected, generally the street curbside or alley. Carts shall be placed with the handle toward the house and lid opening toward the street or alley. The driver is required to place the emptied cart back/down in the same location as set by resident. Recycling carts /containers for municipal recycling collection shall be placed at agreed upon specific locations as determined by the Contractor and City. All carts /containers shall be returned to the specific location after completion of collection. 8. Ownership of Recyclable Materials: All recyclable materials for collection shall remain the responsibility and in the ownership of the resident until handled for collection by the Contractor. At the point of collection the recyclable materials become the property of the Contractor. Any person or persons taking recyclable materials from a curbside container without explicit permission of the resident or municipality will be in violation of local ordinance and subject to penalty. The Contractor shall report to the Recycling Coordinator any instances of suspected scavenging or unauthorized removal of recyclable materials from any collection container. 9. Route Management and Customer Service: The Contractor shall, at all times, provide the City's Recycling Coordinator with a lead route /driver supervisor who is accessible to the Contractor dispatch department via two way communications and to the Recycling Coordinator to handle route and collection issues in a timely fashion. The Contractor shall have on duty Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. a dispatch customer service representative to receive customer calls and route issues. The Contractor shall provide a 24 hour answering service line or device to receive customer calls. The Route Supervisor and all collection vehicles must be equipped with 2 -way communication devices. 10.1 Procedure for Unacceptable Materials, Materials Outside Cart and Unreachable Carts: If the Contractor determines that a resident has set out unacceptable recyclable materials or other materials that are not recyclable materials, left recyclable materials outside of the cart, or has positioned the cart so that it is unreachable with the mechanical arm, the Contractor shall use the following procedures: a. The Contractor shall collect all the recyclable materials and leave an "education tag" provided by the Contractor attached to the handle of the recycling container indicating acceptable materials, the proper method of preparation and the proper placement of the cart. b. The driver shall record the address of repeat educational tags notifications. 11. Procedure for Complaints- Questions- Missed Collections: A complaint of service or missed collection is a complaint received by the Contractor from.either the customer or the Administration Office. If the report is for a missed stop and is received by the Contractor before 12:00 p.m. on a scheduled working day, the Contractor is required to return to the complaint address and complete the collection. If the report is registered after 12:00 p.m. on a scheduled working day, the Contractor is required to return to the complaint address by 12:00 noon the. following working day. 12. Clean up Responsibilities: The Contractor shall adequately clean up any recyclable material spilled or blown during the course of collection and/or hauling operations. All collection vehicles shall be equipped with at least one broom and one shovel for use in cleaning up material spillage. The Contractor shall have no responsibility to remove or clean up any items, which are not recyclable materials. 13. Non- Completion of Collection and Extension of Collection Hours: The Contractor shall inform the City of the areas not completed; the reason for non - completion, and the expected time of completion. 14. Collection Vehicle Equipment Requirements: Each collection vehicle shall be equipped with the following: a. A two way communication system. b. A first aid kit. C. An approved 2AlOBC dry chemical fire extinguisher. d. Warning flashers. e. Overhead strobe light. f. "Reverse" audio warning alarm to indicate movement in reverse. g. Signs on the rear of the vehicle which state "This Vehicle Makes Frequent Stops." h. Shall be equipped with some form of monitoring system for the driver to observe the materials as the cart is being dumped into the hopper. i. Hazard flares and cones. j. A broom and a shovel for cleaning up spills. k. "Absorb" pillows or dry product adequate to absorb /contain any.oil/liquid spill from collection vehicle. All required equipment must be in proper working order at all times. All vehicles must be maintained improper working order and be clean and free from odor as much as possible. All collection vehicles shall be uniformly, painted and the paint shall be in good condition. The Contractor's name shall be clearly visible from all sides of the vehicle, along with the Contractor's phone number, and the vehicle ID number. 15. Driver Duties and Responsibilities: The Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that there is sufficient personnel and equipment to fulfill the requirements and specifications of this contract proposal, and that all personnel are trained both in program operations and in customer service and insure that all personnel maintain a positive attitude with the public and in the work place and shall: a. Conduct themselves.at all times in a courteous manner and use no abusive or foul language. b. Be clean and presentable in appearance, as so far as possible. C. Wear.a uniform and employee identification badge or name tag. d. Drive in a safe and considerate manner. e. Manage carts. in a careful manner, setting them back in place so as to avoid spillage and littering or damage to container. f. Perform their work in a neat and quiet manner, monitor for any spillage and be responsible for cleaning up any litter or breakage spilled in collection and hauling operations. g. Record all addresses that could not be collected and reasons, turn list into dispatch at end of each collection day. h. Attach an education tab to the container identifying problems and how to resolve them. i. Collect and transport recyclable materials according to all existing laws and ordinances, and future amendments thereto, of the State of Minnesota and local governing bodies. j. Report all damage to property. 16. Holiday The Contractor will observe all Holidays on which no recycling collection service will be performed. When a Holiday occurs on a scheduled collection day, the collection for each day of that week after the Holiday shall be made one (1) working day later. 17. Contract Length: This contract shall commence October 1, 2012 and shall be for 7 years, 3 months ending December 31, 2019 and shall have options upon mutual agreement of the parties for renewal with the terms of 5 or 7 years each. 18. Rate and Scholarship: The price per CDU (Exhibit D) for single -sort curbside collection service per month from October 1, 2012 through December 31, 2019 for the City shall be: Year Price per Curbside CDU per Month Oct 1, 2012 $2.40 2013 $2.40 2014 $2.47 2015 $2.54 2016 $2.61 2017 $2.68 2018 $2.76 2019 $2.84 19. Revenue Sharing and Process fees: The City shall receive a 100% revenue share on the Net Proceeds (defined in Exhibit B) of the sale of all recyclable materials. In no case shall the Net Proceeds be negative (i.e., the City shall not be charged if value of revenue from sale of all recyclable materials is less than processing fees). Payments shall be made on a bi- annual basis per calendar year. The per ton processing fee and formula for sharing Net Proceeds as described in Exhibit B, attached and made a part of this Agreement. Scholarship: The Contractor has agreed to provide four $500 scholarships annually for the length of this contract. The money is to be awarded annually to an Edina High School student through the Edina Education Fund. The criteria for the scholarship will be determined by the Edina Recycling Coordinator. 20. Default. Any of the following occurrences, conditions, or acts shall be deemed a "Default" under this Agreement: a. If either party fails to observe or perform its, obligations under this Agreement and does not cure such failure within ten (10) days from its receipt of written notice of breach without, however, limiting any other rights available to parties pursuant to any other provisions of this Agreement. b. Except as expressly limited hereby, City and Contractor shall have such remedies for the default of the other party hereto as may be provided at law or equity following written notice ,of such default and failure to cure the same within ten (10) days. 21. Termination. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement may be terminated without any penalty or further liability as follows: a. Upon ten (10) days written notice in the event of a default (as defined above); b. Upon ninety (90) days written notice by Contractor, if Contractor is unable to obtain or maintain any license, permit or other governmental approval necessary to the operation of the Contractor's business; C. Upon ninety (90) days written notice by City if it determines that Contractor has failed to comply with applicable ordinances, or state or federal law, or any conditions attached to governmental approvals granted thereunder, after a public hearing before the City's Council. 22. Taxes.. Contractor shall pay any taxes, of any nature, due, owing or levied in association with its services pursuant to this Agreement. 23. Insurance. a. , The Contractor must maintain the types and amounts of insurance sef forth in the RFP with the following exceptions: i. Contractor shall not be required to 'provide coverage for $50,000 in medical expenses per Section 20.2 of the RFP; ii. Contractor shall not be required to provide Professional Liability Insurant or Errors and Omission coverage, so Section 20.4 of the RFP is struck in its entirety as are any references to such insurance in the RFP; iii. Contractor will provide evidence of insurance on an ACORD form (versus a City- approved) insurance certificate., iv. . The second and third sentences in Section 20.5 of the RFP are struck in their entirety. V. The fourth sentence of Section 20.5 of the RFP is deleted in its entirety to read as follows: "The successful Proposer shall provide City with a certificate of insurance upon written request from the City." vi. The last sentence of Section 20.5 is deleted in its entirety. b. Adjustment to Insurance Coverage Limits. The coverage limits shall be increased at the time of any rate adjustment by the Consumer Price Index. C. Additional Insured - Certificate of Insurance. The Contractor shall provide, prior to starting services, evidence of the required insurance in the form of a Certificate of Insurance issued by a company (rated A- or better), licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota, which includes all coverages required in this paragraph. Contractor will name the City as an Additional Insured on the General Liability and Commercial Automobile Liability Polices. The Certificate(s) shall also provide the coverage may not be cancelled without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. 24. Indemnification Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all claims, costs, losses, expenses, demands, actions, or causes of action, including reasonable attorneys' fees and other costs and expenses of litigation, which may be asserted against or incurred by City or for which City may be liable in the performance of this Agreement, except those which arise solely from the negligence, willful misconduct, or other fault of City. Contractor shall defend the City against all claims arising out of the performance of this Agreement. 25. Notices. All notices, requests, demands and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given if personally delivered or mailed, certified mail, return receipt requested, or sent by overnight carrier to the following addresses: If to City, to: City of Edina 4801 W. 40U' Street Edina, Minnesota, 55424 Attention: Solvei Wilmot If to Contractor, to: Allied Waste Services c/o Rich Hirstein 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55347 26. Assignment. This Agreement, or rights thereunder, may not be sold, assigned, or transferred at any time by Contractor without the written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 27. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties, their respective successors, personal representatives and assigns. 28. Miscellaneous. a. The prevailing party in any litigation arising hereunder shall be entitled to its reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs, including appeals, if any. b. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and understanding of the parties, and supersedes all offers, negotiations and other agreements. These are no representations or understandings of any kind not set forth herein. Any CITY: CITY OF EDINA BY: AND amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and executed by both parties. C. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. d. If any term of this Agreement is found to be void or invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the remaining terms of this Agreement, which shall remain in full force and effect. James Hovland, Mayor Scott Neal, City Manager A CONTRACTOR: BY: Bryan 'Zimmerman, Area President Exhibit A Monthly Reports. The Contractor will submit to the City monthly reports. At a minimum, the Contractor shall include the following information in its monthly reports: (a) Gross amounts of materials collected, by recyclable material (in tons). (b) Net amounts of materials marketed, by recyclable material (in tons) (c) Amounts stored, by recyclable material, with any notes as to unusual conditions (in tons) (d) Amounts of "process residuals" disposed (in tons) (e) Recycling service fee (based upon contracted price per ton). (f) Revenue share back to the City (if any) Monthly reports hall be due to the City by the 15th day of each month. Annual Reports. The Contractor will submit an annual report to the City by Feb 1st of each calendar year for the previous year collections. The annual report shall include: (a) Annual sum total of tons of materials collected (b) Set out rates and participation rates. (c) Annual progress on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from activities under this contract. The Contractor must indicate what model vehicles they use in their fleet and fuel type. The Contractor must also describe other means of energy conservation on the Edina collection routes and at the materials processing facility. (d) Annual summary of complaints received, methods used to handle and respond to such complaints, and summary of complaint types. (e) Contractor's recommendations for improvement in the City's recycling program including adding materials to be collected, enhanced public education, multifamily recycling and other opportunities. (h) Response to any City staff recommendations for Contractor's service improvements. (i) Other opportunities for improvement with the remaining years under the contract. Annual reports shall be due by January 31 each year. Exhibit B Published Industry Market Indices Product Mix Market Indicator Mix Glass Reviewed Annually HDPE Natural Waste News Last Issue High HDPE Pigmented Waste News Last Issue High PET Waste News Last Issue High No. 3 -7 Plastic Avg. Monthly Sales Price Residual Garbage Hennepin County Rate Tin Average Monthly Sales Price Aluminum AMM High OCC OBM #8 High Mixed Paper OBM #8 High ONP OBM #8 High Aseptic Packaging Average Monthly Sales Price Revenue Share Processing Fees Oct. 1,2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 All recycling materials 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Processing Fees Determining Revenue share The Contractor shall pay a net revenue after processing fees from the sale of the recyclable material that is collected. The Contractor shall use the agreed upon Published Market indices for the sale of the materials. Determining Materials Composition as Collected The Contractor shall conduct at least one materials composition analysis of the City's recyclable materials during the term of the contract any and every extension of this Agreement to estimate the relative amount by weight of each recyclable commodity from each program element by grade or offer a suitable alternative to a composition analysis. The results of this analysis shall include: (1) percent by weight of each recyclable commodity by grade (including materials deemed unacceptable) as collected from the City program element; (2) relative change compared to the previous year's composition; and (3) a description of the methodology used to calculate the composition, including number of samples, dates weighed, and City route(s) used for sampling. The Contractor shall provide the City with a copy of each analysis. City staff will help coordinate the sampling and shall be invited by the Contractor to be present for the sorting. Oct. 1, 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 018 2019 Per ton for each recycling commodi $74 $74 $74 $74 $74 $74 $74 $74 Determining Revenue share The Contractor shall pay a net revenue after processing fees from the sale of the recyclable material that is collected. The Contractor shall use the agreed upon Published Market indices for the sale of the materials. Determining Materials Composition as Collected The Contractor shall conduct at least one materials composition analysis of the City's recyclable materials during the term of the contract any and every extension of this Agreement to estimate the relative amount by weight of each recyclable commodity from each program element by grade or offer a suitable alternative to a composition analysis. The results of this analysis shall include: (1) percent by weight of each recyclable commodity by grade (including materials deemed unacceptable) as collected from the City program element; (2) relative change compared to the previous year's composition; and (3) a description of the methodology used to calculate the composition, including number of samples, dates weighed, and City route(s) used for sampling. The Contractor shall provide the City with a copy of each analysis. City staff will help coordinate the sampling and shall be invited by the Contractor to be present for the sorting. Exhibit C Collection Route Map- (by collection day of theweek) .... .... .. . ....... . ... . 1:11 71 N NOR WIN A :44' 14 -41F, ri d &,y,-G A va, Friday 11kK T I_� 71 City oft Edina Residential, Recycling Pick-Up Schedule W+E S evi—ov NPI Exhibit D Multi — Family Housing on Recycling Pickup Name Address Zip Units Apartments, 8 or fewer units: 5107 496' St W 55436 5 5115 49`s St W 55436 5 5148 Hankerson 55436 4 4200 Valley View Rd 55424 4 4240 Valley View Rd 55424 4 4246 Valley View Rd 55424 3 4000 Mavelle Drive 55435 4 7101 Lynmar Lane 55435 4 4300 Parklawn Avenue 55435 8 4200 60 Street 55424 3 21 Apartments Subtotal 44 Condo. 8 or fewer units: Edina Morningside 4360 France Ave 55410 8 Valley View Est 6201 Brookview Ave 55424. 5 Condos Subtotal 13 Townhomes: Blake Ridge 6055 -6141 Blake Rd Road 55436 31 Cahill of Edina 7400 -7486 Cahill Rd 55439 44 Colony 6330 Barrie Road 55435 236 Dewey Hill III Shaughnessy Rd & Lochmere Terrace 55439 34 Edina Mills 4699 -12 France Ave 55410 7 Gleason Court 6400 -6519 Gleason Ct 55436 28 Habitat Ct. 6100 -6121 Habitat Ct. 55436 18 Highcroft 5501 -65 70'b St W 55439 21 Highlander 7032 Cahill Rd 55439 17 Lewis Ridge 7220 -7240 Lewis Ridge 55439 15 Londonderry Duncan Ln, Tucker Ln 55436 36 Manor Homes Edina 6800 Langford Drive 55436 144 Nine Mile Village Falcon, Oriole, Pheasant, Red Fox, Sandpiper (55436) 97 Pondwood 7700 -7744 Pondwood Dr 55439 24 Summit Hill 5205 Interlachen Blvd. 55436 5 Tanglewood Court. 7700 -7733 Tanglewood 55436 32 Vernon Court 6200 -6216 Vernon Ct. 55436 5 Vernon Hills Vernon Hills Road 55436 16 Vernon Woods 6703 -6711 Vernon Ave 55436 5 Waterford Court 6100 -6110 Waterford 55436 10 Wellesley Place 1 -8 Wellesley Place 55436 8 White Oaks 4620 -4626 France Ave 55439 4 Woodview Court 7650 -7677 Woodview Ct 55436. 23 Townhomes Subtotal $QZ GRAND TOTAL Multi -Unit 949 Note: Habitat Ct., Waterford Ct, Gleason Ct., Tanglewood Ct and Vernon Hills function as townhomes but are classified R -2 by City – two unit side by side buildings, zero lot line. Certified Dwelling The total certified dwelling unit_number is derived from the utility,billing reports, 2011. Dwelling Number Sin le Family 13,298 Multi -unit up to 8 units 1 949 Total CDU's 14,247 i i rn v � )JA" y T • 1�,� rye REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $20,000 /CHANGE ORDER To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item No. VIII. F. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Wooddale Avenue Intersection Improvements, ENG 12 -7 Date Bid Opened or Quote Received: Bid or Quote Expiration Date: July 31, 2012 Se tember 31, 2012 Company Amount of Quote or Bid 1. Ryan Contracting Company $ 265,902.00 2. Midwest Asphalt Corporation $ 266,236.00 RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Reject all bids GENERAL INFORMATION: This pro�ect is to construct bump -outs at the intersections along Wooddale Avenue, between West 50 h Street and Valley View Road. This project was requested by the City Council at the May 15, 2012 Public Hearing for the bike boulevard project due to concerns of bicycle traffic traveling the wrong way in the parking bays. Staff did not realize the expense of the project due to the storm sewer modifications and small patching that is involved with this type of work. This project is not funded in the Capital Improvement Plan. Therefore staff is recommending rejecting all bids due to lack of funding. The bump -out areas will be stripped and staff will be educating the public to not travel incorrectly in the parking lanes. Signature The Recommended Bid is within budget Engineering De rtm mt not with (n budget John Wallin, Finance Director Scoff , taftaW fig, G: \PW \CENTRAL SVCS \ENG DIV \PR0JECTS \C0NTRACTS \2012 \ENG 12 -7 Wooddale Ave Inter Improv \ADMIN \MISC \Item VIII.F. Wooddale Avenue Intersection Improvements, ENG 12- 7.docx .r, 0"WAAM1 \! 1� \aOaOee // REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item # VIII. G. From: Wayne D. Houle, PE Director of Engineering ® Action ❑ Discussion [1 Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -98 Adopting Findings And Decision RE: Valley View Road And Sally Lane Tree Removal Recommendation: Adopt either attached Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A or Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version B, Adopting Findings And Decision Regarding Valley View Road And Sally Lane. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: The Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A was included in the July 17, 2012 City Council packet. The City Council requested that our City Attorney revise this Resolution, which the revised resolution is referred to as Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version B. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version B g: \pw \admin \comm \external \general corr by streets \s streets \sally lane vegetation issue \item viii.g. resolution no. 2012 -98 adopting findings and decision re valley view road and sally lane tree removal.docx Version A ADOPTING FINDINGS AND DECISION RE: VALLEY VIEW ROAD AND SALLY LANE TREE REMOVAL BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 City Council and staff received complaints from neighborhood residents relating to impaired sight lines at the intersection of Sally Lane and Valley View Drive. 1.02 City staff consulted with traffic engineers at WSB and Associates who performed an analysis of the sight lines at the intersection. 1.03 On September 30, 2011, WSB made its written report to City Engineer Wayne Houle. 1.04 The WSB report recommended the removal of all of the plantings in the Valley View Road right of way east of its intersection with Sally Lane located adjacent to 7025 Sally Lane. The plantings consist of six spruce trees located closest to the intersection and twenty -one arborvitae trees located further back from the intersection. 1.05 The WSB report also recommended the removal of three trees located in the Valley View Road right of way west of its intersection with Sally Lane adjacent to 7028 Sally Lane. 1.06 According to the WSB report, the removal of these trees are necessary to bring the intersection into compliance with the decision site distance standards in the MnDOT Road Design Manual Chapter 2- 5.08.04. 1.07 Doug and Jill Benner are the owners of the home located at 7025 Sally Lane. Wayne Alexander is the owner of the home located at 7028 Sally Lane. 1.08 On September 30, 2011, City Engineer Wayne Houle sent Mr. and Mrs. Benner and Mr. Alexander the WSB report and advised them that it would be considered at the City Council's October 4 meeting. 1.09 On October 4, 2011, the City Council approved a motion requiring the adjacent property owners to remove the trees identified in the WSB report as interfering with the site lines at the intersection of Valley View Road and Sally Lane. 1.10 On October 14, 2011, City Engineer Houle sent a letter to the Benners and Mr. Alexander notifying them that they were obligated to remove the offending trees within 30 days. 1.11 On October 30, 2011, the Benners submitted a letter to the City Council, along with a report from consulting engineers RLK Incorporated, asking the Council to rescind the notice requiring removal of the trees. G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A.DOC Version A 1.12 At its November 1, 2011 meeting, the City Council suspended the 30 -day notice until December 6, 2011 for a legal review by the City Attorney. 1.13 At its December 6, 2011 meeting, the Council revised its position and voted to require the delimbing of the spruce trees closest to the intersection to a height of eight feet, with the arborvitaes remaining. 1.14 At its December 20, 2011 meeting, the Council reaffirmed its position that the spruce trees be delimbed to a height of eight feet. 1.15 At the City's initiative, City representatives and the Benners engaged in mediation. Benners have continually refused to either remove the trees in the right of way or to delimb the spruce trees closest to the intersection. Section 2. FINDINGS. 2.01 All of the trees identified in the WSB report limit the site distances at the intersection of Sally Lane with Valley View Road and adversely impact safety at the intersection. 2.02 The WSB report utilizes the accepted MnDOT Road Design Manual standard and the presumptive ten second decision time standard for drivers on Sally Lane at the Valley View intersection. The WSB report assumes a 20 mph approach speed of vehicles on Valley View Road. 2.03 The report prepared by RLK at the request of Mr. and Mrs. Benner does not dispute the fact that the application of the presumptive ten second decision time standards and the 20 mph approach vehicle speed requires the removal of all the trees planted in the right of way adjacent to the Benner property to meet the required sight line distance. 2.04 The RLK report states that the existence of the trees in the right of way still allows a 200 foot stopping distance for vehicles on Valley View Drive to avoid a vehicle entering the intersection from Sally Lane. The RLK report recommends the installation of signs on Valley View Road to warn drivers of the approaching Sally Lane intersection. 2.05. WSB reviewed the RLK report. In its November 21, 2011 memorandum to City Engineer Houle it summarizes the difference in its approach from the emergency stopping analysis performed by RLK. The WSB memorandum states: Stopping Sight Distance versus Intersection Sight Distance: RLK mentions the stopping sight distance criterion of 200'. This is a last resort way of avoiding an accident. Which means the approaching motorist locking up the breaks to avoid a collision. 200' of sight distance only allows for 4.5 seconds of decision making time, which is less than the 6.5 second Highway Capacity G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012-98 Version A.DOC 2 Version A Manual default for driver gap acceptance. This is also assuming the approaching vehicle is not accelerating. 2.06 The City Council believes that the appropriate decision from a safety standpoint is to eliminate the sight distance impairment for vehicles turning onto Valley View Drive from Sally Lane rather than leave that safety hazard in place and rely on the ability of drivers on Valley View Road to make an emergency stop to avoid a collision. 2.07 The Council is appreciative of the fact that the removal of the trees will have some impact on the Benners' property. However, the trees are clearly within the City's Right of Way. There are plantings'And other landscaping that can be done on the Benners' property to mitigate the impact of the tree removal. 2.08 When issues are brought to its attention, City staff and the Council have the legal right and obligation to address safety issues caused by obstructions existing in its Right of Way. Section 3. DECISION. The City Attorney is directed to take all necessary legal steps to cause the removal of all the trees adjacent to 7025 Sally Lane and 7028 Sally Lane properties identified in the WSB report as interfering with the sight line standard. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota on August 6, 2012. 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 August 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 12012. City Clerk G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A.DOC 3 Version B RESOLUTION NO. 2012-98 ADOPTING FINDINGS AND DECISION RE: VALLEY VIEW ROAD AND SALLY LANE TREE REMOVAL BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 City Council and staff received complaints from neighborhood residents relating to impaired sight lines at the intersection of Sally Lane and Valley View Drive. 1.02 City staff consulted with traffic engineers at WSB and Associates who performed an analysis of the sight lines at the intersection. 1.03 On September 30, 2011, WSB made its written report to City Engineer Wayne Houle. 1.04 The WSB report recommended the removal of all of the plantings in the Valley View Road right of way east of its intersection with Sally Lane located adjacent to 7025 Sally Lane. The plantings consist of six spruce trees located closest to the intersection and twenty -one arborvitae trees located further back from the intersection. 1.05 The WSB report also recommended the removal of three trees located in the Valley View Road right of way west of its intersection with Sally Lane adjacent to 7028 Sally Lane. 1.06 According to the WSB report, the removal of these trees are necessary to bring the intersection into compliance with the decision sight distance standards in the MnDOT Road Design Manual Chapter 2- 5.08.04. 1.07 Doug and Jill Benner are the owners of the home located at 7025 Sally Lane. Wayne Alexander is the owner of the home located at 7028 Sally Lane. 1.08 On September 30, 2011, City Engineer Wayne Houle sent Mr. and Mrs. Benner and Mr. Alexander the WSB report and advised them that it would be considered at the City Council's October 4 meeting. 1.09 On October 4, 2011, the City Council approved a motion requiring the adjacent property owners to remove the trees identified in the WSB report as interfering with the sight lines at the intersection of Valley View Road and Sally Lane. 1.10 On October 14, 2011, City Engineer Houle sent a letter to the Benners and Mr. Alexander notifying them that they were obligated to remove the offending trees within 30 days. 1.11 On October 30, 2011, the Benners submitted a letter to the City Council, along with a report from consulting engineers RLK Incorporated, asking the Council to rescind the notice requiring removal of the trees. G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version B.DOC Version B 1.12 At its November 1, 2011 meeting, the City Council suspended the 30 -day notice until December 6, 2011 for a legal review by the City Attorney. 1.13 At its December 6, 2011 meeting, the Council revised its position and voted to require the delimbing of the spruce trees closest to the intersection to a height of eight feet, with the arborvitaes remaining. 1.14 At its °December 20, 20171 meeting; the Council reaffirmed its position that the spruce trees be delimbed;to a height of eight feet. 1.15 At the City's 'initiative, City representatives and the Benners engaged in mediation. Benners have continually refused to either remove the trees in the right of way or to delimb the spruce trees closest to the intersection. Section 2. FINDINGS. 2.01 All of the trees identified in the WSB report limit the sight distances at the intersection of Sally Lane with Valley View Road and adversely impact safety at the intersection. 2.02 The WSB report utilizes the accepted MnDOT Road Design Manual standard and the presumptive ten second decision time standard for drivers on Sally Lane at the Valley View intersection. The WSB report assumes a 20 mph approach speed of vehicles on Valley View Road. 2.03 The report prepared by RLK at the request of Mr. and Mrs. Benner does not dispute the fact that the application 'of the presumptive ten second decision time standards and the 20 mph approach vehicle speed requires the removal of all the trees planted in the right of way adjacent to the. Benner property. 2.04 The RLK report states that the existence of the trees in the right of way still allows a 200 foot stopping distance for vehicles on Valley View Drive to avoid a vehicle entering the intersection from Sally Lane. The RLK report recommends the installation of signs on Valley View Road to warn drivers of the'approachirig Sally Lane intersection. 2.05. _WSB, reviewed the RLK report. In its November:,21, 2011 memorandum to City Engineer Houle it summarizes the difference in its approach from the emergency stopping analysis performed by RLK. The .WSB memorandum states: Stopping Sight Distance versus Intersection Sight Distance: RLK mentions the stopping sight distance criterion of 200'. This is a last resort way of avoiding an accident. Which means the approaching motorist locking up the breaks to avoid a collision. 200' of sight distance only allows for 4.5 seconds of decision making time, which is less than the 6.5 second Highway Capacity G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version B.DOC 2 . . . Version B Manual default for driver gap acceptance. This is also assuming the approaching vehicle is not accelerating. 2.06 The City Council believes that the appropriate decision from a safety standpoint is to improve the sight distance impairment for vehicles turning onto Valley View Drive from Sally Lane rather than rely on the ability of drivers on Valley View Road to make an emergency stop to avoid a collision. 2.07 The Council is appreciative of the fact that the removal of all the trees will impact the Benners' property. 2.08 When issues are brought to its attention, City staff and the Council have the legal right and obligation to address safety issues caused by obstructions existing in its Right of Way. Section 3. DECISION. The City Attorney is directed to take all necessary legal steps to cause the delimbing to a height of eight (8) feet of the six spruce trees adjacent to 7025 Sally Lane and the removal of the three lilac bushes adjacent to 7028 Sally Lane properties identified in the WSB report as interfering with the sight line standard. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota on August 6, 2012. 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 August 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of , 2012. City Clerk G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version B.DOC M Save the Trees AUG 04 2012 July 28, 2012 Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 -1394 Re: Save the Trees Dear Honorable Mayor Hovland and Council Members: Page I of This letter is submitted by the undersigned to petition the City of Edina to stop all actions against the Benner family of 7025 Sally Lane to further trim. , de -limb. or remove any of the 28 trees. (22 Arborvitaes and 6 eye-[greens) that stand between their yard and Valley View Road. During the last year the. Benners have been. continuously contacted with respect to these trees: • First, they were required to remove them all'at their own expense. • Then, when the Benners appealed this they were required to trim the six evergreens back slightly. (They did this, and the City Engineer pronounced the matter closed.) • Then, the City Council changed its mind and required them to be de- limbed to a height of eight feet: • The family appealed this, and the City determined that formal mediation should ensue. • The Benners agreed, entered into mediation with the City, and offered the removal of the two corner evergreens as a means to begin a mediated compromise. However,,the mediation was terminated by the professional mediator when he determined the City was not mediating in good faith. • Now the City has resumed it's determination that the 6 evergreens should be de- limbed up eight feet. We ask that all actions against these trees be stopped for the following reasons: • These trees were planted by the previous homeowner in 1992 at the suQCtestion_ of the _City of Edina ft oft f as a means to grow a natural, green, safety, sight, and noise barrier for the protection of children playing in the yard and for the quiet enjoyment of their home for the family. One of the reasons the Benners purchased the property in 2001 was the beauty and utility of the trees. The City Council is aware that it was the City itself who suggested the trees be planted in the first place. • There is no violation of any section of the City Code. The Benners have hired their own attorney in order to defend the trees, and a review of the City Code by the law firm concluded there is no violation. • De- limbina the trees up 8 feet will endanger their health and create an evesore. The trees stand approximately 16 feet. Removing the bottom half of the branches will remove 7/8 of the foliage, which may kill the trees. If they do live, they will look strange, with only 1/6 of their foliage in a cone at the top. • The Ci 'will violate its own code if the de- limbing occurs. Section 830 of the Code indicates that the City will take all steps possible to NOT destroy or.injure trees. There is no official safety concern at the intersection. A traffic study conducted by engineering firm RLK Incorporated concludes this. Also, residents in the neighborhood have indicated the same in writing to the City. According to the Edina Police Department, there are no recorded accidents at the intersection. • The City has never once clearly identified a valid. legal reason to either trim, de -limb. or remove these beautiful trees. Legal counsel believes this is because there is no valid, legal reason. • A petition, which started all this. is not legitimate. It was represented to signers to have the aim of trimming back (not up) the two corner trees to be compliant with a Clear View requirement in the City Code (the two corner trees are compliant according to the Edina Police Department). However, the written petition was for the complete removal of all 28 trees. This misrepresentation by the organizers Save the Trees Page a of -L of the petition (whether deliberate or not), once discovered, caused multiple signers to formally revoke their signatures in writing to the City. The petition is, at a minimum, of questionable legitimacy. The City Council is aware of this issue. • The City is failing to sincerely work with the homeowners. One example is its refusal to mediate in good faith (causing the mediator to terminate mediation), when it was the City itself that suggested it. Each time the City attempts to force action against the trees, the Benner family has responded with logic and facts to support a request for the City to desist, either by appearing at City Council meetings to present their case, by their legal counsel contacting the City in writing, or by entering into mediation. Each time the City has taken the matter under advisement, and followed up with a different requirement to take action on the trees (and each time not citing a specific reason). This is looking like harassment. We respectfully petition the City of Edina to cease and desist all actions related to this matter, and leave the trees, and the Benner family, at peace. Sincerely, (Please see attached signature pages) Save the Trees Signature � 1,0 to Name ;)e�6GA -c, W g0MAccl�, Page � of JO- Address 70 '—S c c i L-►J -ke j e1 , b� - b gala o 7(c( r, ClQ I�PY 'lea C-D Gen v loo--/ 11:G/ilI7 :S-6f df, Nod k� CA?-kv4 06-P _7022 SO MI / aLlte LC' L ;;202 y J,//5 `�,sO 2 -y -)utI! LNG Z29�r���1 70;6� M c) 6 <Awd L^j Save the Trees Page r' of Signature Name Address Ut (K v -D G r w 2 0-13 ir<7) 1 ?AL11 �s 14 /44 Cd b. 6YN is ✓�ja��l �ePq� 'V ) ) c V vz •7, 3 3 Vj &L UieAj; Rc( 51 oo Clue�1 eve s Miff • li � i e Save the Trees Page of jo. Signature Name Address 2ti u Af.ApM L IJedqu15 s_�j3 Ft2io Let r l� as-Ilmi9t) 5'9ZSFP l u? fax 19u' l RAWk �►"ZIIMAH �OZ R �tA r M,4P 4 RIr -z c�a 64.1-4Z MAO.-\ qrefthe*l w fffoh MV L V Save the Trees Name Page of Address (c Us- %,w✓ �� -� G �� . 0 Item VIII. G. Version A RESOLUTION NO. 2012-98 ADOPTING FINDINGS AND DECISION RE: VALLEY VIEW ROAD AND SALLY LANE TREE- REMOVAL BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 City Council and staff received. complaints from neighborhood residents relating to impaired sight lines at the intersection of Sally Lane and Valley View Drive. 1.02 City staff consulted with traffic engineers at WSB and Associates who performed an analysis of the sight lines at the intersection. 1.03_ On September 30, 2011, WSB made its written report to City Engineer Wayne Houle. 1.04 The WSB report recommended the removal of all of the plantings in the Valley'View Road right of way east of its intersection with Sally Lane located'adjacent to 7025 Sally Lane. The plantings consist of six spruce trees located closest to the intersection and twenty -one arborvitae trees located further back from the intersection. 1.05 The WSB report also recommended the removal of three trees located in the Valley View Road right of way west of its intersection with. Sally Lane adjacent to 7028 Sally Lane. 1.06 According to the WSB report, the removal of these trees are necessary to bring, the intersection into compliance with the decision distance standards in the MnDOT Road Design Manual Chapter 2- 5.08.04. 1.07 Doug and Jill Benner are the owners of the home located at 7025 Sally Lane. Wayne Alexander is the owner of the home located at 7028 Sally Lane. 1.08 On, September 30; 2011, City Engineer Wayne Houle sent Mr. and Mrs. Benner and Mr. .Alexander the WSB report and advised them that -it would'be considered at the City Council's October 4 meeting. 1.09 On October 4; 2011, the City Council approved a motion requiring the adjacent property owners to.remove the trees identified in the WSB report as interfering with the site si ht lines at the intersection of Valley View Road and Sally Lane. 1.10 On October 14, 2011, City Engineer Houle sent a letter to the Benners and Mr. Alexander notifying them that they were obligated to remove the offending trees within 30 days. G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A site vs sight version.doc 1 Item VIII. G. Version A 1.11 On October 30, 2011, the Benners submitted a letter to the City Council, along with a report from consulting engineers RLK Incorporated, asking the Council to rescind the notice requiring removal of the trees. 1.12 At its November 1, 2011 meeting, the City Council suspended the 30 -day notice until December 6, 2011 for a legal review by the City Attorney. 1.13 At its December 6, 2011 meeting, the Council revised its position and voted to require the delimbing of the spruce trees closest to the intersection to a height of eight feet, with the arborvitaes remaining. 1.14 At its December 20, 2011 meeting, the Council reaffirmed its position that the spruce trees be delimbed to a height of eight feet. 1.15 At the City's initiative, City representatives and the Benners engaged in mediation. Benners have continually refused to either remove the trees in the right of way or to delimb the spruce trees closest to the intersection. Section 2. FINDINGS. 2.01 All of the trees identified in the WSB report limit the site sight distances at the intersection of Sally Lane with Valley View Road and adversely impact safety at the intersection. 2.02 The WSB report utilizes the accepted MnDOT Road Design Manual standard and the presumptive ten second decision time standard for drivers on Sally Lane at the Valley View intersection. The WSB report assumes a 20 mph approach speed of vehicles on Valley View Road. 2.03 The report prepared by RLK at the request of Mr. and Mrs. Benner does not dispute the fact that the application of the presumptive ten second decision time standards and the 20 mph approach vehicle speed requires the removal of all the trees planted in the right of way adjacent to the Benner property to meet the required sight line distance. 2.04 The RLK report states that the existence of the trees in the right of way still allows a 200 foot stopping distance for vehicles on Valley View Drive to avoid a vehicle entering the intersection from Sally Lane. The RLK report recommends the installation of signs on Valley View Road to warn drivers of the approaching Sally Lane intersection. 2.05. WSB reviewed the RLK report. In its November 21, 2011 memorandum to City Engineer Houle it summarizes the difference in its approach from the emergency stopping analysis performed by RLK. The WSB memorandum states: Stopping Sight Distance versus Intersection Sight Distance: RLK mentions the stopping sight distance criterion of 200'. This is a last resort way of avoiding an accident. Which means the G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A site vs sight version.doc 2 Item VIII. G. Version A approaching motorist locking up the breaks to avoid a collision. 200' of sight distance only allows for 4.5 seconds of decision making time, which is less than the 6.5 second Highway Capacity Manual default for driver gap acceptance. This is also assuming the approaching vehicle is not accelerating. 2.06 The City Council believes that the appropriate decision from a safety standpoint is to eliminate the sight distance impairment for vehicles turning onto Valley View Drive from Sally Lane rather than leave that safety hazard in place and rely on the ability of drivers on Valley View Road to make an emergency stop to avoid a collision. 2.07 The Council is appreciative of the fact that the removal of the trees will have some impact on the Benners' property. However, the trees are clearly within the City's Right of Way. There are plantings and other landscaping that can be done on the Benners' property to mitigate the impact of the tree removal. 2.08 When issues are brought to its attention, City staff and the Council have the legal right and obligation to address safety issues caused by obstructions existing in its Right of Way. Section 3. DECISION. The City Attorney is directed to take all necessary legal steps to cause the removal of all the trees adjacent to 7025 Sally Lane and 7028 Sally Lane properties identified in the WSB report as interfering with the sight line standard. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota on August 6, 2012. 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 August 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of 12012. City Clerk G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \S Streets \Sally Lane Vegetation Issue \Resolution No. 2012 -98 Version A site vs sight version.doc o� (Le REPORT /RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item Item No. VIII.H. From: Debra Mangen City Clerk ® Action ❑ Discussion ❑ Information Date: August 6, 2012 Subject: Resolution No. 2012 -97 Accepting Various Donations ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution. INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: In order to comply with State Statutes, all donations to the City must be adopted by a resolution approved by four favorable votes of the Council accepting the donation. I have prepared the attached resolution detailing the various donors, their gifts and the recipient departments for your consideration. ATTACHMENT: Resolution No. 2012 -97 RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -97 ACCEPTING DONATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 465.03 allows cities to accept grants and donations of real or personal property for the benefit of its. citizens; WHEREAS, said donations must be accepted via a resolution of the Council adopted by a two thirds majority of its members. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council accepts with sincere appreciation the following listed donations on behalf of its citizens. Edina Art Center: Carol Urness $25.00 Linda A& James Masica $100.00 Michael F. Kelly $500.00 Mark Johnson Art Books James Van Valkenburg $100.00 Mary Bang $50.00 Suzanne Selig $100.00 William M. Lord $50.00 Edina Communication & Technology Department: Edina Community Foundation $457.44 Edina Engineering Department: Bloomington Public health $3,333.00 Edina Fire Department: Residential Mortgage: $100.00 Edina Park Department: Edina Community Foundation $1,240.00 Edina Police Department: Edina Crime Prevention Fund $265.01 Dated: August 6, 2012 Attest: Debra A. Mangen, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CITY OF EDINA ) GoPro Camera Video Counting System For Bike& Pedestrians & Cars Margit Johnson Greenhouse Lighting At Arneson Acres Park Nite To Unite 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 August 6, 2012, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this day of CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street • Edina, Minnesota 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 927 -8861 • Fax 952 - 826 -0390 �s UJ 1 18813 Eo . REPORPRECOIV MENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item IX. A. DEBRA MANGEN Action From: CITY CLERK F1Discussion M Information Date: AUGUST 6, 2012 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED SINCE LAST COUNCIL MEETING INFORMATION/BACKGROUND: Attached are copies of e -mails and letters received since the last Council meeting. M July 25, 2012 Mayor James Hovland and Edina City Council Members 4801 W. 50'h Street Edina MN 55424 Dear Mayor Hovland and Council Members, We are writing to express our concern over flooding in the natural area located on Townes Road just south of Sunnyside Road in the White Oaks neighborhood, and to ask for your help in addressing this situation. One of the signature natural areas in White Oaks has always been the wooded area on Townes Road. Many Edina residents, including those from the surrounding Country Club and Morningside areas, enjoy walking past this area, making Townes Road a popular walking route. Historically, this natural area was densely wooded with one small wetland area in the center. In recent years, however, this woodland has been inundated with storm water, resulting in the loss of almost all its trees. Because the area has no outlet, there is' stagnant standing water within a few feet of the roadway for much of the year. Please see the attached photos, which were taken while standing on Townes Road. This woodland was once an attractive asset in our neighborhood and was the reason so many Edina residents enjoyed walking through White Oaks. We are concerned that the water levels that have been allowed to accumulate have killed the majority of the trees, have created health and safety concerns, and are rapidly turning this natural area into a detriment rather than an asset. We are especially concerned because Edina residents have long worked to save this natural area from development and to ensure that it remained in its natural state. In the late 1980s, the lot that comprises the southern portion of the woodland was sold to a developer who listed it as a residential building site. Because the lot was viewed as part of one of the signature natural areas in White Oaks, over ninety residents from White Oaks and surrounding neighborhoods signed a petition to the City Council opposing the development. _ Throughout 1.988 and 1.989,—the—White—Oaks—neighborhood—association—worked—with—the— _ _ — — City to negotiate a purchase of the lot from the developer. White Oaks neighbors raised $20,000 in private donations for the purchase, the city contributed a matching amount, and the developer agreed to sell the lot at a bargain price. r. In exchange for its $20,000 contribution, the neighborhood received assurances from the City that the lot would remain in its natural state. It was understood that the area would receive some storm water runoff as it always had, but that the character of the area as a wooded natural area would remain the same. Aerial photos from the 1990s confirm that the area was largely wooded at this time. Neighbors recall that it was possible to walk through most of the area. In addition, the City's 1999 Wetland Inventory identified the area as a Class 7 wooded wetland, indicating that trees were the dominant vegetation. In 2000, the City approved a storm water project that was designed to address a water level problem on Arden Avenue in the Country Club neighborhood. Unbeknownst to residents of White Oaks, part of the project involved redirecting storm water from Sunnyside Road between Grimes and Casco into the Townes Road natural area. Within a few years, higher water levels had killed all the trees in the center of the area. Cattails moved in and took over the former woodland, and as the cattails pushed out from the center, the water that accumulated after significant rain events collected in the remaining areas on the perimeter. As the attached photos show, the few remaining trees now frequently stand in significant amounts of water and it is only a matter of time until they are also lost. White Oaks neighbors who expressed concern over the loss of trees in the natural area were told that the higher water levels were simply due to higher levels of rain. It was not until recently that White Oaks residents finally learned about the actual change in the direction of storm water from the Country Club neighborhood. We are troubled by the City's decisions regarding the management of this natural area for several reasons: • The City's Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan states that Class 7 wooded wetlands are "highly susceptible" to degradation from storm water impacts and that inundation should be avoided. This management guideline obviously has not been followed. • As the marshy area fills in with cattails, the higher water levels are forcing water on to the property of adjacent homeowners. It is not acceptable for the City to use these residents' property for storm water containment. • The alternating condition between stagnant water and mud in the area is smelly and extremely unattractive and amounts to a nuisance for the entire neighborhood because it is so close 'to the roadway. The standing water is an insect breeding ground, and is undoubtedly highly polluted, raising both health and safety concerns. Because the city created this nuisance by choosing to direct run -off from other neighborhoods into the area, we believe it is the City's responsibility to fmd a way to manage this natural area in a way acceptable to the'nearby residents. We have met with the City's new Environmental Engineer, Ross Bintner, and have been impressed with his knowledge and interest in the matter. However, we believe that this issue needs immediate attention and we are requesting that the Council direct staff to prioritize finding a solution and to take immediate steps to improve the appearance and health of this natural area. We think these steps should include consideration of the following measures: • re- directing the storm water from Sunnyside Road to a different location and returning the area to former water levels., • developing a plan to ensure that storm water does not accumulate on,private property; ensuring that future storm water projects do not add to, and, if possible, work to reduce the amount of run -off into the area; - • clearing of dead trees by the City; • planting or seeding of a healthy and attractive buffer area along the roadway and possibly periodic mowing of this buffer; and consulting with adjacent property owners and White Oaks residents regarding all, plans for the management of this area. Most importantly, we believe a plan must be developed and action taken in the near future. The City's forester has confirmed that most trees cannot withstand being submerged for more than a couple of weeks, and it is highly likely that the'remaining trees in the area will be lost if something is not changed: Thank you in advance for your attention to this important concern — we look forward to working with you to find a solution. Sincerely, oe . bo�� DrAhn and Bette 4 .11 Road .g i 4544 Meadow Road 4611 Townes Circle �hOG�� "/ Dr. Christie Rhodes Dekko and 4704 White Oaks Road c6 0 Patty Brooks O'Neill 8 Bridge Lane Heather Wallace and John Schutzle 4701 Townes Road Ctj 114d, Susan and David Graham 4700 Townes Road Gary and Susan Vahman 4715 Weadow RoVd Lynne Ubrishita 4001 West 48`h Street 11 .c � At ..a-- Dr. Diane Feldman and Mike Feldman, M.D. 4083 Sunnyside Road Connor and Kathy Schmid 47111 Meadow Road 71 and Peggy JbIlMon C5, Dr. Tom and Arlene Wilson Road Harry and 8 Townes From: Susan Graham <sgraham @blakeschool.org> Subject: Re: White Oaks Marsh -Letter Date: July 31, 20121:57:16 PM CDT To: Cheryl Appeldorn <appeldornc@aol.com> Perfect. Thanksl Susan On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:09 AM, Cheryl Appeldom <apoeldornc @aol.com> wrote: Hi Susan - If its ok with you I'm going to send the letter with a note that you have signed via email, and attach your email to me - Have a great vacation Cheryl On Jul 26, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Susan Graham wrote: Cheryl, I should have mentioned when we spoke on the phone that David and I are out of town until 8/8. If you send the letter without our signatures, we'd be happy to go into City Hall and add them once we get home. Thanks again for all of your hard work! Susan On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Cheryl Appeldorn <appe!dornc@aol com> wrote: Hlall - I've got most of the signatures, but need to connect with all of you. Unfortunately I have to go out tonight - I wanted to let you know that the letter is on my front stoop in a plastic folder - you can stop by any time tonight or tomorrow during the day if that could work out - we are just having one member of each couple sign. Tomorrow evening we have company - so I'd love to get the signatures before then if I could - Thanks! Cheryl appeldornc @aol.com appeldornc @aol.com e Susan Howl ...... ... .........__.................... _.......,_... From: Bergren, Kathyf mai Ito- Kathy. Bergren @hanesbrands.com] Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 8 :32 AM To: Edina Mail; jonibennettl2@comcast.net; Mary Brindle; joshsprague@edinarealty.com; swensonannl@gmail.com Cc: 'scotta169 @hotmail.com' Subject: RE: Tue night Council Meeting Good Morning! Thanks again for the opportunity to address my Mother's situation during your council meeting on 7/17. My Mother is quite anxious to hear if any decisions have been made on this issue= if someone could please advise status, I would appreciate. I can be reached via email or cell (336.926.2512). Thanks! Sincerely, Katherine Bergren From:_. Berg'ren; Kathy Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 8:41.AM To: 'mail @EdinaMN.gov'; 'jonibennettl2 @comcast.net'; 'mbrindle @EdinaMN.gov'; 'joshsprague @edinarealty.com'; 'swensonannl @gmail.com' Cc: 'scotta169 @hotmail.com' Subject: Tue night Council Meeting Good Morning! I am writing on behalf of my Mother who lives at 5844 Brookview Ave So (house facing Pamela Park). She has an issue that was created when her street was recently curbed /repaved that we would like to address during Tuesday night's Council Meeting (7/17). Since we only have 3 minutes to present the case, I thought it would be helpful to send you a brief synopsis of the situation (attached). If anyone has any questions prior to Tuesday evening, please feel free to contact me. I will look forward to meeting you! Sincerely, Katherine Bergren 1 Susan Howl From: Jennifer Bennerotte Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2012 4:22 PM To: ED Everyone Cc: Ann Swenson; Jim Hovland; Joni Bennett; Josh Sprague; Mary Brindle (Comcast) Subject: Website Report -- July Good afternoon! We are now using Google Analytics to monitor activity on our website. Activity on the City of Edina website reflected the following activity during the month of July 2012, the first full month of our new website: Total visits: 72,677 Number of visitors: 51,548 Average time of each visit: 2 minutes, 35 seconds Total page views: 267,597 Besides the home page, the most visited page was the Aquatic Center home page with 20,615 page views. Other top pages included the following (with number of page views): Centennial Lakes Park — 15,176 Braemar Golf Course — 14,131 Aquatic Center General Information — 11,842 Edinborough Park -9,193 Aquatic Center Rates — 8,058 Aquatic Center Attractions — 6,775 Aquatic Center Hours — 6,072 Centennial Lakes Park Attractions — 5,084 Centennial Lakes Park Arts & Entertainment -4,763 The most frequently accessed PDF among visitors was the Centennial Lakes Park summer entertainment calendar. Other frequently downloaded files included the following: 2. Bike Plan 3. June 17, 2012 Crime Activity Report 4. Park Facilities Map 5. June 10, 2012 Crime Activity Report 6. Feb. 27, 2011 Crime Activity Report 7. Richmond Hills City Extra No. 1 8. Edina Country Club Brochure 9. Dan Patch Study 10. June 3, 2012 Crime Activity Report Along with the new website, we also launched a new civic engagement site, SpeakUpEdina.org. That site had 1,332 visits from 964 unique visitors during the month of July. The most popular area of the site was that of the Name Your Neighborhood project. Ecommerce totaled more than $10,525.44 in July. Top sales were Art Center program registrations, $4,214; online invoice payments, $2,390; and tennis program registrations, $1,177. We have been streaming video on our website through Granicus for several years. In July, there were 378 views through Granicus. The most requested videos on Granicus in July were the July 17 City Council meeting, 85 views; Second Quarter business performance presentation to City employees, 67; June 19 City Council meeting, 28; late June episode of "Agenda: Edina," 20; July 11 Planning Commission meeting, 16; July 19 Transportation Commission meeting, 14; April 17 City Council meeting, 11; 4th of July parade, 9; early April episode of "Agenda: Edina," 9; and April 3 City Council meeting, 8. We have been streaming all programming on YouTube since January 2011. In July, there were 5,394 views on the City's YouTube channel. The most requested videos on YouTube in July were the Aquatic Center's set of three commercials, 1,125 views; Aquatic Center FlowRider commercial, 1,102; 4th'0 f July parade, 705; 4th of July parade promo, 242; "Agenda: Edina" segment on the FlowRider, 173; Braemar Golf Dome commercials, 72; 2009 4th of July parade, 72; "The Peddler" PSA, 63; Edina Police Department overview video, 53; and "Together We Stand" PSA, 41. Please continue to review our new website and think about ways to improve it. If you have suggestions or questions, please contact me. Thanks! L Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications &.Technology Services Director 952 -833 -9520 I Fax 952 -826 -0389 1� JBennerotteREdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families Si Doing Business 2 Susan Howl From: Kitty O'Dea <kodea.mnQgmail.com> To: Edina City Council RE: 4524 Bruce Avenue I appealed the HPB's decision on the proposed homes at 4524 Bruce. I am in Denver this weekend and, in the event I don't make it back in time for the meeting, wanted to share my thoughts with you. I will be presenting pictures of the Country Club Tudors at the meeting. Please take a look at the pictures before the meeting by clicking on the following link: Country Club Tudors Username: HPB Password: preserveCCD The Board did not have all the information they needed to make an informed decision. The vote was close (5 to 4 for approval) and I am confident that the decision would have been different if they had more complete information. After the lst review meeting, it was clear to me that the some of the Board members weren't very familiar with the neighborhood or with the Tudor -style homes in particular. As a result, I photographed the 95 Tudor -style homes in the neighborhood that had the same distinguishing characteristics as the proposed ]ionic (2- story, stucco, wood timbering, gables & brick/stone accents). I was prepared to present the pictures of the Country Club Tudor homes to the HPB at the 2nd meeting. Unfortunately, we were in Council Chambers instead of the Community room (laptop) and Joyce didn't know how to run the equipment. I shared the following findings, but wasn't able to show the pictures. Here's what I learned: Porticos, Pillars & Porches >The original Country Club Tudors DID NOT have front porticos, pillars or porches. 92% still have the original entries while 8% have been modified to add porticos. These modifications occurred prior to the COA process. > None of the 95 Country Club Tudors have porches. In fact, there are only 2 homes in the entire neighborhood with open front porches and both are remodeled homes on Sunnyside and Edgebrook). 3rd Story Windows > Many Country Club Tudors have small decorative attic windows in large front facing gable, but only 3 have separate gables in the roof large windows facing the street. The predominant design is to have 3rd floor windows face the sides or rear of the home. > The color schematic that the builder presented were not consistent with the detailed plans for the attic/bonus room windows. The schematic shows one small south facing window and the large front gable /window. On the actual plans, there will be three south - facing windows. Had the HPB seen this, they may have felt differently about the front gable /window. The Wordelman's raised concern about using cement panels versus stucco on the home at the first meeting. I've been to other HPB presentations where materials were presented to the HPB and neighbors to review and discuss. Given the strong concerns raised at the 1 st meeting, the proponent should have presented the proposed materials at the 2nd meeting. How can the Board approve a material they haven't seen? In the end, only 2 members of the Board said they liked the house. There was confusion on how to evaluate the home and there was concern that the changes didn't go far enough. Please uphold the appeal and give the Board the opportunity to get all the facts and make an informed decision on this home. I hope to see you on Monday. Please check out the photos online. Thanks for your consideration. Susan Howl Subject: Support Wind Energy and the PTC Dear Council members of Edina, I am e- mailing to follow up on an e-mail regarding the Production Tax Credit (PTC). We are still trying connect with mayors in Congressman Paulsen's district to encourage him to support the renewal of the PTC. More information is below in the original e-mail. Please let me know whether or not you are interested in signing on! Thank you for your time, Sydney Forrester Sierra Club Intern sPf2107(cr_.gmail.com (612) 659 -9124 On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Sydney Forrester <ssp 1070)gmail.com> wrote: Dear Council members of Edina, I am writing as an intern for the Sierra Club to ask you to support clean energy by signing onto a letter of support that would encourage Congress to renew the Production Tax Credit (PTC). The PTC has proven successful in increasing the production of clean energy, especially that of wind. This has helped both the creation of American jobs as well as reducing the dependence on fossil fuels as the primary source of energy. With the wind industry growing rapidly, the PTC supports over 75,000 American jobs. Unless Congress acts quickly to renew the PTC, half of the existing jobs will be lost. We need to gain support from leaders across the state to convey to our Congressional leaders how important these added jobs, along with the wind industry, are to Minnesota. Attached please find both a fact sheet and a sign on letter with more information to support Minnesota's wind industry and the renewal of the Production Tax Credit. Please contact me with any questions or to sign on to the letter. Thank you for your time, Sydney Forrester Sierra Club Intern spf2107(a)_gmail.com (612) 659 -9124 The wind industry supports more than 75,000 American -made jobs around the country and is helping to lead the way toward America's clean- energy future. With the right policies in place, the wind industry could support 500,000 jobs by 2030. Already, states like Iowa and South Dakota generate 20 percent of'their electricity from wind power, and the wind industry is on track to produce 20 percent of America's electricity by 2030. Over 400 American manufacturing plants build wind components, keeping jobs close to home. EXPIRING POLICIES MEAN AMERICAN JOBS ARE AT RISK The Production Tax Credit (PTC), a federal policy that helps level the playing field and has been a key driver in wind - industry job growth over the past decade, is set to expire at the end of 2012. If the PTC is not renewed, approximately half of all existing U.S. wind jobs are expected to be lost. That means as many as 37,000 Americans could face pink slips thanks to government inaction — something we can't afford during this tough economy. Already, Congress's failure to extend the PTC has dried up orders for new wind turbines and created a crisis where thousands of layoffs are imminent. CONGRESS SHOULD DEFEND AMERICAN JOBS, NOT THE INTERESTS OF BIG POLLUTERS Congress should support American wind energy jobs rather than continue to subsidize big polluters like the oil industry. Congress can protect jobs and public health by supporting the PTC and helping the country transition away from dirty energy. Elected officials should vote now to extend the PTC for at least two years —and absolutely before they go home to run for reelection. JOIN US IN SUPPORTING AMERICAN JOBS IN THE WIND INDUSTRY BY TELLING YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO RENEW THE PTC NOW! To learn more, and to find out how you can get involved, visit: www.sierraclub.org /windworks PROTECT THE PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT: WIND ENERGY CREATES AMERICAN -MADE JOBS. Support Minnesota's Wind Industry Sign. On letter To Minnesota's Congressional Delegation: Wind energy is facing a potential crisis that.could.result in the loss of tens of thousands of high = quality American jobs. Your active support of renewal of the Production Tax Credit is critical to avoid the unnecessary disruption to one of our fastest- growing industries. The Production Tax Credit (PTC) for renewable energy was created in the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to help level the playing field for clean energy industries such as wind and geothermal. The Production Tax Credit has been,.incredibly successful at helping to move the wind industry forward. and enabling it to achieve economies of scale that make it competitive with other energy sources: Wind energy is already an important part of our country's energy mix. Wind now generates around.20'percent of total electricity. needs instates ` like South Dakota and Iowa. In March 2012, wind was responsible for 32 percent. of the energy supply in South Dakota, and 29 percent in "Iowa. Nationally, wind is 3% of our energy mix with opportunity to expand. Minnesota. is a wind energy leader with over 2731 of installed wind energy capacity. The wind industry supported 2000 -3,000 jobs in 2011 in, Minnesota, and it provided Minnesota with 12.7% of its electricity. Moving America toward a clean energy future will not only create new, high - quality American jobs, but also has significant public health benefits. Renewable energy like wind power replaces energy from fossil fuels that -cause air pollution, leading to heart attacks, asthma attacks and more than $1'00 billion in health costs. Jobs in the wind industry are not expendable or to be cast off lightly. The American Wind Energy Association estimates that as many as 37,000 jobs - mostly in the manufacturing sector — could be lost if no action is taken to renew the Production Tax Credit. Please speak out and urge your leaders to bring a Production Tax Credit renewal bill up for a vote immediately: Every day of inaction risks further job losses and uncertainty for thousands of American families. Sincerely, Name: Organization: City: Phone: Email: Any affiliations or titles that we should list: State: Please return to: Joshua Low, Sierra Club North Star Chapter, joshua.low(2csierraclub.ork" or Mail: Sierra Club, 2327 E Franklin Ave, Suite 1; Minneapolis, MN 55406 Susan Howl Subject: Edina, compete in the Earth Hour City Challenge Jul 26, 2012 Mayor James Hovland 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Dear Mayor Hovland, As a Edina resident, I'm writing to urge you to help protect my family and our city from the harmful consequences of increasingly extreme weather by participating in WWF's Earth Hour City Challenge, a competition among cities to prepare for a changing climate. More and more, communities in Minnesota are facing heavier precipitation and dangerous flooding. We aren't alone. Cities throughout our country are on the front lines of increasingly extreme weather, from more intense heat waves and wildfires to droughts, rainstorms, and floods. As climate change worsens, dangerous weather events are getting more frequent or severe - or both. But our city can take practical measures at the local level to prepare for these weather extremes, protecting us from more costly and dangerous problems in the future. Infrastructure improvements and other proactive actions will save us money and keep our families and communities safer and healthier. How is our city preparing for these climatic changes? And are we doing enough? With this letter I challenge our city to compete in WWF's Earth Hour City Challenge! I hope you will participate and protect my family and fellow residents by preparing for the increasingly extreme weather our community is already facing. Learn more at woridwildlife.org /citychallenge. Sincerely, Ms. Susan Spindler 5305 W 60th St Edina, MN 55436 -2651 (952) 922 -1943 Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2012 8:48 AM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: Fw: Edina Medical Plaza Proposal - 6500 France Avenue Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952- 927 -8861 1 Fax 952- 826 -0389 Ibiunno(a_EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Fatuities & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.town ... working to make the healthy choice the easy choice': From: Alan Lapinsky [mailto:a.lapinsky @comcast.netl Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 5:25 PM To: jonibennettl2(@comcast.net; joshspraguePedinarealty.com; swensonannl(5gmail.com; Mary Brindle; Edina Mail Subject: Edina Medical Plaza Proposal - 6500 France Avenue Dear City Council members, My wife and I were very disappointed with your decision to turn down the proposal by Mount Development, Edward Farr Architects and Aurora Investments to build the new "Edina Medical Plaza Building" at 6500 France Avenue. We are condo owners at the Point of France (POF) and considered the proposed building to be a wonderful change to a corner screaming for redevelopment as well as an outstanding addition and asset to the local neighborhood and the City of Edina in general. Both the development company and architectural firm have extensive experience in the design and construction of medical buildings and their portfolio of past projects is quite impressive. Over the last number of months we have attended meetings with the developer and architect conducted at the Point of France and have also attended both of their project presentations to the City of Edina Planning Commission. We have been quite impressed with the vetting process and the considerable amount of well thought out questions, concerns and feedback between all stakeholders as to the relative merits of the proposed project. After the first Planning Commission meeting where the project as then presented was turned down by nearly all commissioners, the developer and architect went back to the drawing board and came up with a revised building design that addressed the vast majority of the Planning Commission's previous concerns. As part of their revised plan and design, commitments to purchase the other adjacent property at 4005 West 65th Street to create a more unified and acceptable design concept as well as bringing the ratio of land to build -out square footage to a more acceptable measure were incorporated. In our opinion, the developer, architect and investment company have been responsive to the many concerns raised during the proposed project, taken action to modify their plans accordingly in order to satisfy the many parties involved and as a result subsequently received unanimous support from the Planning Commission to pass this project forward for the City Council's review. It was therefore very surprising and quite unexpected to us to see the City Council vote down this important project. The buildings intent appears to be consistent with the City's plan for a medical services campus with it being in close proximity to Fairview Southdale Hospital and the Southdale Medical Center at 6545 France Avenue (both of which I can see out my window as I write this fetter and are as tall or much taller than the proposed 6500 building). Would we prefer a 4 story building instead of the 6 stories proposed, probably so, but to stop and quite likely kill this project with the primary objection being it's height when everything around it, including the Point of France is of equal or greater height makes little sense to us. Also in light of the fact that the developer stated during the council meeting there is no intention for the foreseeable future to build the 5th and 6th floors in a second stage brings into further question the wisdom of the City Council's decision to turn down the proposed project. This is a project that should go forward and we hope that some reasonable compromise is currently being considered. We would also like to call to the City's attention the under- maintained condition of the Milavetz property at this corner and the safety hazard confronting pedestrians. I walk by there every day trying to avoid broken glass and portions of small tree branches that are littered on the France Avenue sidewalk. There are also dead branches from shrubs or trees piled against the building on the south side which invites rodents and is a likely fire hazard. Very little is being done to maintain this property and the adjoining surface lot. I realize the owners are looking to sell the property but something needs to be done by the building owners in the interim to better maintain an acceptable and safe environment. Sincerely, Alan & Ruthanne Lapinsky 6566 France Ave. #1007 Edina, MN 55435 Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 8:24 AM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: CRITICAL ISSUE -__ Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952- 927 -8861 1 Fax 952- 826 -0389 Ibiunno(DEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. 'We're a do-town ... working to make the heal?hy choice the easy choice; From: Roslye Ultan [mailto:ultan0010)umn.edu1 Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:24 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: CRITICAL ISSUE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS of Edina: There is a critical issue regarding my property //5249 Lochloy Dr // that makes it important to meet with you for a discussion as soon as possible. My neighbor on Skyline drive adjacent to my backyard is in the process of constructing a wall close to 30 ft high which is positioned to cause land slides and erosion. Your council is sought on this issue ranging from the environmental to the level of taxes on my property which has now come into question. Your prompt address of this matter is appreciated. Rosly Ultan ultai1001 cr,umn.edu 952 926 3576612 889 1313 Susan Howl Jul 27, 2012 Mayor James Hovland 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 -1330 Dear Mayor Hovland, As a Edina resident, I'm writing to urge you to help protect my family and our city from the harmful consequences of increasingly extreme weather by participating in WWF's Earth Hour City Challenge, a competition among cities to prepare for a changing climate. More and more, communities in Minnesota are facing heavier precipitation and dangerous flooding. We aren't alone. Cities throughout our country are on the front lines of increasingly extreme weather, from more intense heat waves and wildfires to droughts, rainstorms, and floods. As climate change worsens, dangerous weather events are getting more frequent or severe - or both. But our city can take practical measures at the local level to prepare for these weather extremes, protecting us from more costly and dangerous problems in the future. Infrastructure improvements and other proactive actions will save us money and keep our families and communities safer and healthier. How is our city preparing for these climatic changes? And are we doing enough? With this letter I challenge our city to compete in WWF's Earth Hour City Challenge! I hope you will participate and protect my family and fellow residents by preparing for the increasingly extreme weather our community is already facing. Learn more at worldwildlife .org /citychaIlenge. Sincerely, Ms. Christine Wisch 7601 Stonewood Ct Edina, MN 55439 -2640 Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 10:23 AM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Edinborough pool hours Good morning, This message has been forward to the Mayor and Council members, Susan Faus, Ann Kattreh and John Keprios. , Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952 - 927 18861 1 Fax 952-826-0389 Ibiunno @EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families.& Doing Business - - - =- Original Message---- - From: joan mcmillan; [mailto:imcmillan6 6@gmail.c6m1 Sent: Friday,.July 27, 2012 10:09 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Edinborough pool hours Hello again, I am happy to see the pool and track at Edinborough Park will remain open..thank you! But I am disappointed in the reduced hours. First of all, it has been a puzzel as to when you are open and when is family /lap scheduled. I have gone to find the pool closed, taken my granchildren.to find it is lap time and closing in a half hour. They say it is to save money, but the pool and water are there, the attendants are there for the play area so what is the cost to have paying customers turned away -- negative costs as I see it. Having families come in the evening to swim is great and you are closing the pool too early for people to get home, eat a meal and go for a swim -- especially nice this very hot summer. Your new schedule-has been impossible to find in the first place so it is especially disappointing for all of us, as it was for my grandaughter when you get turned away. The evening I took my grandaughter we had 1/2 hour and it was really lap time - -so there were other families and lap swimmers trying to `accommodate the confusion. Another item I have on my mind is the unlocking of the pool and track doors. I feel this is not good for safety - -young people in the locker rooms can.easily be victims as well as one can lose their clothes or other items left in the locker rooms. I went for laps one late afternoon (I think) and there were five young men in their twenties ( ?) not even swimming. They admitted they didn't even know how to swim. I was not alone until the other gentleman swimming laps left. I did not think of safety until a woman came in and, after the men left, she told me she would not have stayed if I was not there. I did not observe the standard bracelets on these men and mentioned that to the "attendant and,she said they:do not use the bracelets anymore. The bracelets may be unpopular, but at least we know the persons sharing our locker rooms are not.persons who just sneaked in .while the doors are unlocked. Thanks again for keeping the pool open, but I feel it is being poorly managed in the excuse of saving money when it is only turning your paying customers away. Joan mcMillan 1 Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 8:36 AM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Hornets Nest - ° Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952 - 927 -8861 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno(@EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.fown ... working to maker the healthy choice the easy choir.,ei From: Eric Anderson [mailto:Ericaccrpllc.com] Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 8:23 AM To: joshspragueC&edinarealty.com; swensonannl(a)gmail.com; jonibennettl2Cdcomcast.net; Mary Brindle; Edina Mail Cc: Scott Neal; John Keprios; Susie Miller Subject: Hornets Nest Mr. Mayor and City Council Members, I wanted to advise you that we have received the full amount of the required $795,707 from our donors. On Friday, $747,000 was wire transferred to the City of Edina's bank account per the instructions provided by John Wallin. The remaining $48,707 was provided to us by donors in the form of check and was not yet authorized for release from US Bank to the City's account. The remaining transfer will occur on Monday. With that, the final contingency for this project is satisfied and we have begun to make preparations for ground breaking on August 1st. Thanks again for your support of this project. Eric J. Anderson, CCIM City Center Realty Partners 800 Washington Avenue North Suite 690 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 - 339 -6400 eric @ccrpllc.com www.ccrpllc.com Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 2:46 PM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Edina Medical Plaza application, Jim Hovland Lynette B.iunno, Receptionist 952- 927 - 8861.1 Fax 952- 826 -0389 Ibiunno cDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov JJ For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.town .,. working to make: the healthy choice the easy choice From: Stephen Michals [mailto:smichals(&mountdev.coml Sent: Friday, July 20,:2012 2:36 PM _ To: Edina Mail. Subject Edina Medical Plaza application Jim Hovland Dear Mr. Hovland, I appreciate your thoughtful words in support of our, proposed building. We would like to discuss an alternate design with several members of the Council to see if we can obtain some direction. There are several changes we could make to achieve our size but reduce green space. We have obtained approximately 10 resident calls in disbelief the plan was denied. Could we meet with several Council members and you to discuss an alternate plan with the architect at City Hall? Steve Michals Mount Development Co. 10400 Viking Dr. Suite 160 Eden Prairie, MN. 55344 952 - 941 -1383 smichals @mountdev.corn 1 Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 8:35 AM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Equality Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-8861 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 .R ( Ibiunno(&- Edina MN.gov i www.EdinaMN.pov - ...For Living, Learning, Raising Faulilies &. Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.`-,),%,n ... vrorking to make ibe la--althy choice the e:.asN choire' From: Joan Anderson [ mailto:jcanderson560 @gmail.coml Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 7:58 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Equality Dear Mr. Hovland, I saw the list of the Mayors for the Freedom to marry http : / /www.google.fr /url ?sa=t &rct =i &q= mayors+ for +freedom +marry &source = web &ed =1 &ved= OCCsOFiAA & url= http %3A %2F %2Fwww.freedomtomarry.or °/g o2Fpages%2Finayors- for - the - freedom -to- marry& ei= Hgs2T466JgGmOQXXitCgAg& usg= AFQiCNFfZEz- caUfU4uExSk- ;lATunelcOQ.g (direct link). There are 265 Mayors on the list now, like Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Rochester, Duluth, Eagan, Shakopee, Golden Valley, Falcon Heights. Same gender marriage is not allowed in Minnesota and you may know that even married same gender couples are unequal because of a law called DOMA. This is downright discrimination and this means real hardship for many families like mine. Maybe you do not know of this bipartisan initiative. Equal opportunities for all citizens regardless their differences is consistent with the true spirit of our Nation, enshrined in our Constitution (liberty and justice for all...). I hope that you will take a stand for justice and join these mayors, like our President did and countless civil rights associations. Thank you. Joan Anderson icanderson560(aagmail.com Susan Howl ` From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 2:25 PM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Pinstripes Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952 -927 -8861 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno @EdinaMN.> ov I www.Edi'naMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business - - - - -- Original Message---- - From: kerrykisling@ aoLcom . [ma i Ito: kerrykisling @aol.coml Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 2:13 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: dalel@att.blackberry.net Subject: Pinstripes Dear. Council members, I was reflecting today on the previous discussions before you regarding the opening of Pinstripes in Edina. I am a resident at the Coventry town -homes and spoke in favor of Pinstripes. I'm writing to you to thank you for supporting this business and voting "yes ". Pinstripes has been a fabulous neighbor and is an asset to Edina. Dale and his staff run their business with the quality and professionalism equal to what was represented at the Council meetings. I appreciate . the work you do. Sincerely, Kerry Kisling. Sent from ,my, Wad Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 10:26 AM To: Susan Faus Cc: Susan Howl; Ann Kattreh; John Keprios Subject: FW: Edinborough Park Pool Good morning, This message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council members, Susan Faus, Ann Kattreh and John Keprios. Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952-927-88611 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno(- EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov Failie & Doing Business ...For Living, Learning, Raisin g Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.town ... working to make the healthy rhoice the easy choice! From: Zuccaro, Kay [ mailto :KayZuccaro@)edina.kl2.mn.us] Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 10:16 AM To: Edina Mail Subject: Edinborough Park Pool Dear Edina City Council Members: I wanted to Thank You all for voting to keep the Edinborough Park Pool open. We are so happy to be able to use the pool for our water exercise classes and parent /toddler swim lessons. The Seniors are especially grateful. We do appreciate all the time and effort you have put into this important issue in our community. Sincerely, Kay Zuccaro Aquatics Supervisor Edina Community Education 952 - 848 -3965 Edinacommunityed.org Susan Howl Good Morning Mayor, It was kind of fun to be at the council meeting last night. The city website has changed so I don't know how to email the correct person in regards to the 6500 France project. I- would ask that you please forward to others as you feel it is appropriate. I would like to share my thoughts on how we can work thru the issues. It is a great.;project and I think we -.all want it'to go'thru.. One issue is the 2nd phase, the additional floors, how about if they keep the 4 floors but make the building footprint bigger ?.;Have the building go over to the parking ramp the drop off could still be there and honestly if, it was in the ramp or under cover it would suit us'9 months of the year with rain and snow, even. shade with the weather we've had lately.. The 'grand entrance' look everyone likes could be-on 65th' street side and maybe, loose the south side exit, because that will be an issue for cars using it' as'a cut thru, trust me I drive a lot and if there is a way, there is a will to short cut.. Another idea. for compromise is ... 5 stories and plant trees.that.will grow tall, white pines or others on the south /west property borders. There are ash trees but are they are not young and we do have. ash borers here so'they could be gone quickly ?? There are varieties of trees that grow to 80 feet. Yes it would:take time but they will grow! The next area of concern is the top of the parking ramp, but honestly the POF residents look at parking lot now but it would be up higher and the tennis court is there in front of the parking structure so I don't think that is so bad, however I had an idea. What about a pergola type structure for the top that would afford some screening? maybe just on the south side ?? Cornelia doesn't really look down on it like POF. The real problem I have with the plan that wasn't discussed at. all last night is how close they are to the property, line on the south side. Did you'see the drainage pipe? The water would becoming out in our property it, is so-close. Why do they automatically get to go over what the rules are there? Having the building tall and in your face (right on the property line) is a double whammy, can't they use what the standard set back is on the south side? I left my notes at home so I may have forgotten a couple good ideas but at least I can cover these for now. We all want the project, the city and the residents to do well by this. Sincerely, Teresa Wedin NCS 952- 941 -4464 952- 941 -0396 fax twedina_ncscor.com 1 Susan Howl TO: Edina Planning Commission & Mayor Hovland and the Edina City Council Members RE: Architectural Design Standards of New Construction I am writing because I am cognizant of pleasing architectural design. My background experience has been with Ellerbe Architects and more recently with Edina Public Art. I encourage the Planning Commission as well as the City Council to be very diligent in scrutinizing the architectural design of the upcoming new projects proposed for Edina. To name two - the proposal for apartments adjacent to Southdale and the Byerly's project along the Edina Promenade. These projects will be milestones in the formulation of Edina. Architectural works, in the material form of buildings, are often perceived as cultural symbols and as works of art. There have been many negative discussions regarding the architectural design and details of some of the recent construction. The project that has received the most criticism is York Gardens. The original building 7500 York is much more attractive and pleasing to the public than the new building. Comments are that the new addition looks like the building is not finished. A project without character or pleasing design is the apartment/condo building along Highway 100 and 77th. Another example of poor design is the addition to the Y on York. I am referring to facade or curb appeal. An example of good design is the building now leased by Pinstripes. The louvers in the parking ramp skin made a significant improvement to the overall appearance of the building. I am aware that resident input led my John Bohan requesting improvements to the original design of this ramp was acted upon by the developer and the council and it resulted in an attractive building. Thank you for your dedication and hard work for our community. I hope that my comments will impact your future decisions. Sincerely, Lois Ring 7440 Edinborough Way Edina,MN 55435 952- 806 -9966 Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 3:21 PM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Lynette Biunno, Receptionist .952 - 927 -8861 ( Fax 952- 826 -0389 t IbiunnoCrDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov l� ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. 4% /e're a do-town ... working to make the healthy choice the easy choice! From: O'Connell, Sam [ mai Ito: sam.oconnelWDmetrotransit.orgl Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 2:58 PM To: Edina Mail Cc: Caufman, Robin Subject: Good Afternoon Mayor Hovland: At last week's Southwest LRT Corridor Management Committee, you asked us to share with you the name of the person replacing Arrie Larsen Manti at the Edina Chamber. We spoke with Arrie last week and she indicated that her last day with the Chamber will be at the end of this month and she will notify us of her replacement. Arrie contacted us today and informed us that her replacement is Lori Syverson. In addition, the Edina Chamber has named Wendie Graczyk, Comcast Business Development, as their representative to the SWLRT Business Advisory Committee. Please feel free to call me if you have further questions. Thank you. Sam O'Connell, AICP Public Involvement Manager Southwest Light Rail Project Office 6465 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 500 St. Louis Park, MN 55426 E -mail: sam.oconnell(@metrotransit.ore Phone: 612.373.3815 www.swlrt.org SOUTHWEST i h, s ( n. ii ,; r,t,:i i:: i hc. v rY t y the n: :I + eciI)[ a t. 1 ,s o—ma u n } .;rr i cip;J or unit :nicr.7 fr n,, (Ji;,r;iosuro by laoi. it you are= OI'IiiT 1 L =nddn i :a,ne,nt, an, c, s:'r; - i' a.! o -o t us (�mafl or any P1vFchr cents iS sU¢'rty :xo %i ^rJ y:; .i n,rr :cF .,in f, on: i .,:m ; tt i, ; r :m cr [ x ;rainirri aiLlc;iun of ,. It Vol ie:.;, , :at, ri. s er'lai! in fn: o? pleFr .(; n;:i'y .hc. s nJt,r ur,n : rlcitc "y „nc ('c..(` i` th1S en tai! a,m .,i } Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail - Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 8:24 AM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Hornets Nest Lynette Biunno, Receptionist 952- 927 -8861 1 Fax 952-826-0389 IbiunnotcDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families &. Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a do.towv ... r+orking to make the hea lhy choice: the easy chorice! From: Eric Anderson rmailto:Eric(cbccrpllc.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 6:36 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Hornets Nest Mayor Hovland, Thank you for your leadership and support of the Hornets Nest project. You should be proud of the group you lead. The City has been a pleasure to work with throughout the process. I'm looking forward to getting a shovel in the ground soon and watching young Edina players honing their hockey skills for years to come. Thanks, Eric J. Anderson, CCIM City Center Realty Partners 800 Washington Avenue North Suite 690 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612 - 339 -6400 eric @ccrpllc.com www.ccrpllc.com Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:14 AM To: Jeff Long Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Coyote Good morning, I have forwarded this message to the Mayor and Council members and Jeff Long. —w Lynette Biunno, Receptionist c iC-1 952- 927 -8861 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 f ! a ;J Ibiunno(a2EdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov — 1 ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families 4 Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. Were a do town ... wo Cin^ t.o make the health, choice the Easy rhoicel From: Kathy Dahlheimer [ mailto:kdahlheimer @comcast.netl Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 9:40 AM To: swensonanni@gmail.com; Edina Mail Subject: Coyote Hello ... I just watched some of the marathon meeting of July 17th and heard the comments at the end of the meeting about the coyote problem. About one week ago I was driving east on 60th St. (I live at 4801 West 60th St.) and at the corner of Concord and 60th I saw an animal coming out from the northwest corner house there and I thought at first it was a dog. Then it went back in the backyard of the house and I went around the block a couple of times but it was gone. At closer range it was not a dog and I confirmed with photos online it was a coyote...) am sure. I left a message with the animal control but never got a call. This is not too far from Pamela Park where I know there have been sightings. As a dog owner I am very concerned about this trend. I also noted just this past week at least three signs for missing cats, in the area. Probably not related but who knows? I felt like this subject has not been taken as seriously as it should and frankly "hazing" does not give me much hope for eliminating this problem. I hope after the latest reports more serious action is taken. Thank you in advance for your attention to this issue. Also thanks for all your work ... I noticed all of you asking great questions about Edinbourgh Park even at lam.! Kathleen Dahlheimer Susan Howl From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4:28 PM Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Edina City Council -�: Lynette Biunno, Receptionist ? (t? 952- 927 -8861 1 Fax 952 - 826 -0389 Ibiunno(cDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.gov -�. ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business Please make note of my new email address. We're a tdo.town ... working to make the healthy choice the easy choice! From: Jane.Borden fmailto :Jane. Borden (atarget.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 4:21 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Edina City Council Mayor Hovland, It was nice meeting you at the recent "Oasis for Youth" event. My husband and I have owned our home in Edina for 26 years (and I lived in it when my parents owned it beginning in 1969) and I have never contacted the City with any complaints, until today. We are selling our home and learned that about $25,000 is going to be withheld from our payout to cover the cost of the pending special assessment for road work that was completed one year ago (estimated cost $16,300). 1 was told that until the City Council approves the work as being completed and agrees to the amount to be paid, the special assessment cannot be levied, and therefore can't be billed to, and paid by, the homeowner. I didn't complain about the outrageous amount homeowners are expected to pay, nor about categorizing this as a special assessment so, as is custom in MN, home sellers pay it even though the home buyer will reap the benefits of this work for years to come. We would like to pay the bill and move on, not have our money tied up until who knows when. Please let me know if there is some way to resolve this in a manner that is satisfactory to the City and us. Thank you. Jane Borden 5440 Woodcrest Drive Edina, MN 55424 _ %avwl 1;1 "�'. j [3:. ... 71,7 ?� ;ra :1...f; •'l R. r'Y'iI i .,r` ,I, Rea t ,;1: i E) 21 1 1 Wif tv, - !I Tip_ i 2f �;'' dt 3 -18 �E l i U1�5 oi:! n � i� c_ �,e,,v� -at any{. � c-_- -%uciL G1� cP � o l � O.,n rt jqq de c( 4,e- LOR-cn QW) ' w:e.w}' ba c�liCularro Qn PA bow Ca- ro"l.c, hcd dl is l o ec&-4 -iu�, �. s--o peed and hp, ape d W-�%� 4/, frt/m c/ l . VO� arnkac u,Y-e., of mom. j��10�?'� 4pn J ivo J J h off- hC ct,f ibp. 76d�. q,l ci G,'S -fvo'- 5'Nty-f-d CLY\I,-I..Cb C-kL C/I �4kt� r6hr� hol� j �i,m Sa CJ mud, ley � yta-14 -6� 44,vtl ct4--e, 6tG� n D jn5ctr CAC'e-) cou'ld44 OSeP c7 t.15+ W.4✓4 or c� �I a c-e for �lec,�.(� 5. ja�gc�.s lay -S'+ e., k� -e.��- � , �, %J �. c�- -iO W �k , �rn,k*,- a- ha,i 55Q/� 1'`)� ax in J ins ice' J � V�-i -✓' - c o ty),t + beaus re e, 6CA 4� CL, �I�an �t-e, p l an �I'�i -ti �-c rn� a� hoP,l� wi�.�o�- alsb. � sv ��sti �-- �-� i1-�� �S�l�r,�c...� -- not. . '�►'� us (/j �,t (C)5J tm n-e, cuti d i� m-e, o-f- i RESERVE AFFAIRS OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE EMPLOYER SUPPORT OF THE GUARD AND RESERVE (ESGIS 4800 MARK CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 03E25 ALSXANDRtA. VA 22314 24 July 2012 Mr. James Hovland Mayor City of Edina (Police Dept) 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 -1394 Dear Mr. Hovland: As previously announced, City of Edina (Police Dept) was nominated by Petty Officer First Class Kevin Rofidal for the prestigious 2012 Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award and was selected as a finalist. The Freedom Award is the highest recognition the Department of Defense gives to employers for their outstanding support of employees serving in the Guard and Reserve. With 3,236 nominations, the strong competition this year showcased the superior and selfless initiatives in support of our Guard and Reserve. America continues to rely heavily on the Guard and Reserve. Our military could not perform the duties of protecting the Nation, conducting combat operations or providing humanitarian aid around the globe without your continued support. America's employers are inextricably linked to our national security. Unfortunately, only a limited number of Freedom Award recipients are selected each year from the many great employers providing outstanding support. Even though your organization was not selected as a 2012 Freedom Award recipient, your selection as one of only 30 finalists is a great honor. Thank you for the exceptional leadership, support and personal devotion you provide. The DoD sincerely appreciates your support of Guard and Reserve service members, and in turn, this great country of ours. Members of ESGR's Employer Outreach Program look forward to continuing to work with you in the future. Please contact us at 1- 800 - 336 -4590 with your questions or concerns and visit our website at www.esgr.mil. Ronald G. Yo Executive D" or - ' **,_' ww� Oak - . 40 ' ' North Shore Animal League America POST CAR-W-'..7�-.41 I saves abandoned dogs and cats, and finds them new homes. yA | ' ' �' | i � mwnzxoouSM � ^"",^"�^^~~.. / �- � . ` � ` . ' - . 40 ' ' North Shore Animal League America POST CAR-W-'..7�-.41 I saves abandoned dogs and cats, and finds them new homes. yA | ' ' �' | i � mwnzxoouSM � ^"",^"�^^~~.. / �- � . ` � ` in r`f •h \�' \ / . sag, p:_. � :�- •..L••c-,', .�: �s a r' � ��c=� •�r'r�c: �� 7 P2— r � � �k-1 vSvw V-OAO I cawj- amov+ Glow C 10se .((Ak wtyi build, " t will be: "mac �ro�iv► tivaJw Ffyt' V4,.3 i6 Read m1oreel al'"rlrtbune.c m/whutlebigwer TELL US WHAT TO INVESTIGATE ul 1+ 11 . 4v , `'' Contact us at 612 - 6'13 -4271 or , 2 i 1 111k= v iM o A whistleblower @startrlbime.mm A DRAINI WHISTLERLOWER JANE FRIEDMANN F1Gerry and Mar- gie Richels have been fighting an uphill battle with Blaine City Hall for almost two years. Their property used to be at a higher elevation than the land next to them But since the city allowed a developer to raise the elevation 6 feet and build hous- es on it, water and silt washes down into the Richels' yard. Richels, a retired engineer, had warned that such a thing might happen when he caught wind of the project, but the city promised him it wouldn't. His frequent complaints to City Hall since then have prompted numerous attempts to stop the erosion and drainage trouble, but he's still not satisfied — es- pecially since the city allowed the be to be built right up to Richels' property line, despite a standard caller for a 3 -foot setback. City officials, for their part, are exasperated with Richels. One council member calls it the "project from hell" Mayor "Ibm Ryan acknowl- edges that since the townhouses were built, "it's a6-foot drop right onto his property. lea steep." But he indicated Richels is in good compamk "Drainage problems in this city are pretty typic" They're also a frequent source of conflict among neighbors. "Property owners have the right to drain water from their property onto their neighbor's, as long as it doesn't unreason- ably damage their neighbors'," said Adam A. Ripple, a lawyer at Rinke Noonan; a St. Cloud firm that specializes in these kinds of disputes. "That, as you can imagine, does nothing but breed litigation and arguments. There's usually not a dear-cut way to resolve issues if you have folks that don't want to work together toward a com- mon solution." At this point, the city and the Richelses seem far apart WAR WITH LAINE RICHARD sENNorT• is[' c# @swtibinto Gerry and Margie Richels stood at the edge of their property next to a housing development built sev- eral feet above their land. Runoff has caused silt and other debris to accumulate intheir yard. • For two years, a Blaine couple have been fighting City Hall over a drainage problem caused by an adjoining development The city's attempts to control the runoff have helped, but the homeowners remain unsatisfied. When Richels bought his retaining walls from.proper- property in 1998, his next -door ty lines, city manager Clark neighborwas afarm. There's dis- .Arneson said those rules are agreement about which way the "standards, not ordinances or water used to flow =the mayor statutes." says that the farmland drained One home's downspouts di- onto Richele property, but a hy- rected water down the slope. drologist hired by Richels eon- . With silt accumulated in his cluded the water used to drain yard, Richels contacted the in the other direction. city with his objections. In 2006, when Merit be- The city directed the builder velopment -G Inc. 'rfenrfye - ,t6vuderthke a series of reme- fore the planning commissum dial efforts. A swaled berm that for zoning approval to build on slanted at 45 degrees, ending at the site, Richels expressed his the property line. A new gutteL concerns about runoff _Com- Redirected downspouts. A'dou- mission meeting minutes show, ble raw of rocks on the hillside. that the ciiys projectcoordina- The measures helped, but for 'Tarn Scott, said "that it will the runoff continued. be looked at with the grading ' Richels dogged city staff and plan to be sure there will be no council members with a -mails runoff water running into Mr. and phone calls as the berm's Richels property. ", - sod 'sagged and failed to take ,Minks Custom Homes Inc' hold. Contractors, repeatedly later became the develolf- entered his property to collect er. When nearby houses wise debris or add another layer of built and dirt was graded two dirt and sod to the berm. years ago, the yards for two This year when the city houses abutting Richels' land sought permission to enter were graded to slope down to his property to plant seed for the property line. While city native plants, which they said 'engineering standards rec -- would solve the problem once ommend a 3 -foot setback for ' and for all, Richels said no. A city engineer said the work could only safely be done from the bottom of the steep slope, but Richels told the en- gineer to ask.the person who approved the project how to maintain the berm from the owner's property. "Like any . organization, you're going to have situa- tions where mistakes hap- pen," David Clark a city coun- cilman, said. If a project "can't be brought into compliance reasonably, then some other accommodation is generally worked out" But Ryan, the. mayor, feels the city has done everything it can to try to fix the problem, short of tearing down a house or, building "the . fooiishest- looking [retaining wallj you've ever seen.°. - "I don_ti think he wants that;" he said. But Richels does want that. In July 2011, he proposed a solution based on his reading of city rules: A 3 -foot setback, a 4-foot -high retaining wall and a swale leading to a city sew- er nearby. The idea gained no traction. "I've lost over 200 hours in this. I've lost sleep over this be- cause I wake up, at night won- dering how: to get this fixed," Richels said t-t<A. �0� Le �\ )ocn • r�cORPOR%'T�'O� IB80 REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: MAYOR AND COUNCIL Agenda Item IX. A. DEBRA MANGEN Action From: CITY CLERK Discussion Information Date: AUGUST 6, 2012 Subject: CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED AFTER PACKETS INFORMATION /BACKGROUND: Attached is correspondence received after the packets were delivered to you. August 3, 2012 Mayor James Hovland Edina City Council Members: Joni Bennett, Mary Brindle, Josh Sprague, Ann Swenson RE: Edina Medidal Plaza Development Dear Mayor and Council Members: I am writing to each of you to ask those of you who rejected the Edina Medical Plaza proposal at the City Council Meeting on July 17th to reconsider your decision, This is a personal letter to you, not intended to be. shared with the public or anybody other -than those receiving it. Thank you. Personal Opinion I am writing to express my personal, opinions as a 26 -year resident of Edina who lived on Upper Terrace for 24 years and has now lived at Point of France (POF) for 2 years. My husband and I raised two daughters who graduated from Edina High School. and we now have five grandchildren beginning to attend the Edina Schools. My parents and sister and her family are also Edina residents. We care about the quality of life Edina offers and the tax revenue to maintain that quality. Statement -as POF President spoke at.the July 17th City Council Meeting as'President of.the Board of the Point of France Owners Association, Jack Windhorst, former' Board President, also spoke. By majority vote, our board requested that we express the opinions of a minority of owners who believe the Edina' Medical Plaza building would diminish their view and affect their property values. We stated their opinions. The Edina Planning Commission unanimously approved the project nonetheless. We thought the City Council would accept the recommendation of the City Planning. Commission instead of the minority owners''negative ppinion of the plan. They are happy with your vote. Opinions of the Majority — Actions by Mount Development The majority, of POF owners, however, support the two- phase Edina Medical Plaza project for several reasons. First, most peoples' views_ are not affected. Of the 140 units at Point of France, 20 units face north and would see the new development from their living rooms. Forty -eight units face east where residents look at the 6 -story, 92 foot -high Southdale Medical Building and 124 foot -high Fairview Southd ale Hospital. The other 72 units face south (6 -story, 6600 France Ave. building) or,west (residential area). Full disclosure, I, face west. Page 2 Secondly, Mount Development has been very responsive to POF owners. They genuinely want to be good neighbors. Steve Michaels and Ed Farr met with owners and listened carefully to owners' opinions. Owners unanimously rejected their first plan which included a building and parking ramp on the 6500 France Avenue property only. The developers listened to objections and suggestions of the City Planning Commission. They reached an agreement to purchase the 4005 W. 65th St. building and developed a third plan which included both property sites. They presented their third plan to POF owners and received enthusiastic approval. The City Planning Commission subsequently unanimously approved the third plan. Thirdly, with a rejected good plan by the City Council and knowledge that our adjacent property owners are finally willing to sell, some POF owners are now expressing anxiety about what alternative development might occur on that property. Quotes from Planning Commission Report I now quote Mount Development statements in the Planning Commission's Report. Page A 24 11. The estimated real estate taxes will be over two times the current revenue. The two existing buildings pay $144,000 and the fully assessed Phase 1 building will likely pay in excess of $380,000. 12. There will be over 70 new medical staff positions in the building. In addition, there will be 40 -60 construction jobs over 12 months." Page A 27 "Final comment for the approval of the project The building size at 102,406 sq. ft. over six levels is very important to create a successful project. Market rents set the overall budget. We are projecting rents to be 20% higher than other buildings in the area to absorb the land cost. Redevelopment is difficult when you are purchasing two older buildings. The value for the Developer on the acquisition of the two older buildings is the land. The viability of the development is based on the approval of the 102,406 sq ft project." Fully- informed Decisions — Economic Viability I ask you, having this information, why would you reject a plan that would offer additional tax revenue and create jobs? Steve Michaels of Mount Development, when asked at the meeting, stated that this project needed the six -story option to be economically viable. Page 3 Perhaps you hadn't read or had access to the whole City Planning Report—it was long. Perhaps you didn't appreciate that Steve's statement meant the Phase 1, four -story building alone was not an economically viable project. Knowing this information, would you vote differently? Four Story Option? I spoke with Steve Michaels after the July 17th meeting. He told me that they may try to create an economically viable four story building but I know that it would require a land footprint similar to the first proposal which POF residents rejected. It would require land use similar to downtown Minneapolis properties, minimal green space, narrower sidewalks, and buildings close to streets. I question whether the City Planning Commission would consider such a plan after rejecting the first proposal. Take a Close Look I urge each of you to please visit the site. Don't just drive by, however. Park your car and walk along 65th Street and France Avenue. Look at the Cornelia Place Apartments, the Orthopedics Building and Point of France. Observe the landscaping. Look closely at the 6500 France and 4005 West 65th properties as they exist today. Look at the Fairview Southdale Hospital and the Southdale Medical Building properties. Imagine the proposed building on the site. Image an alternative four -story building with minimal green space that must sit very close to the streets, its own parking ramp and the Point of France property line. Become thoroughly informed. After your walk, then consider or reconsider the Edina Medical Plaza development proposal. I would suggest stopping by the corner to have a cup of coffee, but the coffee shop, of course, is only conveniently located in the Edina Medical Plaza plan. Maybe in the future we could have that coffee —POF residents would certainly join you! Thank you for your time reading this letter and for your time visiting the project area Sincerely, Marilyn Kemme 6566 France Avenue South, #1206 Edina, MN 55435 CC: Steven Michaels, Mount Development Cary Teague, Community Development Director Susan Howl ' ' From: Lynette Biunno on behalf of Edina Mail Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 2:43 PM To: Solvei Wilmot Cc: Susan Howl Subject: FW: Edina garbage pick up Good afternoon, This message has been forwarded to Mayor Hovland and Solvei Wilmot. �+�``"�-' ;> Lynette Biunno, Receptionist KH i_ • , 952 - 927 -8861 1 Fax 952 -826 -0389 ` Ibiunno(cDEdinaMN.gov I www.EdinaMN.aov ...For Living, Learning, Raising Families & Doing Business From: Elizabeth Fallon [mailto:eifallori 0)yahoo.com1 Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 2:32 PM To: Edina Mail Subject: Edina garbage pick up Mayor Hovland, I recently moved to Edina from Iowa City, Iowa. I was very surprised to find that we had to contract with a private company for garbage pick up. I understand that Edina is not the only local city to not have city garbage pick up, but I am curious as to why. On Fridays, which is garbage pick up day in our neighborhood, trucks from various companies fly up and down our small street. We live on Deville Drive, a street with only a few houses, and twice we have had to call Allied Waste Management because our yard waste was not picked up, I assume at times the drivers forget the smaller streets. It seems that all of the trucks driving all over town increases noise and air pollution and also wastes gas. I am no expert on the subject but I would appreciate it if the city would consider city sponsored garbage pick up. Sincerely, Elizabeth Fallon 5713 Deville Drive August 6, 2012 Ms. Iris Bergren 5844 Brookview Avenue Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ms. Bergren, Summary At the July 17 City Council Meeting, 5844 Brookview Avenue presented information stating that the cost of a sanitary sewer service (service) repair and required street patch should be the responsibility of the City. It is the opinion of the Engineering Department that the service repair and street patch is not the responsibility of the City but rather the responsibility of the homeowner. Background At the July 17 City Council Meeting, 5844 Brookview Avenue presented information stating that the cost of a service repair and required street patch should be the responsibility of the City. A video was provided of the service to the Engineering Department. Figure I. shows the repair location just short of the sanitary sewer trunk (trunk) pipe. The service pipe is offset with roots growing through the joints. The offset in the background is near the service wye at the trunk pipe. Figure I. 5844 Brookview Avenue — Repair Location of the Service Pipe Per City Code, the homeowner owns the service pipe from the house up to and including the service wye at the trunk pipe. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7450 Metro Boulevard • Edina, Minnesota 55439 www.EdinaMN.gov • 952 - 826 -0371 • Fax 952- 826 -0392 The street above the service was reconstructed during the summer of 2010. Past City practice requires any utility work within 5 -years of a newly constructed street must be repaired full street width and from saw & seal joint to saw & seal joint. This patch is approximately 30 -ft by 30 -ft. City forces televised the trunk pipe. Figure 2. shows the service wye from inside the trunk pipe. Figure 2. 5844 Brookview Avenue — Sanitary Sewer Service Wye from Trunk Pipe The trunk pipe is approximately 16 -ft deep at the service wye. The televising of the trunk pipe shows the trunk pipe and wye to be in satisfactory condition. Based on the depth of the trunk pipe it is our opinion the service issues were not caused by street reconstruction operations. If you have any questions, please contact me at 952 - 826 -0443 or whoule EdinaMN.gov. Sincerely, Z�1 Wayne Houle, PE Director of Engineering C: Scott Neal — City Manager City Council G: \PW \ADMIN \COMM \EXTERNAL \GENERAL CORR BY STREETS \B Streets \5844 Brookview Avenue \20120806 5844 Brookview Sanitary.docx Minutes Edina Community Health Committee May 15, 2012, 6:30 - 8:30 pm Mayors Conference Room, City Hall Members Present: Jeff Bartleson, Kumar'Belani, Matt Doscotch, Janet Johnson, Mary Jo Kingston, Nancy Ott- Pinckaers, Adrian Qureshi, Student Tyler Gieseke, Members Absent: Carolyn Peterson, Student Maggie Stang Guests: Karen Zeleznak; Flynn Rico - Johnson CALL TO! ORDER Chair Doscotch welcomed members and called the meeting to order at 6:301pm. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA Meeting agenda was unanimously approved. following a motion from Member Ott- Pinckers and a second from Member kingsIton. Minutes from the March 20, 2012 meeting were unanimously approved following a motion from Member Belani and second from Member Ott- Pinckers. COMMUNITY COMMENT None presented. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS Edina Chemical Health Coordinator Kathy Iverson did not attend the meeting. Liaison Engelman will follow -up and request a written report from the Coordinator. The written report will be distributed to Members. Karen Zeleznak, Director of Bloomington Public Health, discussed the mission of public health and the essential community health services provided to Edina. Included in these services are 1) health planning, 2) disease prevention and control, 3) emergency preparedness, 4) public health clinics, 5) family health, 6) senior /adult health, and 7) healthy youth and communities. The Local Public Health Act requires our community health board to address and implement essential local public -health activities, complete an. assessment of community health needs and establish and address identified'public health priorities. Ms.' Zeleznak•also explained the coordination between State Health Improvement Plan (SHIP) and the do.town initiative. A general review of the 2012 fist quarter report was presented relative'to the programs listed above. The 2013 Bloomington Public Health Work Plan will include intensive home visiting for high risk populations. and a new market approach for community health services in Bloomington, Edina and Richfield: Ms. Zeleznak closed her presentation with information regarding the Community Health Improvement Program (CHIP) and how this program assessment overlaps with the upcoming required . assessment of community health needs. The advisory, boards of Bloomington, Edina and Richfield will again work together on this assessment. early next year. Flynn Ri' 64ohnson, do.town, gave an update on current do.town activites and initiatives in Edina. Included are discussions regarding healthier school food, healthy food at concession stands, community gardens; farmers market promotion of cooking demonstrations and master gardener, Safe Routes to Schools, promotion of bike safety, and chalk boards for community engagement. Mr. Rico- Johnson suggested that the Community Health Committee consider a letter of support on work for Living Streets Policy and also Healthy Concessions Policy. Members recommended that do.town develop a complete list of bike routes in Edina. Liaison Engelman reminded members that do.town is a community wide initiative which Mayor Hovland strongly supports and expects the Community Health Committee to take an active role in the initiative. A written report from Ruth Tripp, SHIP Grant Coordinator, on current Edina SHIP activities was reviewed. Current projects include ongoing work toward healthier concessions and Safe Routes to School policy, a summer camp on edible schoolyard gardens and information on National Bike To School Day participation. The Parks Department developed a nutrition policy for healthier concessions at city concessions stands and Public Works Department is developing a "Living Streets Policy to include Safe Routes to School. Chair Doscotch discussed the idea of developing a "Vision of Health" for the City of Edina and reviewed methods of communicating the vision to City Council. Liaison Engelman informed members that Council Member Brindle recently drafted a Vision 20/20 for Public Health which can be incorporated into the Vision of Health concept. Chair Doscotch lead a discussion on developing the 2013 work plan. The Community Health Committee has developed work plans for several years and must incorporate the new "board & commission work plan format" for 2013. Yearly Minnesota Department of Health requirements and also review of contracted community health services and emergency preparedness services are the foundation of the work plan. In addition, three sub groups were developed to study 1) aging/seniors, 2) youth, and 3) general health. Members Johnson and Peterson will work on aging; Members Ott- Pinckers, Kingston and Doscotch on youth and Members Bartleson, Belani and Qureshi will focus on general health. The groups will meet independently and report back to the Committee later this year. Chair Doscotch will work with Liaison Engelman to develop an agenda for the work session with the City Council June 19. Council suggestions from this meeting may be incorporated into the 2013 work plan also. The Community Health Committee annually reviews: • Community Health Services • Public Health Emergency Preparedness Services • Edina Medical Consultant & Emergency & Paramedic Services • Edina Chemical Health Services • Edina Public Schools Health Services • Edina Public Schools Food Services • Edina Resource Center Services Additional responsibilities are: • Member Orientation • do.town initiative • Work session with the City Council • Statewide Health Improvement Program • Public Health Accreditation • Community Health Improvement Program Assessment • Joint meeting with the Bloomington & Richfield Advisory Boards of Health Member Johnson reported on the Health & Wellness Expo which was held April 28a' at St. Patrick's Church. The event was well attended with approximately 250 guests. A variety of exhibitors participated and the keynote speaker was Dr. Jon Hallberg, M.D. Medical Director of University of Minnesota Physicians Mill City Clinic. ` Liaison Engelman reminded members of the June 26 Joint Meeting with Bloomington & Richfield Advisory Committees. Also announced was a date change for the September meeting from September 18 to September 11 at 6:30pm. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS None presented. CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS None presented. STAFF COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT Motion was made by Member Ott- Pinckers and seconded by Member Belani to adjourn. Vote to adjourn was unanimous. Meeting adjourned at 8:50 pm. Sherry Engelman Next Meeting: June 19, 2012 Council Work Session 2012 Meeting Dates: March 19 March 20 May 15 June 19 June 26 July 17 September 18 October 17 i MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA HUMAN RIGHTS & RELATIONS COMMISSION JUNE 26, 2012 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Kingston called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM. IL ROLLCALL Answering roll call were Commissioners Bigbee, Erhardt, Finsness, Seidman, Stanton and Chair Kingston, and Student Members Aderhold and Nolan. Staff present: Lisa Schaefer, Human Resources Director and Staff Liaison; Susan Howl, administrative staff; and Ari Klugman, administrative intern. III. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Bigbee approving the meeting agenda of June 26, 2012. Ayes: Bigbee, Erhardt, Finsness, Kingston, Seidman and Stanton Motion carried. IV. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED Motion #1 was made by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Finsness revising the meeting minutes: , IV.A Under Item #4 within VI.A. Work Plan, delete the word "and" from the second line and replace it with the word "who." Ayes: Bigbee, Erhardt, Finsness, Kingston, Seidman and Stanton Motion carried. Motion #2 was made by Commissioner Finsness and seconded by Commissioner. Stanton approving the meeting minutes with the following change: N.A. Approve the meeting minutes of May 22, 2012, with the following edits: Under Item #8 within VI.A. Work Plan, replace'the fourth sentence with "Commissioner Finsness voiced concerns about the messaging and the objectives of the theme as presented.by the Chair and supported Commissioner Winnick' s. statement about being sensitive to our community' and replace the word ':divorce" in the sixth sentence with the word "separate." Ayes: Bigbee, Erhardt, Finsness, Seidman and Stanton Nay: Kingston Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT There were no community comments. Vt. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS VI.A. SELECT REPRESENTATIVE FOR HUMAN SERVICES TASK FORCE Motion was made by Commissioner Bigbee and seconded by Commissioner Seidman that Commissioner Stanton serve as the appointed HRRC representative on the 2012 Human Services Task Force. Ayes: Bigbee, Erhardt, Finsness, Kingston, Seidman and Stanton. Motion carried. The Task Force will meet three times in October and present a recommendation for 2013 human services funding to the City Council in November. VI.B. 2013 ANNUAL WORK PLAN CALENDAR Director Schaefer reported that the City Council has requested that boards and commissions follow a more formalized process with regard to annual work plans. It was noted that HRRC was one of the few commissions with a work plan previously in place. The Council's goal is to meet with commission chairs on September 191h to hear the potential work plan items for 2013. This input will be used during the City's overall planning and budgeting process and for the approval of the annual work plan in January. Director Schaefer and Chair Kingston will begin a draft of the HRRC's 2013 work plan to bring to the July meeting for discussion. The work plan should be approved by the HRRC in August, so that the Chair can present it at the City Council work session with commission chairs on September 19. Director Schaefer described the ways in which the Commission work plan can be changed or modified during the year, and noted that a simple deadline change does not require modification of the plan. Questions and comments: • How do new student members fit comfortably into the work plan? • How do student members see themselves involved and adequately informed? • An orientation for incoming student members is being looked at by the City's Board and Commission Task Force. • Could student members have input when meeting agendas are created? • It was suggested that new student members begin their terms in August. • Could graduating student members return to serve on commissions while attending local colleges? • Questions and /or concerns should be forwarded to Commissioner Winnick, who is representing HRRC on the City's Board and Commission Task Force. VI. C. 2012 WORK PLAN UPDATE 1. Monitor Domestic Partner Ordinance With Commissioner Cashmore being absent, Chair Kingston will check with him to see if this item can be discussed at the August Commission meeting. 2. Initiate Census Research Funding Recommendation Commissioner Stanton reemphasized the importance of current census data and the value of establishing outreach to new members of the community. Turning Val Burke's recommendation into action, Commissioner Stanton met with Greg Hanks, Director of the Southdale YMCA, to see how they are tapping into the community and what is working well. The Y is in a partnership with Edina Rotary and Cornelia during the school year, providing round -trip transportation for students to participate in programs after school. During the summer, Rotary also provides scholarships for 20 children to experience Camp Kici Yapi. Director Hanks indicated that the Y would be willing to partner with HRRC for "Listen and Learn" sessions. When asked about locating community leaders among the various populations, he reported that the Y does not keep this kind of information. The Commissioners discussed various ways to partner with the Y to engage the community in a diversity event: • Try hosting a meeting for one ethnicity at a time. Think of each community as being different and unique, and use different strategies in each community. This would be a way to identify meaningful issues and provide a learning experience. • Could a "meet and greet" event be planned with the Y later this fall? It could be a "mixer" in order to get to know each other. • HRRC could become a vehicle for recommendations as a result of the community gatherings. Events of this type could take up to one year, creating opportunities to do a number of things together. HRRC would be able to listen and learn from each community. • There should be two phases. Phase I: Identify people from ethnic groups for a focus group activity of six months to one year. Phase II: The next step could be a community -wide event. • Listening to community concerns could become problematic for HRRC if there are expectations that HRRC will be able to solve all concerns. How can the Commission be a partner and help various ethnic groups learn about Edina? • It is important for the Commission to start small in a non - threatening way as a partner with the Y. • HRRC does not have to be the problem - solver. The emphasis should be on the changing demographics and giving groups the opportunity to be heard. The Commission could take opinions into consideration for the City. • Commissioners Stanton and Newell will continue discussions with the Y and Cornelia School staff, bringing back information about ways to partner with new diverse groups. 3. Anti - Bullying Event and Education Commissioner Finsness and Student Member Nolan shared information about the upcoming event on June 29th at the Edina Theater. It is a 45- minute documentary entitled "Minnesota Nice? A Documentary on Bullying in Minnesota Public Schools." The documentary was created by graduating Edina senior Alec Fischer. With a focus on students' stories of being bullied, Alec took on the seven - month project of interviewing, editing and filming. Commissioner Finsness reported that "Edina Reads" is receptive about having a community -wide event around the subject of bullying with HRRC being the host during a specific time from December to February. The Commission should consider books for readers from 6th grade through adults that have a community perspective and would provide momentum for a City -wide discussion. There are discretionary funds in HRRC's operational budget that perhaps could be used to lend some support. Commissioners were asked to contact Commissioner Finsness with ideas for books. (At 8:15 PM, Chair Kingston left the meeting, and Vice Chair Seidman assumed the role of Chair.) 4. Marriage Amendment Forum Because of HRRC's position against the marriage amendment, Commissioner Stanton has been investigating the legality of the Commission's involvement in a community -wide educational event /forum. The commissions of the cities of Shoreview and Roseville are hosting an activity on October 4th about Project 515 —a focus on the 515 laws that are discriminatory against Minnesotans and how to look at creating fairness for all Minnesotans. Because the expenditure of funds could be a legal issue, Commissioner Stanton provided options for the Commission to consider: 1) Do nothing; 2) Host a neutral forum; 3) Host a free event, advocating the City's position, using a speaker and publicizing it; 4) Bring in a speaker to talk to HRRC and invite the media; 5) Have a co -host pay for advertising and boldly advocate the City's position; 6) Develop a guest editorial for the local media; and 7) Combination of options. Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Finsness to approve writing a guest editorial as identified in option #6, which will increase visibility, put Edina at the fore- front and cause more people to jump on the band wagon. Amendment to the motion was made by Commissioner Finsness and seconded by Commissioner Bigbee to state that HRRC and the City Council will co -sign a letter for the media that addresses the impact the amendment has on Edina. Concern was raised that the City Council Members may not wish to do this. Nevertheless, a letter from HRRC would have more impact if it was co- signed by the Council. It was suggested that the Council Members be queried about this co- endorsement. Commissioner Stanton withdrew his original motion and stated that he would bring back a draft letter for discussion and that the Commission could decide whether to invite the City Council to participate. Commissioner Finsness withdrew her previous amendment to the motion. Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Finsness to bring a draft editorial to the next meeting for approval and then approach the Council Members about co- signing it before it is submitted to the newspaper. Ayes: Bigbee, Erhardt, Finsness, Seidman and Stanton Motion carried. Commissioner Stanton will send the draft editorial to Director Schaefer to be forwarded to HRRC Members. Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Finsness to also create a subcommittee to explore option #5— finding a co -host to sponsor an Edina social event for taking an advocacy position and without spending any money. Ayes: Erhardt, Finsness, Seidman and Stanton Nay: Bigbee Motion carried. Commissioners Stanton and Cashmore and Student Member Aderhold will comprise a sub - committee for handling this effort. Director Schaefer stated we should have the attorney review any agreement with a co- sponsor. 5. Diversity Awareness Event Prior to leaving the meeting, Chair Kingston announced the subcommittee decided to cancel this event and pulled it off the Commission 2012 Work Plan. 6. Tom Oye Award Criteria This item was carried over to the July meeting due to the absence of Commissioner Winnick. 7. Supreme Court Decision on Super PAC's Commissioner Finsness reported that a number of states and counties have voted to approve a resolution calling on Congress to pass a constitutional amendment overturning the Citizens United ruling and for in -state disclosure laws to give voters information about the sources and amounts of corporate spending. The Commissioners agreed that HRRC should take a stand and bring a resolution to the City Council. Motion was made by Commissioner Stanton and seconded by Commissioner Finsness that a proposed resolution be drafted by Commissioner Finsness and brought to the July Commission meeting -for approval. Ayes: Bigbee, Erhardt, Finsness, Seidman and Stanton Motion carried. VI1. 'CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS. Priorto leaving.the meeting, Chair Kingston stated (i) HRRC was all copied on an email from Laird Beaver . and she would respond to him; (ii) She had sent out resolutions from other cities for the subcommittee to review VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Commissioners Erhardt, Bigbee and Stanton discussed the photo ID issue and the fact that it is still under review in the courts. The HRRC should continue to monitor how this proceeds through the courts. Student Member Nolan reported that this would be her last HRRC meeting. She will be concentrating on her Native American interests through Habitat for Humanity at the Rosebud reservation in July. Student.Member Aderhold plans to return to the Commission in August before beginning his first year in college at the U of M. Commissioner Finsness requested that the Diversity Awareness Event be on the agenda for the next Commission meeting so that an explanation could be given for why it was determined to remove from the work.plan at this time. IX. STAFF COMMENTS Director Schaefer shared that Candy Fiedler Will not prepare minutes for the Commission for the foreseeable future: Administrative Intern Ari Klugman will take on this role for close to the next year. .While Director Schaefer:is on maternity leave, Assistant City Manager Kurt will assist as the interim Commission liaison. X: ADJOURNMENT There being no further business on the Commission Agenda, Vice Chair Seidman declared the meeting adjourned at 9:15 PM. Respectfully submitted, Susan,Howl, Administrative Staff Minutes approved by HRRC, July 24, 2012 Jan Seidman, HRRC Vice Chair MINUTES CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS JULY 11,2012 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Grabiel called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM II. ROLL CALL Answering the roll call were Commissioners Scherer, Forrest, Platteter, Potts, Carpenter, Staunton and Grabiel Absent from the roll: Fischer and Schroeder III. APPROVAL OF MEETING AGENDA Meeting Agenda was approved as submitted. IV. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Scherer moved approval of the June 27, 2012 meeting minutes. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT None VI. REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . A. Zoning Ordinance Update - discussion Site Grading n,50- footlots Planner Teague informed the Commission there has been discussion throughout the City on grading that's been occurring on City lots; especially for new construction. Teague said City. Engineer Wayne Houle is present to explain the process the Engineering Department follows when reviewing building permit applications. Engineer Houle addressed the Commission and informed them the Engineering Department reviews all building permit applications for grading. Houle explained that every applicant is required to submit a detailed survey, drawn to scale with other required Page 1 of 7 elevations. Houle explained a typical review of the application contains the following to ensure proper drainage and erosion control: • Surface water maintains or reduces the same direction of flow ensuring that surface water cannot be redirected onto an adjoining private property. • Analyze the known conditions and if these conditions can be easily remedied (if appropriate). • Verify if a retaining wall needs to be designed by a structural engineer due to the height of the retaining wall. • Check for easement encroachments. • Check for new curb cuts. • Check number and location of driveways • Verify the sanitary sewer service invert elevations. Engineer Houle presented copies of surveys to help Commissioners see all the details found on a survey to aid in plan review. Commissioner Platteter asked Engineer Houle if downspouts are indicated on the survey or are they indicated somewhere else. Engineer Houle responded that downspouts and the direction of their flow are not required to be indicated on the survey; however that review (if applicable) occurs at the building department level. Platteter also questioned if neighbors are notified when a remodeling or rebuilding occurs. Houle said there is no notification requirement (except for the applicant) unless a variance was required. Platteter questioned if there should be notification pointing out everyone appears to be building a larger house than what previously existed; thereby creating -more water run -off. Houle agreed, adding in Edina that appears to be the case on every lot, pointing out the majority of new construction is to the maximum. Commissioner Staunton commented if he understands the permit process for new construction correctly that "new" water flow pathways can't be created that didn't exist before. Engineer Houle responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Staunton asked if the water continues to flow along its natural path can the rate or volume of the flow be increased. Engineer Houle acknowledged that the rate of flow does increase; adding it's very difficult to control and monitor. Houle reiterated run -off is required to continue to follow its natural path, adding rates fluctuate depending on the "size" of the rain storm and spring run -off. Houle acknowledged that creating a larger building mass also contributes to an increase in water run -off; however, he reiterated storm water run -off on residential lots is something that is extremely difficult to monitor or control, adding this has been an ongoing issue. Continuing, Houle pointed out that measures can be implemented to mitigate storm water run -off impact such as lot coverage requirements, placement of gutters /downspouts, use of pervious materials for driveways and sidewalks, rain barrels etc. Concluding, Houle stated if a house meets all code requirements a building permit is issued. Page 2 of 7 A discussion ensued on the question of notification responsibility, is it the responsibility of the applicant, the City, or the neighbor(s) when new construction occurs. It was also noted that building plans are available for viewing at City Hall. In response to the discussion Engineer Houle said he wasn't aware of any storm water management control - measures for single family lots. He noted the City and Watershed Districts: require grading permits and erosion control. measures; however they don't review surface water management for single family. lots. Both Nine Mile and Minnehaha watershed districts only require storm water management measures to be implemented for commercial properties. 1. Commissioner Carpenter questioned h'ow difficult it would be to monitor or regulate this. Engineer -Houle said in his opinion it would be very difficult. Houle reiterated to mitigate water run -off issues different measures can be implemented. Commissioner Scherer asked if there was a review process for retaining walls. Engineer Houle responded if retaining walls are indicated on a survey it,is reviewed. If a retaining wall is higher than 4 -feet the retaining wall is required to be designed by a structural engineer and reviewed by engineering staff. Continuing, Houle said another reason for an increase in retaining walls could be to accommodate basement ceiling height. Houle explained if a property owner wants higher ceilings they need to dig deeper. Planner Teague informed the Commission he has been in discussions with area builders that told him that the City's current way to determine the side yard setback for building height results in builders building up the grade and potentially constructing retaining walls to achieve desired building height. Teague referred Commissioners to a handout placed before them amending the way side yard setbacks are determined. Teague said this change would require the builder to use the existing grade and not the "proposed" grade to determine building height. Teague asked Commissioners for their opinion on the handout. A discussion ensued with Commissioners indicating that manipulating the grade along the side to achieve building height as currently. done may be the reason retaining walls are popping up allover the City. Commissioners indicated it may just be easier to either include the retaining wall(s) in the calculation or measure from the existing grade, not proposed. Planner Teague responded that is an idea; however, he expressed concern that running the calculations from averaging the existing grade may prohibit two story homes. Commissioners indicated if this were problematic in certain instances a variance could be requested. Planner Teague suggested that staffrun different scenario's on measuring from the existing grade and bring those findings back to the Commission for comments. Commissioners agreed and directed staff to "run" scenario's and return with them. Furthering the discussion Commissioner Potts questioned .if,the City has a code requiring outside access to the rear yard. Planner Teague responded that he doesn't believe there is an ordinance requiring rear yard access from outside the house. Engineer Houle agreed. Page 3of7 He said there are a number of homes in Edina that access the rear yard through the house, even on flat lots. A discussion ensued on if the City should require outside rear yard access. It was observed that the City requires minimum side yard setbacks; however, retaining walls and egress windows could prevent easy access to rear yards. Staff noted that many of these issues are between neighbors. It was further explained that when construction erosion control fences are erected and if there is trespass; again that's between neighbors. Commissioner Potts says he worries that most of the discussion occurs between the City and builder, not the homeowner. He wondered if communication should be "opened up" between the City and homeowner. Engineer Houle pointed out that a number of new homes "do not have an owner ", adding in his experience there will always be common lot line issues. Planner Teague said one tool City staff is working on is a Construction Management Guide Plan. Teague said at this time City Staff is reviewing implementing a plan for monitoring compliance during the construction phase. One requirement is posting a sign on the site informing neighbors of what would occur. The City could also add a line item referring neighbors to City Hall if they want to view the complete set of building plans. Chair Grabiel suggested that if the Commission establishes a different way to regulate building height there would probably be those odd lots that would need a variance to comply. Commissioner Staunton agreed, adding topography is a classic hardship for granting a variance. Planner Teague noted that the variance process would also engage the neighbors. Planner Teague clarified the following for future topics of discussion: Draft different scenario's measuring building height that would eliminate the need for retaining walls alongside property lines. (measure from existing grade, not proposed as required) Consider establishing setbacks for retaining walls Discuss requiring access to the rear yard from the outside of the house. Maybe require offsetting side yard setbacks. Planner Teague added that for every change to the ordinance there are consequences. Subdivision of lots less than 9,000 square feet in area and 75 -feet in width Planner Teague reminded the Commissioner they directed staff to draft an Ordinance amendment that would allow PUD rezoning as a tool to subdivide lots that are less than 9,000 square feet in area and 75 feet in width. Continuing, Teague said that recently the City Council has expressed interest in considering a uniform median lot area, lot width and Page 4of7 depth as the minimum lot size requirement in the R -1 district. If established the median of all lots within 500 -feet becomes the minimum lot size requirement. This approach is what is currently done. Commissioner Platteter said the last time this. was discussed it did appear that PUD "may be the way to go" but now without specific guidelines the 500 -foot neighborhood approach the City has.been utilizing may be best and fairest. Commissioner. Carpenter agreed. He pointed out if a PUD would, be developed for residential subdivisions of smaller lots he foresees :residents; applying for "a lot,of PUD's"..: Carpenter said as previously mentioned,by Commissioner Platteter that specific guidelines would need to be established for lots under 75 -feet in width or else there would be no regulator. Carpenter stated in his opinion the 500 -foot rule has value. It's across the board. I, Commissioner Staunton commented if some form of guidelines need to be developed for allowing a PUD in an R -1 zoning district adding the present "500 -foot 'rule" maybe best because it establishes guidelines. Staunton suggested that if the Commission.was uncomfortable with the present subdivision code using the 500 -foot standard to establish neighborhood maybe in the smaller lots neighborhoods the radius could be lessened. A discussion ensued with Commissioners agreeing that they should proceed with caution in developing a PUD for R -1 lots that require variances:. It was also noted there needs to be fairness with the City's approach to this topic. It was suggested that a simple way to approach this on the PUD level may be "what's in it for the City ". It was acknowledged that could be considered subjective. Planner Teague suggested that the Commission could develop -a low density PUD or something to the effect of subdivision requiring variances. That could be done in ordinance form. Continuing, Teague added that a number of City's have policies; not ordinances that regulate neighborhood character, etc. Teague told the Commission he would draft something reflecting those sentiments. The discussion continued with Commissioners:requesting that Planner Teague do an informal survey of how other City's deal with subdivisions of non - conforming lots. Commissioners suggested that staff first tackle this from a policy position not ordinance. Building Height Planner Teague informed the Commission there has been some concern expressed on building height for new construction especially in the small lot neighborhoods. A request has b: een made by builders to relax the present standard of increasing the setback 6- inches for each foot the average building height exceeds 15 -feet. Teague referred to an ordinance he drafted that would amend the existing ordinance exempting the second story setback requirement if the ridge line of a house is reduced to 30 -feet. Teague explained that Page 5 of 7 builders have indicated to him that this amended provision would allow more creativity for building design by giving incentives to builders to reduce the ridge line in order to achieve more square footage on the second story. This could also impact grading and retaining wall issues. Commissioner Staunton asked the purpose of this amendment. Planner Teague further explained that the way the ordinance is now written makes it very difficult for builders to construct a colonial two story home on these smaller lots. To achieve the adequate upstairs ceiling height builders now create pitches to gain that living space; however it gives the appearance of greater roof height and building mass. Relaxing the present requirement would allow a builder to achieve more living space on the 2nd floor without pitching the roof. Commissioner Platteter stated he likes this approach. Commissioners agreed, adding if in reality the ordinance is driving the steep pitched roof it would be good to modify the ordinance. A discussion ensued with Commissioners wondering if there would be a "down side" to this change. The consensus was that this approach was simple and would work. Commissioners suggested letting this percolate; noting the ordinance changes to address height and mass are relatively new. It was further noted that building height and the previously mentioned grading have similar components. Work Plan Planner Teague said the City Council has requested that each Board and Commission create a yearly work plan. The purpose of the plans are to ensure that the priorities of the City Council and Commissions are aligned, and that the City has the appropriate financial and staff resources to support the work. Teague said over the next few months, the Commission is asked to develop their plan for the next year. Teague suggested that the Commission think about their goals for 2013 and at the September work session with the City Council. Commissioner Scherer said that she feels this is a good idea and suggested that the Commission "pick a few topics" and commit. Commissioner Staunton agreed with Scherer and added that the Commission should also prioritize our goals. Staunton said he is interested in the next steps for the Grandview Development Framework and noted that he heard the City of Edina was hiring an Economic Development Director. Planner Teague informed Commissioners he sat in on the interviews for the new Economic and Development Director and that it has been narrowed down to three very good candidates. Teague said he would let the Commission know who was hired. Page 6 of 7 Commissioner Platteter said he believes a work plan is a great idea and agreed with Commissioners Staunton and Scherer that the Commission needs to prioritize.our goals. Platteter suggested identifying our top five goals. Planner Teague told the Commission that he has continually added topics to the Commissions "bucket list ". Teague said the Commission could go through that'list and develop our work plan using that list and add other issues we believe are pertinent. Planner Teague also informed Commissioners that the Cityhas submitted a grant to offset the cost of tearing p down old municipal buildings. Teague said that the old ubl is works building would be an excellent candidate for these monies. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS Chair Grabiel- acknowledged back of packet materials. Chair Grabiel congratulated Platteter and Forrest on their 100% attendance record. VIII. CHAIR AND COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Chair Grabiel asked Planner Teague if he would give a brief account on what's happening with "The Waters', "Southdale Apartments" and Byerly's. Commissioner Scherer also asked what was occurring with the France Avenue corridor roadway study. Planner Teague responded that "The Waters" was almost ready to pull their:building permit. He stated he believes it will be pulled next week. Continuing, Teague told the Commission that he justmet with Byerly's and they informed him they have retained a housing developer. More information should be coming from them. With regard to the "Southdale Apartments" WSB is initiating the parking study. Concluding, Teague reported that an estimate on the improvements along France Avenue came back and the estimates on those improvements are many many many times over budget. IX. STAFF COMMENTS None X. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Potts moved adjournment at 8:55 PM. Commissioner Platteter seconded the motion. All voted aye; motion carried. Respectfully submitted Page 7of7 MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION COMMUNITY ROOM JUNE 21, 2012 6:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Franzen, lyer, Janovy, La Force, Nelson, Schweiger, Thompson, and Whited. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - REGULAR MEETING OF May 17.2012 The minutes was amended as follows: page 3. CHAIR AND COMMISSION COMMENTS. First sentence 'Member Janovy .... because it did not include...' Second sentence 'use of an advisory communication might..: It was noted that the attendance sheet did not include the work session meeting that took place in April. Motion was made by member Braden and seconded by member Thompson to approve the amended minutes. All voted ave. Motion carried. COMMUNITY COMMENT — None. REPORT /RECOMMENDATIONS Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) Report of June 6, 2012 Assistant city engineer Chad Millner noted that the Temporary Speed Table Policy Process was revised to say 'The City Engineer will determine where the temporary speed table will be installed." He said also that staff is reviewing all traffic ,olicies and will eliminate any that is inconsistent with Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Page 3, Section B — Member Whited inquired about Section B. She said the report does not reflect that the speed limit is 25 mph and asked if the percentile should be changed. Member Janovy said the area keeps coming up and is not being resolved. ' Member Janovy said the Temporary Speed Table Policy needs further discussion because one was placed in her neighborhood but not for the reasons listed in the policy. She said she did not see the connection why road reconstruction would increase speed on another street and not volume and is not sure how the policy will be used in practical terms. She is also concerned that the speed hump purchased previously was paid for by special assessment to a neighborhood but it has use in multiple neighborhoods. Discussion ensued and included: what specifically is speed tables used for; some things noted at last meeting was not included in the policy revision; discussion to possibly buy two more speed tables; only in place for a season; assigned on a first come first serve basis; likes that neighbors making request was taken out because it creates conflict with NTMP; policy is a good first step; everything cannot be spelled out, staff must have some discretion; do see cut through traffic that tend to go faster; and obvious use is for deterring traffic. Policy revision discussion included the following: Purpose: The purpose of a Temporary Speed Table is to provide a temporary traffic calming method for local street. that -ar-P Process: / G y� �+4 entaet: the TFa' ie Safety (;9VTS Rate . • The City Engineer may initiate the installation of a temporary speed table. • The traffic Safety Coordinator will gather the pertinent facts to help define the problem and seek a solution. • The City Engineer will determine where the temporary speed table will be installed. • Contact the Traffic Safety Coordinator. Policy Delete items 2 and 5 and instead refer to engineering judgment. Chair Nelson said these changes do not address the concern of how they are paid for but from last discussion, he said it appeared the city engineer was going to find resources other than special assessment for the new purchases. How do you define significant increase? Would like to include opportunity for fire department to review and be informed where they are being placed. Fire will never approve speed table. Focus more on the process to indicate duration and if based on speed, determine the speed. Would like to see another draft. Motion was made by Member Janovy and seconded by member Iver to forward the TSC report to the City Council with the exception of the Temporary Speed Table Policy with a request that staff revise the policy to include the ETC's comments and brine it back to them for review. All voted ave. Motion carried. Updates Student Member - No update. Bike Edina Task Force — Minutes of May 10, 2012 Member Janovy said the BETF discussed riding bikes on sidewalk, which is not allowed in Edina, and she is recommending a code change to provide a basis for safety education and building in requirements for safe riding. She handed out a memo outlining the situation, background, analysis and recommendation and requested that the ETC review it and provides feedback at the next meeting. Whether or not the police enforce this rule is not clear; however, some in the community are aware that biking is not allowed on the sidewalk. BETF has discussed becoming a working group of the ETC and she forwarded the bylaws to them. There is a free application from the Met Council called Cycle Tracks that cyclists can sign up for at Google Play Store or Apple's iTunes Store. Member La Force said since being a member of the ETC, he has learned that there are anti -bike sentiments in the community and some feel that the ETC only care about bikers. Member Janovy said the TLC Bike Blvd was approved recently but France Avenue is pedestrian- focused. Member Whited said she has learned that the same sentiment exist for sidewalks. Member Bass said Blue Cross Blue Shield has done focus groups testing on key messages around Complete Streets and the same sentiment is strong across the country. She said it is important to start with the idea that the City has a responsibility to create the infrastructure that moves all residents, including about 1/3 of people who do not drive. Member Bass said there were strong sentiments against bike lanes on W. 70th and asked if residents could be surveyed to see how they feel now. Motion was made by Member Bass and seconded by Member Iver to draft an ETC advisory communication to field a survey of resident in the W. 70`h area to get a post construction survey. All voted ave. Motion carried. Nine Mile Creek Trail received grant funding of $5.5M for the Tracy to France portion. Grandview Small Area Study Chair Nelson said to date there was nothing new to report. Living Streets Workina Group Update Member Thompson said the group met on June 14 and the consultants shared a report that mirrored LA's Living Streets olicy. He said, the working group will be reviewing the report and giving feedback and the rest of the ETC can also provide feedback. The consultants will, be presenting their findings and recommendation at the July ETC meeting. This will be followed'by presentations to other groups to get their input. Member Janovy said there, was a Living Streets related item was on the City Council agenda recently; vacation of easement, in the ;Morningside area, and the City Council did not approve it. She said this is consistent with the Living Streets draft policy. She said further that there are right =of -ways or undeveloped land, like the vacation that was not granted, that could be used. as short-cut walkways for pedestrians and'they should be inventoried. She asked if,they Were already inventoried. and staff said no: Transportation Options Working Group Member Whited said the working group.is starting over by reviewing their charge and then they will create a checklist of community needs.She'said member Brown has been working on an Edina street car option that could move people around the shopping. areas that he would like to present to the ETC. She said he has spoken with the Chamber of Commerce, Southdale Hospital, and is in talks with Target for possible funding. This would be modeled after one.in Oregon. France Avenue Pedestrian and Bike Crossings Member La Force =gave an update on Stakeholder 1 meeting. He said they were asked to create a grand vision, which they did, only to be reminded in the end that they only had a small amount of money for three intersections. He said he was not sure why they took this approach. Member lyer expressed the same feelings considering the financial constraints. Member Janovy said she felt the same way and that they did not provide concrete information on certain design aspects. Regarding the grand vision, she said there is money in the CT for studying the whole area and they ould like whatever is done now, to be based on the grand vision. She said the urban design portion was not presented in a context based, on this project. Member Bass.said she appreciates the opportunity to think longer term than they have fund.ing.for and the approach may have been to let the Hennepin County staff that was in attendance see what the City's grand vision. is for France Avenue. The next stakeholder meeting is scheduled for June 26. Member lyer suggested making the agenda clearer for the next meeting, including the desired outcome: CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS — None CHAIR AND- COMMISSION MEMBER COMMENTS Member Janovy handed out a memo on the ETC policy and the NTMP for future discussion or, an advisory., communication with a recommendation to eliminate them. Chair Nelson said he spoke with city-engineer Houle and-h6 suggested waiting until the Complete Streets policy is done because other policies will become obsolete at that time. Member Janovy said waiting to do everything at once could complicate things. Motion was made by Member Janovy and seconded by Member Iyer.to recommend an advisory communication to the City Council recommending elimination of the ETC policy and the NTMP, which is part of the ETC policy. All voted ave. Motion carried. Member Bass said the Edina Community Education received a grant funding from Blue Cross Foundation to do a social connectedness project and they are focusing on the Parklawn Neighborhood to do a series of 'meet on the sidewalk' to -�t to know the neighbors. The first meeting was last Tuesday: and it was attended by the Police and Park and :creation Departments, as well as Community Education. She said Community Education and Park and Recreation reported that this neighborhood does not use City services as much as other parts of the community so it was a good 3 opportunity to present the services available. It was also attended by Do.Town staff who talked about the goals of the project to create a healthier community. The high density apartment complexes do not have a structured playground and the nearest park is Cornelia with no safe route to get there. At the last City Council meeting, Councilmember Sprague, who was in attendance at the 'meet on the sidewalk,' motioned to have a feasibility study done to construct a playground and create a safe route to Cornelia Park. Member Whited said she formed a task force that will offer assistance or refer people to where they can,help within their community instead of having to go outside of the community since Hennepin County is closing their service hub in Minneapolis and she would like to discuss this further with the ETC. Additionally, she was asked to present on alternative transportation design for Carver County and asked when was the last time Edina did a similar thing. Member Bass said past member Schold Davis did a presentation last year but it was not strictly focused on this topic. Regarding W. 56th, Member Whited said the shrubs were trimmed but the traffic is getting worst at Pizza Lola. Chair Nelson said his neighborhood had a Neighborhood Open House organized by the Do.Town staff. Approximately 15- 20 residents were in attendance and the discussion included Living Streets, bump outs, place making, benches, places to meet, etc. Member Bass said it is called a Supper Club and the idea is to do more residents engagement and the Do.Town staff is willing to assist with organizing around any topic. STAFF COMMENTS Preview of 2013 Neighborhood Reconstruction Projects Assistant city engineer Millner presented the 2013 projects. He said an open house was held last fall and one is scheduled for this July. Draft feasibility studies are expected to be presented to the ETC in September with public hearings in December. The sidewalk and bike plans were reviewed and there are none planned for any of these neighborhoods. Draft Sidewalk Projects Feasibility Studies Assistant city engineer Millner presented the draft sidewalk projects feasibility studies that were done for City Council and they are in draft form until the City Council finds a funding source for these projects. An informational meeting was held for the Xerxes Ave sidewalk and three residents attended and he's received emails from approximately 10 others and most are not in favor of the sidewalk. He said one resident in favor uses a scooter and she would no longer have to ride in the street. Regarding the W. 60th sidewalk, member Laforce asked about an area that is already being used a cut -thru that seem like it would be a natural path instead of the proposed location. Assistant city engineer Millner said they would be putting pedestrians in traffic. This will be discussed further when the official feasibility study is presented. TLC Bike Boulevard Update Assistant city engineer Millner said this project is going through the approval process at the Federal Highways. Construction is still planned for this summer. 1 -494 Update Start date for this project is July 23. 2012 Human Services Task Force This task force is looking for a member from the ETC. Member Braden volunteered. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned. ATTACHMENT Attendance Spreadsheet 4 'NSP,ORTiAhT101rCOMM1SSI6N NAME TERM J F M A M J J A S O N D Work Session Work Session # of Mtgs. _ Attendance % Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 1 - s,....- - - - - - 4H7 /2 1 2 (enter dafe Bass, Katherine Braden, Ann Franzen, Nathan lyer, Surya Janovy, Jennifer LaForce, Tom 2/1 /2014 2/1/2014 2/1/2013 2/1/2015 2/1/2014 2/1/2015 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T .:-_..x..'140 117% %_ 140 Nelson, Paul Schweiger, Steven Thompson, Michael Whited, Courtney VACANT 2/1/2013 student 2/1/2013 2/1/2015 student 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6'_ 1'31 �_f= Liaisons: Report attendance monthly and attach this report to the Commission minutes for the packet. Do not enter numbers into the last two columns. Meeting numbers & attendance percentages will calculate automatically. INSTRUCTIONS: it Meeting w /Quorum Counted as Meeting Held (ON MEETINGS' LINE) "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Attendance Recorded (ON MEMBER'S LINE) Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Regular Meeting w/o Quorum Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Joint Work Session Type "1" under "Work Session" on the meetings' line. Type "1" under "Work Session" for each attending member. Rescheduled Meeting* Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for each attending member. Cancelled Meeting Type "1" under the month on the meetings' line. Type "1" under the month for ALL members. Special Meeting There is no number typed on the meetings' line. There is no number typed on the members' lines. *A rescheduled meeting occurs when members are notified of a new meeting date /time at a prior meeting. If shorter notice is given, the previously - scheduled meeting is considered to have been cancelled and replaced with a special meeting. NOTES: MINUTES OF CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA SPECIAL MEETING OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION EDINA PUBLIC WORKS & PARK MAINTENANCE FACILITY JULY 9, 2012 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL Answering roll call was Members Bass, Braden, Janovy, LaForce, Nelson, and Whited. APPROVE OF MEETING AGENDA Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member Braden to approve the agenda. Member LaForce asked if the meeting format would be the same as last time. Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member LaForce to go straight to discussion. All voted aye. Motion carried. REPORTS /RECOMMENDATIONS France Avenue Intersection Enhancements Member Janovy asked how the project went from $2m to $10.3m. Consultant Chuck Rickart of WSB & Associates, said something closer to option 3 was assumed in the cost of the funding application which requires minimal right -of -way (ROW), bike boulevard, etc. He said option 1, the most expensive, includes significant intersection work and twice the amount of ROW which tripled the cost. Mr. Rickart described option 1 has having an off - street bike lane from W. 76`h to Crosstown, with the exception of the Macy's and Byerly's location that will have a share - the -road until future redevelopment happens, separated by landscaped boulevard, a 2 foot buffer and a 7 foot walkway. Discussion: Member Janovy asked where the bike plan came from. Mr. Rickart said it was part of the rescoping and city engineer Houle said based on feedback from the first meeting, it sounded like people liked it. He said it would also be a natural connection the planned trail. Is there a funding source? Mr. Houle said there is the Centennial Lakes TIF funding. He said city manager Neal mentioned setting up a special funding district which would be special assessment but the earliest that a public hearing could be scheduled would be September. Member LaForce said he did not feel comfortable forwarding option 1 to the City Council if there wasn't a definite funding source. Member Janovy said there are many who are interested in the TIF funds and she cannot advocate for an extra $7m. Mr. Rickart said the direction from last meeting was option 1. Member Braden said they did not know the cost then and asked if they should scale back. Mr. Houle they should scale back. Mr. Rickart said he did not have all the cost ready for the other options. Chair Nelson said the original scope includes sidewalk on the eastside, improving access to transit, and getting people across safely. Member Janovy said she does not recall a dedicated bike lane in the original scope. She said in her research, she has found some items (cycle track, left turn and colored lanes) that are being proposed are recommended by FHWA International Program for further evaluation and she asked if this was a concern. Mr. Rickart said while they -eed approval from MnDOT, he is not concerned because these treatments are currently being used in other mmunities. 1 Member Janovy said Councilmember Sprague wanted to know what makes this specific design better for pedestrians. Mr. Rickart said the crossings are shorter and if needed, there is a refuge. The cycle track does not go all the way through on the west side because it is cost prohibitive (only at the intersections). Mr. Houle said other intersections would be completed at a later date (Hazelton, Gallagher, etc.). Member LaForce asked if they are deciding the future of these other intersections now and Mr. Houle said yes. Mr. Houle said the proposed design is to have trees closer to traffic, then bikers, and a planter between bikers and pedestrians and this cannot be changed very much based on feedback from Hennepin County. Landscape architect Craig Churchward, said he may want the planter to be 5' high because this is better for plantings. Member Janovy asked if the County has given any feedback yet and Mr. Houle said no. Mr. Houle said they may want to consider a different option and change the schedule so that they go to City Council for approval in August instead of July 17. Mr. Houle was asked about bike parking options at bus stops and Nice Ride. He said they did not discuss parking with Metro Transit and regarding bus shelters, Metro Transit will install them if they have 25 boarding passengers per day. He said Nice Ride identified 50th & France as a location but they are currently out of funding. The commission was asked if they would like to move the curb over another 5 foot and eliminate the bike lane. Member LaForce said this is incomplete but there is no funding for option 1. Mr. Houle said option 3 has bike lanes only at the intersections and they could reserve space for a future bike boulevard. Member Janovy asked if the sidewalk could be made wider to accommodate bikers also. She said she thinks the City Council was asking for sidewalk, benches, pedestrian lights, and planters. Chair Nelson asked if the intent was to have a north /south connection to the Promenade. Mr. Rickart said W. 66th and W. 70h are the City's Comp Plan bike crossings. Chair Nelson asked if the goal was crossing safely. Mr. Churchward said he thought the bigger goal was to not have the orientation towards cars on the corridor. Chair Nelson said he liked option 1, if they had the money, but he does not want to change the design and then do a redo later. Mr. Churchward said if the north /south movement is no longer the desire and east /west is, then they can relook at the design. Chair Nelson said there is a bike lane on W. 70th that ends at the last roundabout and suggested continuing this to France Ave to connect with the Promenade. Mr. Rickart said whatever is done needs to accommodate crossings at W. 66th and all other primary bike routes. Mr. Churchward said he feels responsible for creating the grand vision. He said he had Grand Ave, St. Paul, in mind but instead the bikers will remain secondary, while cars are primary on the corridor if his understanding is correct. Member LaForce said France Ave is not the same as Grand Ave because Southdale is set further back. It likely will be residents and employees who will be on France Ave so it should be made enjoyable and safe for them. Member Bass said this could be a catalyst for rezoning. She said option 1 is bold and she liked it. She said they do not have a shared vision for France Ave and that there also isn't a community vision. Member Whited asked if the businesses have been told that they are to get closer to France Ave and Mr. Houle said no. Mr. Churchward said ideally, they would bring the sidewalk closer to the businesses and this would be part of a vision of having a tree -lined boulevard. This would be done during redevelopments. Mr. Houle said Southdale is willing work on a sidewalk around their perimeter. Member Janovy said there is a vision for France Ave in the Living Streets Policy and for other streets. She believes, however, that there will be resistance to spending $10.3m and this will make it difficult to get other bike lanes approved. Member La Force said they need to reach a consensus on elements and he would like to see finished connections or connection to something that already exist (unlike the one block of sidewalk on Interlachen Blvd). Member Bass said the system is not perfect but it has to be built out bit by bit. Member La Force said there is no plan for future connection. Member Bass asked what they could do that could set them up for a five year plan. Member Janovy asked how they could reduce speed limit on France and if a speed study could be included. Mr. Rickart said they could request a speed study from the County but it would add additional cost. Continuing with his elements, member La Force suggested a sidewalk on the eastside that would be done correctly to avoid a redo later on, wide boulevard, refuge, free right turns, etc. Chair Nelson liked the idea of a sidewalk becoming a bike lane in the future. Mr. Rickart said 8 foot is the federal required width for a 2 -way, multi -use path. Mr. Churchward said this is the right size for three people. He said any wider would look like a lot of concrete based on today's usage. He said if they can reduce speed it will help, otherwise trees will help. He said he prefers 10 foot of soil area between the curb and sidewalk because of less maintenance to tree roots. He said 66th & Lyndale in Richfield does have large trees in smaller areas so it can be done but it would require good soil, sprinkler, etc. Member Janovy asked if there are innovate ways to use runoff water to feed the trees and he said yes. Member Janovy asked about brand identify and how do you know what is right. Mr. Churchward said they need to know what the roadway is going to be for the next 30 years. Mr. Houle suggested leaving space for the monuments and creating a task force to work on branding. Chair Nelson said they should make crossings safe and easier, add sidewalk and make it as wide as possible and plant boulevard trees. He said even this is going to be more than $2m and the bridge was estimated at $6 -8m so it was known that additional funding would be needed. Member Whited suggested talking to businesses about sponsoring benches along the corridor. Member Janovy asked if the special assessment district would only be for beautification and Mr. Houle said he did not know the details but whatever is done has to show benefit to the properties. Member Braden suggested improving the three intersections, east /west crossings and continuing the W. 701h bike lane from the roundabout to France. Member La Force asked if people would stroll on France Ave. Member Bass said maybe not now but hopes that the City will pursue zoning that brings building closer to the street. She said this would encourage strolling. She said also that land use and transportation are inextricably intertwined and she believes there should be formal collaboration between the ETC and the Planning Commission. Member LaForce asked Mr. Houle to repeat to them what he had heard. Mr. Houle said the elements are finish the connections for the sidewalks and bikeways, design the 8 -foot sidewalks so they do not need to be reconstructed in the future, put in as much boulevard as possible, provide pedestrian level lighting, provide safe cross -walk markings, remove free rights from the travel lanes, enlarge the medians to provide refuge areas, and provide space for monuments. Member Janovy asked about pedestrian level lighting and Mr. Rickart said they will need to look into this. Regarding the monuments, Mr. Churchward said they need to be dramatic and look like a destination. Member Bass said there is one at Cahill and. W. 70th that is a good example. She said it should also signal to drivers immediately that they have entered a different space. Mr. Churchward mentioned Fairview as a gateway playing of off this for the rest of the corridor. ember Braden asked Mr. Houle who much more he is comfortable spending and he said between $1 -2M. He said Lnere may be State Aid money available for ROW acquisitions. Motion was made by member Janovy and seconded by member Bass to not recommend forwarding the current feasibility study to Council and to incorporate an alternative design for consideration at their August 6 meeting. All voted aye. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 9 p.m. 4 I ppp- Id, W, a IA . . ... . .. .. . ... . I ater- lant'.0, i . (J�GC HORIZON S-- company 3030 W. Salt Creek Lane, Suite 201 Arlington Heights, IL 60005 -5025 847.391.1000 • Fax: 847.390.0408 EDITORIAL Editorial Director Rod Sutton rsutton @sgcmail.com Editor Ivy Chang ichang@sgcmail.com 952.933.3386 Designer John Wegner MANAGEMENT VP /Group Publisher Rick Schwer rschwer @sgcmail.com VP, Construction Group Rick Blesi rblesi@sgcmail.com Director of Circulation Doug Riemer driemer @sgcmail.com Director of Creative Services & Promotions Sandi Stevenson sstevenson@sgcmail.com ADVERTISING Integrated Media Consultant Richard Thompson rthompson@sgcma i I.com 952- 401 -1158 Advertising Coordinator ReneA Fonferko rfonferko@sgcmai I. com Administrative Coordinator David Schwer dschwer@sgcmail. com CORPORATE Chairman Emeritus (1922 -2003) H.S. Gillette Chairperson K.A. Gillette President, CEO E.S. Gillette Sr. Vice President Ann Fallon O'Neill Vice President of Custom Media, Creative Services and Content Management Diane Vojcanm Vice President of Events Harry Urban Chief Financial Officer David Shreiner For reprints, please contact Heidi Riedl hriedl @sgcmail.com CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN(USPS 130 -050) is published weekly by SGC Horizon LLC, 3030 W. Salt Creek Lane, Suite 201, Arlington Heights, IL 60005. Periodical postage paid at Arlington Heights, IL 60005 and other mailing offices. Subscription Rates per year: USA $220.00; Canada $279.00 (payable in USA funds); all other international $279.00 (payable In USA funds). Single copies: USA $15.00; all international (payable In USA funds) $30.00. Buyers Guide: USA $30.00; all international (payable In USA funds) $70.00. Reproduction of contents Is strictly forbidden. 0 Copyright 2012. CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN is not responsible for the accuracy of any data, clalm or opinion appearing In this magazine and opinions expressed do not necessarily represent the views of the magazine or its publishers. The appearance of any advertisement or new product information does not constitute the endorsement of any product by CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to: Circulation Department CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN 3030 W. Salt Creek Lane, Suite 201 Arlington Heights, IL 600055025 tr Ctio n u in Juno --18, 2012 Servin Serving Minnesota, North Dakota volume 297, number 24 and South Dakota since 1893 features '.j Water Plant Built in a Garage A suburb cleared space from a city -owned parking garage to install its latest water plant departments 4 Industry News 5 Calendar ifil Project News 23 Advertisements for Bid 34 Construction Mart June 18, 2012 / CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN 3 i ifs ._.4 IF W � {y 1 1 r r. I t :4 11 a In a arage A suburb cleared space from a city -owned parking garage to install its latest water plant. By Ivy Chang s with many suburbs parking garage where, on the first firm, to provide design and engi- across the country, Edina, a floor, the police department kept im- neering for a water plant. The plant's Minneapolis first -ring sub - pounded vehicles. Officials decided goal was to improve water quality urb, needed a new water plant to re- the site was the right venue for a new and have more water within the city place an aging plant that closed and a water plant with current technology that's clean, drinkable and useable, plant that is closed temporarily to re- to replace the closed plant and help said Chris Sluiter, project manager for move vinyl chloride, a harmful chem- the second plant to remove vinyl Municipal Builders Inc., general con - ical from plastic, in the well. That left chloride from the water. tractor to the city. "The chemical lev- four water plants operating that were City engineers selected AECOM els in Edina's water system are safe not enough to -serve Edina residents. Minneapolis, the local office of an and this plant will help improve the The city had extra space in a international professional services quality more." 6 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN / June 18, 2012 41 After clearing the garage space, Municipal Builders built Soundblox interior walls for the blower room and high service pump room. . Built in a parking garage The project began in the existing parking garage, which had shared space with a supermarket and other tenants, in June. After city officials determined logistics for all tenants, Municipal Builders began clearing the space for renovation. Two floors of parking stalls sit above the first lev- el where AECOM designed the space for water plant equipment. "The existing structure was to re- main, we didn't have to demolish anything but the inside had to be re- done —block walls, concrete floors and tanks had to be poured within the bottom level," said Sluiter. "All the equipment had to be brought in using no cranes or sky hooks because the plant is at the bottom of the three- floor structure. "We pushed all supplies through the large doors or holes in the walls. For a new plant, working conditions i lacked enough space. We couldn t dig p below the existing floors so tanks had to be installed in place and had to be of a certain size. Some tanks weren't too difficult to fit in their spaces, but the larger backwash tanks fit within f' 18 inches of the ceiling," Sluiter said. Clearing out space When the project began, Municipal Builders removed the ceiling and fire retardant materials from the existing space. Walls dividing various rooms were built before purchasing all the equipment that was brought to the plant. Workers moved in various tanks while electrical and plumbing lines were replaced under the floor. About 30 percent of the existing con- crete floor was removed, re- poured to higher elevations to match the di- vided rooms, and replaced in the en- trance and large room as part of the new construction to cover electrical and plumbing lines, said Sluiter. Multiple trades subcontractors worked alongside electricians and plumbers at the same time Municipal Builders installed the backwash tanks on the existing floor in the large room. "After the floor was removed by the entrance and we finished install- ing the backwash tanks, we had to come back and pour the floor so we can put up walls and continue con- struction," said Sluiter. "The engineer gave us a set of plans and specs to begin the project, but with this retrofit, design and specs change quickly. We had many design an d process changes and the existing plumbing was a big challenge because of the unknown. Floors and rooms change, so many equipment and designs were not at this location before, and we built the rooms according to design," Sluiter emphasized. "The engineers did a good job with the designs; there's a lot of thought as to where every- thing is placed and to make sure each contractor is steps ahead of the next contractor." Workers poured concrete slabs for the backwash tanks. June 18, 2012 / CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN Water Plant r Stainless steel strippers with pipes were installed in limited space on a mezzanine level.. Design changes AECOM did change some of the jpipes used to connect various tanks and other mechanical equipment to obtain a better fit. Space on a second level to one side of the large room was designated for the stainless steel air stripper tanks, which were in- stalled first along with their pipes. Municipal Builders used its hydraulic forklifts to raise the tanks to the sec- ond level with limited space to work. "The air strippers help to strip vinyl chloride from the water system as water comes in and is an extra step f to assure cleaner, useable water. Each stripper weighs about 6,000 pounds;" said Sluiter. The mild winter in 2011 helped work proceed on or ahead of sched- ule as Municipal Builders moved two filter tanks into the space on January 9 in 50 degree weather. "The filter tanks arrived on site on flat- bed trucks, unloaded- with a crane Workers built and installed a cover slab for backwash tanks. outside, set on heavy -duty rollers, then were pulled in with a forklift," Sluiter, said. "Workers pushed the rollers through the 16 -foot door at the main entrance but the space was tight to get the tanks inside." Once the tanks entered the main room, Municipal Builders set them on blocks and poured concrete sup- ports under where they were to be installed. "Without having cranes and lifts inside to move the tanks, we placed the tanks in place and poured the supports under the tanks. That work took two weeks," said Sluiter. The empty filter tanks weigh 40,000 pounds each. PUMM won. Pipes Workers installed pumps and mo- tors in position around the filter tanks and connected the equipment with ductile iron flange pipes to de- termine placement accuracy. "With flange pipes, the connections have to 8 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN / June 18, 2012 be within one - eighth inch accuracy or the pipes won't fit. The hot and cold water pipes are made of copper and the chemical tank pipes are made of PVC because of the corrosive nature of PVC when chemicals flow through them," said Sluiter. In this water plant, all duct work is galvanized except in the chemi- cal room where the ducts are stain- less steel to support the caustic en- vironment of chemicals. Municipal Builders' subcontractor used a sound- proof material, called Soundblox, to build approximately 2,700 square feet of walls for the pump room and me- chanical room to keep noise levels at a minimum. "Soundblox are regular concrete blocks with insulation inside each block," said Sluiter. Contractors used larger diameter pipes in most of the plant that had to be ordered as workers were in- stalling them. "We didn't order all Municipal Builders used a loader to pull the pressure filter tank into position as workers pushed it through the large entrance. the equipment together; instead we ordered the pieces according to the room in which they were installed or for a specific process line. For ex- ample, once the filter tanks were in- stalled, we order the materials based upon field verification, then order the parts at one time," said Sluiter. New water mains Contractors installed new polyeth- ylene water main pipes, 16 inches in diameter, for both incoming and out- going pipes. Incoming water from four different wells containing water from aquifers enters the plant from s the street through pipes on the side of the plant. "After cleaning, water leaves this plant and goes into the city distribu- tion system through connections at the street in front of the plant. From the street, water is flowed to homes in this area. In some municipalities, water flows into a water tower that will determine when to distribute the water. This plant takes water directly to the system," Sluiter explained. More process pipes are in the wa- ter plant than any other equipment: "We've been working on water plants long enough to know what type of materials we need that works and we work with our suppliers to devise the best method of installing all the equipment. Like most pipe systems, the fewer joints within the system, the fewer chances of leaks," Sluiter said. Connected to computers When all tanks and pipes are con- nected and operating, the new sys- tem will hook up to existing comput- ers that monitor the water cleaning process with one person working on the computer, if necessary. The Public Works Department can control com- munications at another remote site, which was updated, to check on the mechanical process from the panel in this plant's control room. Municipal Builders brought in most of its construction equipment from its office in Andover, about 30 miles northwest of Minneapolis. "We brought in a small forklift, a hydraulic forklift, mechanical hoists and many hand tools. The only rent- al equipment was the scissor lift," said Sluiter. When completed, the water plant handles incoming water through me- dia within the pressure filters, then flows through effluent pipes to the air strippers to remove vinyl chloride before it's dumped by gravity into the clear well. The clear water enters high service pumps that forces water through effluent pipes where post chlorine and fluoride are added be- fore it leaves the plant. Sluiter said the $5.6- million project will be completed by June 30, 2012, to provide 4,400 gallons of water a minute to residents on the north end of Edina. ■ June 18, 2012 / CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN