Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2021-07-21 City Council Meeting Packet
Agenda City Council Meeting City of Edina, Minnesota Edina City Hall Council Chambers Wednesday, July 21, 2021 7:00 PM Watch the meeting on cable TV or at EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeetings or Facebook.com/EdinaMN. Participate in Community Comment and Public Hearing in person, or Call 800-374-0221. Enter Conference ID 8530805. Give the operator your name, street address and telephone number. Press *1 on your telephone keypad when you would like to get in the queue to speak. A City sta7 member will introduce you when it is your turn. I.Call To Order II.Roll Call III.Pledge of Allegiance IV.Approval Of Meeting Agenda V.Community Comment During "Community Comment," the Mayor will invite residents to share issues or concerns that are not scheduled for a future public hearing. Items that are on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Mayor may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Individuals should not expect the Mayor or Council to respond to their comments tonight. The City Manager will respond to questions raised during Community Comments at the next meeting. A.City Manager's Response to Community Comments VI.Adoption Of Consent Agenda All agenda items listed on the Consent Agenda will be approved by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of items unless requested to be removed by a Council Member. If removed the item will be considered immediately following the adoption of the Consent Agenda. (Favorable rollcall vote of majority of Council Members present to approve, unless otherwise noted in consent item.) A.Approve Minutes: Work Session and Regular, June 15, 2021 B.Approve Payment of Claims C.Request for Purchase: 2021 Pavement Rejuvenation D.Request for Purchase: Hansen Road Railroad Crossing Improvements E.Request for Purchase: Grandview East Transportation Study F.Request for Purchase: Braemar Ice Arena West Rink Replacement Condenser G.Request for Purchase: 50th and France District Improvements H.Approve Minnehaha Creek Utility Crossing License Agreement with the State of Minnesota I.Approve Encroachment Agreement with 5616 Parkwood Lane J.Approve Tra;c Safety Report of May 21, 2021 K.Request for Purchase: Manhole Lining on W. 60th Street L.Approve Amended Service Line Warranty Program Agreement M.Request for Purchase: Network Infrastructure Replacements N.Request for Purchase: Braemar Field Sports Dome Lighting Replacement O.Resolution No. 2021-55: Rescinding Resolution No. 2009-19 Approval of a @nal site plan and variance for an Aloft Hotel that was never built P.Resolution No. 2021-56: Rescinding Resolution No. 2014-29 Approval of a preliminary rezoning for Pentagon Park Q.Resolution No. 2021-57: Authorizing Emergency Preparedness Grant Agreement R.Arts & Culture Commission Appointment S.Approve 2021-2022 City Insurance Renewals T.Liability Coverage Statutory Limits U.Approve Out-of-State Travel for Mayor Hovland V.Resolution No. 2021-58: Accepting Donations VII.Special Recognitions And Presentations A.Introduce Fire Chief Andrew Slama B.Recognition of Edina High School State Championship Teams from 2020-2021 VIII.Public Hearings During "Public Hearings," the Mayor will ask for public testimony after staG and/or applicants make their presentations. The following guidelines are in place to ensure an e;cient, fair, and respectful hearing; limit your testimony to three minutes and to the matter under consideration; the Mayor may modify times, as deemed necessary; avoid repeating remarks or points of view made by previous speakers. The use of signs, clapping, cheering or booing or any other form of verbal or nonverbal communication is not allowed. A.PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 2021-54, Conditional Use Permit for Interlachen Country Club, 6200 Interlachen Boulevard IX.Reports/Recommendations: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A.2021-2022 Student Commission Appointments B.Resolution No. 2021-52, Ordinance No. 2021-06: Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan for Solhem Companies at 4660 77th Street West C.Ordinance No. 2021-07: Amending Chapter 36 OG-Street Parking Regulations D.Approve Assessment Policy and Street Funding Revisions E.Resolution No. 2021-59: A;rming and Authorizing the Submission of a Request for State Bonding Bill Funding F.Approve Proposed Spending Plan for Edina's American Rescue Act Plan Funds X.Commission Correspondence (Minutes and Advisory Communication) A.Minutes: Community Health Commission, April 12 and May 10, 2021 B.Minutes: Energy and Environment Commission, May 6, 2021 C.Minutes: Human Rights & Relations Commission May 25, 2021 D.Minutes: Transportation Commission, May 20, 2021 E.Minutes: Arts & Culture Commission May 27, 2021 XI.Aviation Noise Update XII.Mayor And Council Comments XIII.Manager's Comments A.Prep Memo for July 21, 2021 City Council and Work Session Meetings XIV.Calendar of City Council Meetings and Events XV.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 ampli@cation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: V.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Activity: Subject:City Manager's Response to Community Comments Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None. INTRODUCTION: City Manager Neal will respond to questions asked at the previous council meeting. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Minutes From:Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Activity: Subject:Approve Minutes: Work Session and Regular, June 15, 2021 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Minutes as presented. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes: Draft Work Session, June 15 Minutes: Draft Regular, June 15 MINUTES OF THE WORK SESSION OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, JUNE 15, 2021 5:30 P.M. Mayor Jim Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Members Ron Anderson, Carolyn Jackson, James Pierce, Kevin Staunton and Mayor Jim Hovland. Members of the Energy & Environment Commission attending the meeting were Michelle Horan, Teri Hovanec, Cory Lukens, Hilda Martinez and Tom Tessman. Ted Redmond of paleBLUEdot was also present. Staff attending the meeting were: Scott Neal, City Manager; Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications Director; Ryan Browning, I.T. Director; Sustainability Intern Sletsy Dlamini; Executive Assistant Jennifer Garske; Sustainability Coordinator Grace Hancock; City Management Fellow Risi Karim; and Engineering Director Chad Millner. Mayor Hovland explained the purpose of the meeting was to give the City Council an update on development of Edina’s Climate Action Plan and to meet jointly with the Energy & Environment Commission. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE Sustainability Coordinator Grace Hancock gave a presentation on development of Edina’s Climate Action Plan. The presentation included a description of the 24-member Climate Action Plan Team, Edina’s Climate Baseline, Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Climate Vulnerability Assessment. She shared examples of possible Climate Action goals and strategies for trees and green space and renewable energy. She urged Council Members to encourage residents to participate in the development of the Climate Action Plan. JOINT MEETING WITH ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION Energy & Environment Commission Chair Hilda Martinez provided the Council with an update on the group’s 2021 work plan. Besides making recommendations regarding the development of the Climate Action Plan, one of the group’s projects for the year is reviewing and recommending possible development of to-go packaging ordinances or policies to reduce waste. She shared the group’s preliminary work on a possible ordinance and said she thought the Commission would have a final recommendation for the Council in late summer or early fall. Martinez also updated the Council on work plan goals to: • attend events such as the Centennial Lakes Farmers Market to educate the community on organics recycling and sustainable living (in progress) • review and comment on staff recommendations for the City’s Green Building Policy (in progress) • evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the Business Recognition Program (complete) • review and comment on the Conservation and Sustainability Fund’s proposed Capital Improvement Plan (complete) • review and comment on the Transportation Commission’s recommendation on organized trash collection (no update) Council Members thanked members of the Energy & Environment Commission for their volunteer service in leading these efforts. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:25 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, _____________________________________ Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications Director Minutes approved by the Edina City Council July 21, 2021. _____________________________ James B. Hovland, Mayor Page 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL VIRTUAL MEETING JUNE 15, 2021 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and stated the meeting was being held remotely in compliance with Governor Walz’ Stay at Home Order then shared the procedure for public hearing and community comment. II. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland. Absent: None. III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED AS PRESENTED Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Anderson, to approve the meeting agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. V. COMMUNITY COMMENT No one appeared. V.A. CITY MANAGER’S RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY COMMENTS Manager Neal said there were no Community Comments at the last meeting. VI. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED AS AMENDED Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Jackson, approving the consent agenda as amended to remove Items VI.C, Resolution No. 2021-21 and Ordinance No. 2020- 17; Final Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD, including an Overall Development Plan, Final Site Plan for US Bank, Final Plat and Development Contract for 7001 and 7025 France Avenue; and, VI.L, Resolution No. 2021-48; Accepting Innovations for Aging, LLC, Grant Funding: VI.A. Approve minutes of the Work Session and Regular Meetings of June 1, 2021 VI.B. Approve claims for payment for Check Register Claims Pre-List dated June 4, 2021, totaling $564,451.65 and dated June 11, 2021, totaling $1,955,712.83 VI.C. Resolution No. 2021-21 and Ordinance No. 2020-17; Final Rezoning from PCD-3 to PUD, including an Overall Development Plan, Final Site Plan for US Bank, Final Plat and Development Contract for 7001 and 7025 France Avenue VI.D. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-49; Setting Public Hearing Date for 4040 W. 70th Street Tax Increment Financing District VI.E. Request for Purchase; awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Contract ENG 21-12NB Highlands Park Trail Improvements, Northwest Asphalt, $128,797 VI.F. Request for Purchase; awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Contract ENG 21-10 2021 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation, Hydro-Klean, $266,436 VI.G. Request for Purchase; awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Contract ENG 21-12 Townes Road Sump Drain Improvements, G.F. Jedlicki, Inc., $39,745 VI.H. Request for Purchase; awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Design Services for McCauley Trail Shared-Use Path, WSB, $66,018 Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 2 VI.I. Approve Transportation Commission Appointment, Janet Kutui, term ending March 1, 2022 VI.J. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-50; Accepting Auto-Theft Investigator and Training and Travel Expenses Grant VI.K. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-51; Accepting Auto-Theft Investigative Equipment and Materials Grant VI.L. Resolution No. 2021-48; Accepting Innovations for Aging, LLC, Grant Funding VI.M. Request for Purchase; awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Supplemental Playground Equipment Arden Park, Landscape Structures, $16,022 and Flagship Recreation, $10,653 VI.N. Adopt No. 2021-53; Accepting Donations Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA: VI.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-21 AND ORDINANCE NO. 2020-17; FINAL REZONING FROM PCD-3 TO PUD, INCLUDING AN OVERALL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FINAL SITE PLAN FOR US BANK, FINAL PLAT AND DEVELOPMENT CONTRACT FOR 7001 AND 7025 FRANCE AVENUE – ADOPTED The Council noted while rezoning was approved in December, concerns were shared regarding comparable units in excess of 20% of high-end rental and the possibility of too many units being created. The Council spoke about changing business patterns and demand and the precarious nature of development then spoke about the level of public support, increased daily traffic trips, increased height and density, and serving the population with through a future fire station and how the City should consider this project further. Member Staunton introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2021-21 And Ordinance No. 2020-17; Final Rezoning From PCD-3 To PUD, including an Overall Development Plan, Final Site Plan for US Bank, Final Plat and Development Contract for 7001 and 7025 France Avenue. Member Pierce seconded the motion. The Council spoke about elevations of the US Bank building, the need for refinement and windows, to see the good architecture on other sides of the project. Mr. Carlson commented how the project met the 75% transparency rule, the south end was not public facing, the need for security for the private, confidential activities, and functions of the bank. Rollcall: Ayes: Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Nays: Anderson Motion carried. VI.L. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-48; ACCEPTING INNOVATIONS FOR AGING, LLC, GRANT FUNDING – ADOPTED The Council noted senior center staff was beginning to consider activating programming again and thanked them for their resilience during this past year. Member Jackson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2021-48 accepting Innovations for Aging, LLC, grant funding. Member Anderson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VII. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS VII.A. VERNON AVENUE BRIDGE PROJECT UPDATE FROM HENNEPIN COUNTY – RECEIVED Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 3 Director of Engineering Millner introduced Jason Stabell with Hennepin County and Matt Christensen with TKDA to provide an update on the Vernon Avenue Bridge project. Mr. Stabell shared history of the Vernon Avenue bridge which was at the end of its useful life and how they have begun preliminary engagement efforts to determine what the bridge could look like now and into the future that included a design that would withstand another 60 years. He said construction would begin in spring 2023 that included overarching goals for safe turning and merging, better walkability and biking, and an updated look to the bridge with a dedicated left turn. He stressed the need for the bridge to be adaptable with whatever the corridor provided in the future then explained more about the project scope. The Council asked about envisioning bikes on the bridge without bike lanes and the need for eight-foot lanes and pedestrian safety with the shared space. Mr. Milner said staff would review usage and add space if needed in conjunction with the County. VII.B. COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2020 – APPROVED Assistant Finance Director Sawyer shared that CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (CLA) audited the financial statements of the City and issued an unqualified opinion, meaning in their judgement the City's financial records and statements were fairly presented and in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Michelle Hoffman, CPA from CLA, presented the audit results and thanked staff for their work. She said the City received a clean opinion that was unmodified and the best available determination then reviewed City processes for financial reporting to ensure checks, balances, and controls were in place. She said no weaknesses were identified and no new findings made and the City was in compliance with federal programs. She shared general fund financial results in detail and emerging issues with the American Rescue Plan Act and how it could be used to substantiate revenue loss for cities. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Pierce, to approve the Comprehensive Annual Financial report for year ended December 31, 2020 as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VII.C. 2021 QUALITY OF LIFE SURVEY – ACCEPTED Communications Director Bennerotte said staff had been directed to complete a Quality of Life survey every two years to measure residents’ satisfaction with City services and facilities and to gauge interest on various topics. Jade Eroca, NRC, stated the 2021 Quality of Life Survey was mailed to 2,000 randomly selected resident households in March and April and 518 surveys were completed for a response rate of 29 percent. She noted more than 200 surveys were completed online and shared how results were weighted based on many elements. She outlined comparisons between 2021 responses and those from previous survey years and said residents continued to praise Edina as an excellent place to live with overall quality of life being good. She shared the response indicated loyalty to the community for its characteristics and the most serious issues were overdevelopment and teardowns and the need for affordable housing and preservation of small starter homes. The Council asked about change in diversity and inclusion, if that compared to other communities in Minnesota, and how COVID-19 influenced responses well. Ms. Arocha spoke about Edina’s response, noting some ratings were due to the recent civil unrest that resulted in shifts in response but were part of broader trends. She commented on how the public trust question compared to other cities which tended to increase initially but then decreased after the initial onset of COVID-19. Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 4 Mr. Neal explained how staff used the survey for budget and planning processes for the upcoming year and would be shared with the public. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Staunton, to accept the 2021 quality of life survey as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VIII.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-52, ORDINANCE NO. 2021-06; PRELIMINARY REZONING AND PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SOLHEM COMPANIES AT 4660 77TH STREET WEST – CONTINUED TO JULY 21, 2021 Community Development Director Teague said the City Council was asked to consider a redevelopment proposal to redevelop 4660 W. 77th Street, which was part of the Pentagon Park office development. The applicant was proposing to tear down the existing two office buildings on the site and construct a 5-7 story, 408-unit apartment complex. He outlined revisions from the initial sketch plan and options for approval then shared about the existing office buildings on site. He shared building materials would be brick with fiber cement paneling then spoke about flexibility in terms of height and the proposed parking being below current ordinance. He spoke about how the applicant contemplated affordable housing with the existing housing but was proposing the buy-in for affordable housing which would be a substantial payment at the time of building permit and how therefore the project needed the height and density to meet those requirements. Mr. Teague shared comments from Better Together that included concerns regarding traffic on 77th Avenue, height, and confusion about affordable housing within the project. He said staff would meet with Seagate to clarify any of their specific concerns and stated with the 344-foot setback requirement and how the project was 700 feet from the closest single-family home that staff felt the proposed project height was reasonable. Curt Gunsbery, applicant, said they were excited to work with Edina and thanked staff for their work. He said they saw this project as transformative for the site as it used to be a wetland that was paved over in the 1960s and how the project would help rectify roads and long-term issues while enlarging the footprint of Fred Richards Park. Mike Kritch, architect, spoke about district goals such as connectivity and others then outlined current conditions of the large amount of surface parking from scraped development and their goal to change that and bring a different use to the area of residential. He spoke about how they intend to embrace the park and its connections and improvements to West 77th Street, improve permeability from its current state, and raise the front entry elevation and eliminate curb cuts for a visible and transparent entrance for safety. He explained how the project would tie into the wooneruf on the west side and include intense landscaping to soften the entrance and with the U-shaped design would create a more intimate courtyard that would include a natural and light palette with a bike café and other elements. Mr. Gunsbery reviewed in detail how they addressed the Council’s concerns from sketch plan that included more integrated water storage opportunities and sustainability and would create more naturally affordable housing. The Council asked for more information on housing price points and the need for more family-focused units. Mr. Gunsbery explained smaller footprint units cost less to construct and there was not much demand for three-bedroom units but a high demand for one-bedroom units and studios. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:12 p.m. Public Testimony Steve Brown, 5528 Halifax Lane, addressed the Council. Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 5 Member Staunton moved to extend public hearing to noon on July 12, 2021, and take final action on Resolution No. 2021-52, Ordinance No. 2021-06; Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan for Solhem Companies at 4660 77th Street West at the July 21, 2021, meeting. Member Anderson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.B. ORDINANCE NO. 2021-07; OFF-STREET PARKING REGULATIONS – GRANTED FIRST READING Mr. Teague said in 2020, the Edina City Council requested the Planning Commission evaluate the appropriateness of the City’s Off-Street Parking Regulations. The City’s current regulations had not been revised since 1992 and many of the current standards had not been amended since 1970. Over the past nine months, the Planning Commission considered revisions to the off-street parking regulations and made edits to clarify the draft ordinance to include the number of parking spaces proposed and the number of stalls to be built. He noted variances would not have been required in most instances, which demonstrated the ordinance was in line with what developers were building within their projects. Mr. Teague reviewed comments received from Better Together which included the importance of parking needed for businesses and others. Chair Nemerov shared comments about ordinances reviewed and ways to address with what fit for Edina today and felt this was a good balance between the City’s needs and the developers. He spoke about added caps and reasons why they should move away from building large garages for private developments then spoke about the effort to add green incentives and others. He shared areas of discretion that should be fleshed out prior to second reading and concluded the goal was to be right in the middle of what fit Edina today. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 9:41 p.m. Public Testimony No one appeared. Member Staunton moved to extend public hearing to noon on July 12, 2021, and grant First Reading of Ordinance No. 2021-07, an Amendment Regarding Off Street Parking Regulations. Member Pierce seconded the motion. The Council suggested further review with a national consultant prior to Second Reading then suggested during study, the Planning Commission engage various people in the development community. Mr. Teague spoke about how the goal was not to drive parking to the streets, especially with the upcoming restaurant proposal on 44th and France. Roll call: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS IX.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-44 AND ORDINANCE NO. 2021-05; PRELIMINARY REZONING FROM PCD-3 TO PUD AT 4040 70TH STREET WEST – ADOPTED Mr. Teague shared the City Council was asked to consider a redevelopment of 4040 West 70th Street. The applicant, Ecumen and Lupe Development Partners, would tear down the existing office building and construct a new three-four story 118 senior affordable housing project with 86 underground and 23 surface parking stalls. Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 6 The Council asked questions received from the neighborhood that included concerns with location of the sewer easement, pile driving and potential damage, lighting impacts, construction parking, and the shadow study supplement. Steve Minn, applicant, responded how they had moved from the right-of-way easements then spoke about vibration monitors and the claim procedure should damage occur from pile driving. He spoke about the plan for hooded, downlit lighting and the inclusion of standard miniblinds for all units then noted the building’s sufficient distance from the neighborhood should help address lighting impacts. Zach Rosnow, Kolb Architects, explained more about the alternate shadow study and inconsistencies with later day hours and the accommodations for daylight savings time, which could have been missed by the residents’ study. He noted there were negligible differences in shadowing over the winter months. The Council suggested that a Cloverride stop be incorporated in the area to increase walkability and connectivity for the elderly then spoke about tree coverage along Valley View Road and asked what could be done so when foliage was gone, the view from the back of property was more than just the building. The Council suggested a hedge or trees, how transition from the commercial to residential should be more of a woonerf style, and the need to leverage the increase in value and create a plan for a western promenade. Mr. Minn explained their intent to save as many trees as possible but noted storm water retention plans would likely result in tree loss but would be replaced with 4-inch caliper trees to begin regrowth. The Council discussed the building size on the site and how it felt large and the need for transparency and trust in sharing clear boundaries of the site. The Council then spoke about the legitimacy of the neighbors’ concerns regarding potential damage to homes through pile driving and including the creation of a west promenade as part of this project either through a natural barrier or fence. Member Jackson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2021-44 approving preliminary rezoning from PCD-3, Planned Industrial District to PUD-22, Planned Unit Development-22, at 4040 West 70th Street and hold first reading of Ordinance No. 2021-05, Amending the Zoning Ordinance to Add PUD-22, Planned Unit Development-22, at 4040 70th Street West. Member Anderson seconded the motion. The Council spoke about the benefits of the proposed project to the community as a whole because of the affordable housing component but raised concerns about approving the proposal without knowing how to address the neighborhood’s concerns. They Council discussed the ability of approving without a plan for cumulative effect to address identified tensions and the need for a collective commitment regarding the screening and promenade. The Council spoke about the cumulative effect of development in this area, walkability and crossing 70th Street, need to discuss traffic and green space, the 10-foot setback, and transform into a public walking space. The Council thanked the Edina Housing Foundation and Planning Commission for their work to balance the project with the neighborhood that would result in 99 years of affordability, which was especially important for seniors. Roll call: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Jackson, to direct staff to investigate the financial wherewithal, including TIF from this project and the Southdale TIF district, to finance the beginning of a western promenade on the identified block of Valley View Road which would include privacy enhancements for the project’s adjacent neighborhood. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 7 IX.B. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-45; PRELIMINARY PLAT WITH VARIANCES FOR 5209 MINNEHAHA BOULEVARD – ADOPTED Mr. Teague shared Scott Busyn, Great Neighborhood Homes, was proposing to subdivide the property at 5209 Minnehaha Boulevard into two lots. The existing home on the lot would be torn down and two new homes built on the new parcels. Lot 1 would gain access off the alley and Lot 2 off Minnehaha Boulevard. This lot was originally platted as two lots and the applicant was proposing to restore the original plat. Member Jackson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2021-45 Approving Preliminary and Final Plat with Variances at 5209 Minnehaha Boulevard. Member Pierce seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-47; APPROVING APPEAL FOR SIGN VARIANCES FOR MONUMENT SIGN HEIGHT AND SIZE AT 7101 AND 7201 METRO BOULEVARD – ADOPTED Assistant City Planner Bodeker shared this was an appeal of the Planning Commission's denial on May 12, 2021, of sign variances for the height of freestanding signs adjacent to Hwy. 100 at 7101 & 7201 Metro Boulevard and the size allowance for the allowable signs at 7201 Metro Boulevard. The subject property was located on the west side of Hwy. 100, south of W. 70th Street and east of Metro Boulevard and the applicant was asking for multiple sign variances for signage on the north, east and south elevations of the 7201 Metro Boulevard building. The Council asked how the proposed signs compared with Bloomington and St. Louis Park for businesses on Highway 100. Ms. Bodeker noted the signs, if proposed in those cities, would be allowed under their ordinances. Member Jackson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2021-47 Approving Sign Variances for Monument Sign Height and Size of Allowable Building Signage at 7101 and 7201 Metro Boulevard. Member Staunton seconded the motion. The Council asked the Planning Commission to review the current sign ordinance to be more comparable to adjacent cities to help maximize visibility for businesses while still being appropriately sized for the City, then thanked the applicant for their project. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.D. DISCHARGE OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AFFECTING PROTECTING CLASSES AND JUST DEEDS UPDATE – APPROVED Mr. Miller shared an update on the Just Deeds project that began in 2016 with the University of Minnesota’s founded Mapping Prejudice to expose discriminatory covenants to expose the racist practices that shaped the landscape of the metro area. He said Mapping Prejudice researched restrictive covenants in Hennepin County and created the first-ever comprehensive map of discriminatory covenants in an American county and shared the project mapped over 2,800 covenants on residential properties in Edina and 52 City-owned properties and that on June 1, 2021, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2021-43: Condemning the Use of Discriminatory Covenants, Discharging Discriminatory Covenants on City-Owned Property, and Approving Participation in the Just Deeds Coalition. Mr. Millner recognized the team of volunteer staff members who had been working to renounce the discriminatory covenants on City-owned properties and said a process had been created for residents to do the same. He said the proposed action would address 42 of the City-owned properties with 10 requiring additional work then noted Yancy Park was included in this action. Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 8 The Council thanked staff who volunteered towards this effort and noted this process was governing by example. Member Anderson made a motion, seconded by Member Jackson, to approve the Just Deeds project and approve the discharge of restrictive convents affecting protected classes affecting city-owned properties. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.E. EXTENSION OF SERVICE LINE WARRANTY PROGRAM – APPROVED Director of Public Works Olson shared the City Council was asked to decide whether to continue the Service Line Warranty program. He shared history of the program since 2016 that would ensure residents had the option for additional protection for their private sewer and water service responsibility. The Service Line Warranty Program was endorsed by the National League of Cities and provided residents assurance that their water and sewer service lines would continue to work into the future. He shared data that outlined the City’s experience of 70-80 water service line breaks and 20-25 sewer backups reported annually and how staff responded to determine if these were resident or City responsibility. He spoke about concerns from residents regarding the legitimacy of the program and how 2,473 Edina customers enrolled for a total of 3,808 polices. He said staff’s recommendation was to cease collection of the royalty but continue with the program as it helped residents repair lines much quicker when needed. The Council discussed how the program resulted in much public discussion when the City endorsed it through use of letterhead and how there appeared to be value to the program, whether it was Service Line Warranty or another private warranty service. The Council suggested increased public education on the need for some type of insurance rider and while a private provider could take longer, removing the franchise fee collection would help perception and still encourage residents to purchase some type of coverage. Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Jackson, to extend the contract with Service Line Warranty as proposed. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.F. SKETCH PLAN FOR 6500 BARRIE ROAD – REVIEWED Mr. Teague shared the City Council was asked to consider a sketch plan proposal to tear down the existing 16,032 square foot medical office building and build a new 3-story, 23,000 square foot medical office and surgery center at 6500 Barrie Road. He said the site was currently zoned POD-1, Planned Office District and a variance would be required by almost any type of development due to the narrowness of the site. Don Rolff, Pope Architects, explained how they needed to tear down the existing structure due to its age then spoke about the rectangular site with lots of pavement and adjacent parking and their goal to improve the site with a Class A medical office surgery center. He said they intended to construct a high-tech building while preserving trees and create green space along with a pedestrian sidewalk creation. He outlined the one level below grade parking lot and one at grade with two levels above grade for surgery and clinic then shared the building image that would use materials outlined in the zoning ordinance. The Council asked if 70 stalls were enough parking off 66th Street, noted the current three-way intersection was already difficult, and suggested access from Barrie Road. The Council also noted the first-floor parking felt unwelcoming and a better design would be appreciated but the Council did like the trees and proposed sidewalk. The Council indicated that 56th Street was planned to go all the way through to Xerxes Avenue and suggested the applicant be mindful that this area’s traffic pattern would change in the future in addition to the nearby apartment complex almost complete with Phase II coming. Minutes/Edina City Council/June 15, 2021 Page 9 X. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS - Received X.A. COMMISSION CORRESPONDENCE (MINUTES AND ADVISORY COMMUNICATION) 1. MINUTES: ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION, APRIL 22, 2021 XI. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE – Received XII. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS – Received XIII. MANAGER’S COMMENTS – Received XIII.A. RECOMMENDATION OF PROPOSED ARPA SPENDING PLAN XIV. CALENDAR OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND EVENTS – Received XV. ADJOURNMENT Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Pierce, to adjourn the meeting at 12:20 a.m. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Allison, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, July 21, 2021. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the June 15, 2021, meeting available. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.B. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Claims From:Don Uram, Finance Director Item Activity: Subject:Approve Payment of Claims Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve claims for payment: Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 06.18.21 TOTAL $834,344.57 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 06.25.21 TOTAL $945,667.29 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.2.21 TOTAL $1,699,995.47 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.9.21 TOTAL $1,492,986.68 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.9.21 TOTAL $22,332.91(REFUNDS) Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.16.21 TOTAL $2,331,853.68 INTRODUCTION: Claims information for approval is attached. ATTACHMENTS: Description Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 06.18.21 TOTAL $834,344.57 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 06.25.21 TOTAL $945,667.29 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.2.21 TOTAL $1,699,995.47 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.9.21 TOTAL $1,492,986.68 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.9.21 TOTAL $22,332.91(REFUNDS) Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 07.16.21 TOTAL $2,331,853.68 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 46 JOURNAL ENTRIES TO BE CREATED FUND SUB FUND DUE TO DUE FR 1000 General 130,214.372300 Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety 1,685.882500 Conservation & Sustainability 21,750.002600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 1,900.004000 Capital Projects 95,829.494400 PIR Capital Projects 1,685.885100 Art Center 550.005200 Braemar Golf Course 41,672.675200 Braemar Golf Course 755.005300 Aquatic Center 4,545.895400 Edinborough Park 212.645500 Braemar Arena 57,231.945600 Braemar Field 4,037.465700 Centennial Lakes 11,158.065800 Liquor 200,994.645900 Utility Fund 96,579.005900 Utility Fund 3,117.505900 Utility Fund 18,680.785900 Utility Fund 68,126.036000 Risk Management 21,303.006100 Equipment Operations 16,180.776200 Information Technology 2,088.366300 Facilities Management 7,041.597100 PS Training Facility 2,534.777200 MN Task Force 1 7,892.549000 Payroll 16,576.319999 Pooled Cash Fund 834,344.57 TOTAL 834,344.57 834,344.57 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Shirleng Tan Geil ** City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 1 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460323 06/18/2021 PRTD 135922 ACUSHNET COMPANY 910854027 04/24/2021 20210618 62.18 ACUSHNET COMPANY 910858287 04/24/2021 20210618 353.11 ACUSHNET COMPANY 910881907 04/27/2021 20210618 360.37 ACUSHNET COMPANY 911029609 05/18/2021 20210618 119.72 CHECK 460323 TOTAL: 895.38 460324 06/18/2021 PRTD 130792 AIRGAS NATIONAL CARBONATION 9113544407 05/24/2021 20210618 564.76 CHECK 460324 TOTAL: 564.76 460325 06/18/2021 PRTD 160095 AM CRAFT SPIRITS SALES & MARKETIN 12460 05/28/2021 20210618 100.20 CHECK 460325 TOTAL: 100.20 460326 06/18/2021 PRTD 141960 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1Q7Q-JH7F-TNNQ 05/18/2021 20210618 166.64 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1QDD-X9FW-3GGM 05/18/2021 20210618 602.00 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1RWK-6TF7-6TJ6 05/18/2021 20210618 231.79 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 11JN-DVD7-7XLX 05/18/2021 20210618 103.22 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16HV-13KW-W1MC 05/18/2021 20210618 53.98 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 199G-DHHX-6JWR 05/18/2021 20210618 185.46 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 14WT-TRXQ-KW4D 05/18/2021 20210618 19.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1LVP-9P4L-V99Y 05/19/2021 20210618 11.89 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1L19-DR7P-FCFF 05/19/2021 20210618 1,797.74 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1R64-XXDK-LFJP 05/20/2021 20210618 49.00 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1L19-DR7P-N4YM 05/20/2021 20210618 224.98 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1X3R-C7T3-TQVW 05/20/2021 20210618 15.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 137H-7RXY-YYFQ 05/23/2021 20210618 57.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1D64-MYMT-TMGC 05/23/2021 20210618 116.91 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1XNW-TNJR-D3M7 05/22/2021 20210618 39.27 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1QJ7-MYKN-HPG6 05/22/2021 20210618 27.78 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 2 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1RJL-DV9C-DPQ1 05/21/2021 20210618 23.75 CHECK 460326 TOTAL: 3,728.38 460327 06/18/2021 PRTD 100575 AMERICAN CYLINDER LLC 187664 05/19/2021 20210618 119.18 CHECK 460327 TOTAL: 119.18 460328 06/18/2021 PRTD 101047 API GARAGE DOOR INC Z177658 05/18/2021 20210618 624.75 CHECK 460328 TOTAL: 624.75 460329 06/18/2021 PRTD 151441 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005030244 04/14/2021 20210618 505.80 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005023779 04/07/2021 20210618 426.54 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005034320 04/20/2021 20210618 204.61 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005035552 04/21/2021 20210618 385.70 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005044857 05/04/2021 20210618 204.61 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005046027 05/05/2021 20210618 426.54 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005040732 04/28/2021 20210618 505.80 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005051319 05/12/2021 20210618 505.80 CHECK 460329 TOTAL: 3,165.40 460330 06/18/2021 PRTD 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA S1405453-060121 06/01/2021 20210618 1,945.02 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA S1146354-060121 06/01/2021 20210618 271.89 CHECK 460330 TOTAL: 2,216.91 460331 06/18/2021 PRTD 100636 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 02P6115 05/19/2021 20210618 543.34 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 02P6097 05/19/2021 20210618 473.69 CHECK 460331 TOTAL: 1,017.03 460332 06/18/2021 PRTD 102113 AUDRANN INC 1311606 05/18/2021 20210618 9.90 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 3 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460332 TOTAL: 9.90 460333 06/18/2021 PRTD 101718 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380055043 05/18/2021 20210618 2.81 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380055389 05/19/2021 20210618 22.42 CHECK 460333 TOTAL: 25.23 460334 06/18/2021 PRTD 141881 FIDELITY SECURITY LIFE 2724056 05/18/2021 20210618 822.39 CHECK 460334 TOTAL: 822.39 460335 06/18/2021 PRTD 125333 BARNUM COMPANIES INC 29925 05/19/2021 20210618 420.00 CHECK 460335 TOTAL: 420.00 460336 06/18/2021 PRTD 100643 BARR ENGINEERING CO 23271799.00-8 05/18/2021 20210618 15,937.00 CHECK 460336 TOTAL: 15,937.00 460337 06/18/2021 PRTD 100645 BEACON ATHLETICS LLC 0531166-IN 05/21/2021 20210618 571.00 CHECK 460337 TOTAL: 571.00 460338 06/18/2021 PRTD 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103343800 06/03/2021 20210618 330.26 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089637300 06/03/2021 20210618 7,483.80 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089637200 06/03/2021 20210618 247.10 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089637700 06/03/2021 20210618 3,895.70 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089637100 06/03/2021 20210618 171.10 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103343900 06/03/2021 20210618 69.97 CHECK 460338 TOTAL: 12,197.93 460339 06/18/2021 PRTD 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC 4975732 05/24/2021 20210618 780.00 CHECK 460339 TOTAL: 780.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 4 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460340 06/18/2021 PRTD 143097 BERRY DUNN MCNEIL & PARKER LLC 402745 05/11/2021 20210618 170.00 CHECK 460340 TOTAL: 170.00 460341 06/18/2021 PRTD 128914 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 31220 05/21/2021 20210618 46.66 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 31219 05/21/2021 20210618 51.36 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 31218 05/21/2021 20210618 51.36 CHECK 460341 TOTAL: 149.38 460342 06/18/2021 PRTD 142153 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 12959 06/03/2021 20210618 543.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 12958 06/03/2021 20210618 362.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 12957 06/03/2021 20210618 362.00 CHECK 460342 TOTAL: 1,267.00 460343 06/18/2021 PRTD 100666 BMI GENERAL LICENSING 39737290 04/02/2021 20210618 368.00 BMI GENERAL LICENSING 39998117 05/02/2021 20210618 368.00 CHECK 460343 TOTAL: 736.00 460344 06/18/2021 PRTD 132444 BOLTON & MENK INC 0270012 05/24/2021 20210618 225.00 BOLTON & MENK INC 0269500 05/24/2021 20210618 2,179.00 CHECK 460344 TOTAL: 2,404.00 460345 06/18/2021 PRTD 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 84063401 05/18/2021 20210618 57.88 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 84068236 05/21/2021 20210618 330.90 CHECK 460345 TOTAL: 388.78 460346 06/18/2021 PRTD 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 178037 06/01/2021 20210618 553.25 BOURGET IMPORTS 178036 06/01/2021 20210618 836.75 BOURGET IMPORTS 178038 06/01/2021 20210618 1,014.00 BOURGET IMPORTS 177907 05/26/2021 20210618 1,926.25 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 5 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460346 TOTAL: 4,330.25 460347 06/18/2021 PRTD 117040 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 05P2872 05/20/2021 20210618 110.65 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 05P2903 05/20/2021 20210618 219.74 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 05P3013 05/21/2021 20210618 -112.20 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 05P3011 05/21/2021 20210618 -38.50 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 02P3012 05/21/2021 20210618 19.25 CHECK 460347 TOTAL: 198.94 460348 06/18/2021 PRTD 142566 BRASS FOUNDRY BREWING CO E-6645 06/03/2021 20210618 128.00 CHECK 460348 TOTAL: 128.00 460349 06/18/2021 PRTD 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339675488 05/28/2021 20210618 4,185.14 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722871 06/02/2021 20210618 167.79 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722869 06/02/2021 20210618 64.15 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722870 06/02/2021 20210618 2,994.00 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722866 06/02/2021 20210618 1,730.55 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722867 06/02/2021 20210618 1,464.65 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722868 06/02/2021 20210618 812.01 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722842 06/02/2021 20210618 238.60 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722843 06/02/2021 20210618 1,398.14 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722844 06/02/2021 20210618 3,545.23 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722865 06/02/2021 20210618 4,483.34 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722863 06/02/2021 20210618 181.82 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 33972864 06/02/2021 20210618 2,907.53 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339722862 06/02/2021 20210618 45.15 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339632043 05/26/2021 20210618 2,817.83 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 6 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339632042 05/26/2021 20210618 178.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339632044 05/26/2021 20210618 4,176.75 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339632045 05/26/2021 20210618 1,411.90 CHECK 460349 TOTAL: 32,803.53 460350 06/18/2021 PRTD 124529 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339708140 06/01/2021 20210618 3,881.20 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339676880 05/28/2021 20210618 1,461.60 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339708149 06/01/2021 20210618 885.00 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339708148 06/01/2021 20210618 2,546.50 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 408650658 05/17/2021 20210618 -480.00 CHECK 460350 TOTAL: 8,294.30 460351 06/18/2021 PRTD 121118 BRUESKE, JEFFREY 21CLP622 06/22/2021 20210618 200.00 CHECK 460351 TOTAL: 200.00 460352 06/18/2021 PRTD 140503 CITY OF BURNSVILLE 9409 04/20/2021 20210618 692.13 CITY OF BURNSVILLE 9412 04/20/2021 20210618 108.36 CITY OF BURNSVILLE 10820 04/30/2021 20210618 5,472.56 CHECK 460352 TOTAL: 6,273.05 460353 06/18/2021 PRTD 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 933225206 05/18/2021 20210618 495.00 CALLAWAY GOLF 933250523 05/21/2021 20210618 648.00 CHECK 460353 TOTAL: 1,143.00 460354 06/18/2021 PRTD 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553054 05/28/2021 20210618 58.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553048 05/28/2021 20210618 1,385.95 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553055 05/28/2021 20210618 175.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553056 05/28/2021 20210618 266.60 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553047 05/28/2021 20210618 988.35 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 7 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553839 06/01/2021 20210618 292.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553841 06/01/2021 20210618 3,305.80 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2553840 06/01/2021 20210618 171.30 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 6251071 06/07/2021 20210618 -117.00 CHECK 460354 TOTAL: 6,527.50 460355 06/18/2021 PRTD 100223 CASS COUNTY MN 18015744 06/09/2021 20210618 100.00 CHECK 460355 TOTAL: 100.00 460356 06/18/2021 PRTD 101515 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY 557151 05/20/2021 20210618 1,241.09 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2341881 05/18/2021 20210618 1,232.50 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2346732 05/19/2021 20210618 748.00 CHECK 460356 TOTAL: 3,221.59 460357 06/18/2021 PRTD 142028 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085124449 05/24/2021 20210618 40.85 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085124512 05/24/2021 20210618 30.25 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085124296 05/24/2021 20210618 11.78 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085124381 05/24/2021 20210618 36.88 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085124406 05/24/2021 20210618 28.62 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085124036 05/24/2021 20210618 3.69 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085743651 05/28/2021 20210618 68.64 CHECK 460357 TOTAL: 220.71 460358 06/18/2021 PRTD 103235 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE PARKS AND RE 21CLP628 06/28/2021 20210618 150.00 CHECK 460358 TOTAL: 150.00 460359 06/18/2021 PRTD 141531 CITY OF HASTINGS MN-TF1/05212021 05/21/2021 20210618 1,619.49 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 8 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460359 TOTAL: 1,619.49 460360 06/18/2021 PRTD 103216 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS 431-0005.300-5/21 05/05/2021 20210618 11,797.20 CHECK 460360 TOTAL: 11,797.20 460361 06/18/2021 PRTD 105696 CITY-COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS & MARK 3CMA-2021 06/01/2021 20210618 720.00 CHECK 460361 TOTAL: 720.00 460362 06/18/2021 PRTD 140274 CIVICPLUS, LLC 210368 02/25/2021 20210618 750.00 CHECK 460362 TOTAL: 750.00 460363 06/18/2021 PRTD 100012 CORE & MAIN O246347 05/18/2021 20210618 629.61 CHECK 460363 TOTAL: 629.61 460364 06/18/2021 PRTD 100012 CORE & MAIN O246016 05/18/2021 20210618 47.40 CHECK 460364 TOTAL: 47.40 460365 06/18/2021 PRTD 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 78340 05/20/2021 20210618 608.86 CHECK 460365 TOTAL: 608.86 460366 06/18/2021 PRTD 100699 CULLIGAN SOFTWATER SERVICE COMPAN 114X80909704 05/31/2021 20210618 73.78 CHECK 460366 TOTAL: 73.78 460367 06/18/2021 PRTD 130169 CUSTOM BUSINESS FORMS INC 324443 05/24/2021 20210618 1,089.00 CHECK 460367 TOTAL: 1,089.00 460368 06/18/2021 PRTD 119214 CUSTOM HOSE TECH 106084 05/21/2021 20210618 47.52 CUSTOM HOSE TECH 106134 05/24/2021 20210618 315.13 CHECK 460368 TOTAL: 362.65 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 9 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460369 06/18/2021 PRTD 101951 CUSTOM REFRIGERATION INC 0000045782 05/21/2021 20210618 240.00 CHECK 460369 TOTAL: 240.00 460370 06/18/2021 PRTD 102514 CUTTER & BUCK INC 95619289 05/24/2021 20210618 951.91 CUTTER & BUCK INC 95617040 05/21/2021 20210618 379.23 CHECK 460370 TOTAL: 1,331.14 460371 06/18/2021 PRTD 104020 DALCO ENTERPRISES INC 3783868 05/21/2021 20210618 4,161.00 CHECK 460371 TOTAL: 4,161.00 460372 06/18/2021 PRTD 118190 DAVIS EQUIPMENT CORPORATION EI13858 05/21/2021 20210618 88.78 CHECK 460372 TOTAL: 88.78 460373 06/18/2021 PRTD 102195 DAY INVESTMENTS LLC P38974462 04/22/2021 20210618 12.99 DAY INVESTMENTS LLC P39409209 05/05/2021 20210618 186.60 DAY INVESTMENTS LLC P39682321 05/13/2021 20210618 136.70 CHECK 460373 TOTAL: 336.29 460374 06/18/2021 PRTD 100718 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 31018/1 05/18/2021 20210618 147.90 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 33368/1 05/24/2021 20210618 206.10 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 12893/1 03/26/2021 20210618 7.22 CHECK 460374 TOTAL: 361.22 460375 06/18/2021 PRTD 138179 DAVID HAACK 190241 05/21/2021 20210618 79.60 DAVID HAACK 190237 05/21/2021 20210618 4,723.00 CHECK 460375 TOTAL: 4,802.60 460376 06/18/2021 PRTD 100730 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 3662686 05/12/2021 20210618 5,557.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 10 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460376 TOTAL: 5,557.50 460377 06/18/2021 PRTD 129079 DRAIN KING INC 108735 05/21/2021 20210618 220.00 CHECK 460377 TOTAL: 220.00 460378 06/18/2021 PRTD 150827 DRASTIC MEASURES BREWING, LLC 1343 05/28/2021 20210618 281.00 CHECK 460378 TOTAL: 281.00 460379 06/18/2021 PRTD 101479 DMH COMPANIES 22988 01/11/2021 20210618 74.76 CHECK 460379 TOTAL: 74.76 460380 06/18/2021 PRTD 145811 EASTLAKE CRAFT BREWERY LLC 1322 06/02/2021 20210618 114.00 CHECK 460380 TOTAL: 114.00 460381 06/18/2021 PRTD 160118 ECCO USA, INC 115179686 04/22/2021 20210618 1,114.00 ECCO USA, INC 201374515 04/09/2021 20210618 464.00 CHECK 460381 TOTAL: 1,578.00 460382 06/18/2021 PRTD 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 835894 05/20/2021 20210618 89.25 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 835895 05/20/2021 20210618 142.80 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 835893 05/20/2021 20210618 89.25 CHECK 460382 TOTAL: 321.30 460383 06/18/2021 PRTD 160062 ELM CREEK BREWING COMPANY E-1109 05/27/2021 20210618 140.00 CHECK 460383 TOTAL: 140.00 460384 06/18/2021 PRTD 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC 2256646 05/19/2021 20210618 111.94 CHECK 460384 TOTAL: 111.94 460385 06/18/2021 PRTD 147181 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-3611 06/03/2021 20210618 180.00 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-3610 06/03/2021 20210618 180.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 11 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-3556 05/26/2021 20210618 180.00 CHECK 460385 TOTAL: 540.00 460386 06/18/2021 PRTD 103600 FERGUSON US HOLDINGS INC 0473345 05/20/2021 20210618 1,103.84 FERGUSON US HOLDINGS INC 0473628 05/21/2021 20210618 1,557.88 CHECK 460386 TOTAL: 2,661.72 460387 06/18/2021 PRTD 116492 BRIDGETOWER OPCO, LLC 745065610 05/19/2021 20210618 114.55 CHECK 460387 TOTAL: 114.55 460388 06/18/2021 PRTD 137554 FRED HOLASEK & SON INC 00022631 05/18/2021 20210618 3,426.47 CHECK 460388 TOTAL: 3,426.47 460389 06/18/2021 PRTD 102456 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1362184 05/21/2021 20210618 308.77 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1362451 05/21/2021 20210618 268.38 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1374602 06/08/2021 20210618 315.00 CHECK 460389 TOTAL: 892.15 460390 06/18/2021 PRTD 144412 WINEBOW MN00095377 06/02/2021 20210618 387.25 WINEBOW MN00095378 06/02/2021 20210618 160.75 WINEBOW MN00095385 06/02/2021 20210618 1,330.98 WINEBOW MN00095442 06/03/2021 20210618 192.00 WINEBOW MN00095441 06/03/2021 20210618 1,080.00 WINEBOW MN00095384 06/02/2021 20210618 1,020.00 CHECK 460390 TOTAL: 4,170.98 460391 06/18/2021 PRTD 160108 GREAT RIVER OFFICE PRODUCTS, INC. 2102573-0 05/21/2021 20210618 57.13 GREAT RIVER OFFICE PRODUCTS, INC. 2102560-0 05/24/2021 20210618 50.42 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 12 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460391 TOTAL: 107.55 460392 06/18/2021 PRTD 122093 GROUP HEALTHPLAN INC 104863632 05/18/2021 20210618 18,231.80 CHECK 460392 TOTAL: 18,231.80 460393 06/18/2021 PRTD 100787 GRUBER HARDWARE INC. 01-5026 05/18/2021 20210618 17.22 CHECK 460393 TOTAL: 17.22 460394 06/18/2021 PRTD 129108 HAAG COMPANIES INC 4-418708 05/19/2021 20210618 22.68 CHECK 460394 TOTAL: 22.68 460395 06/18/2021 PRTD 137677 HAMMEL GREEN AND ABRAHAMSON INC 218592 06/08/2021 20210618 21,750.00 CHECK 460395 TOTAL: 21,750.00 460396 06/18/2021 PRTD 105344 HANCOCK CONCRETE PRODUCTS LLC 1735352 05/21/2021 20210618 1,059.40 CHECK 460396 TOTAL: 1,059.40 460397 06/18/2021 PRTD 102618 HARDWOOD CREEK LUMBER INC 12099 04/28/2021 20210618 1,656.90 CHECK 460397 TOTAL: 1,656.90 460398 06/18/2021 PRTD 100797 HAWKINS INC 4942393 05/19/2021 20210618 12,931.99 HAWKINS INC 4945076 05/24/2021 20210618 12,672.67 CHECK 460398 TOTAL: 25,604.66 460399 06/18/2021 PRTD 101503 HCT 13329 06/11/2021 20210618 2,149.73 CHECK 460399 TOTAL: 2,149.73 460400 06/18/2021 PRTD 103085 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000166521 05/28/2021 20210618 1,044.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000166544 05/31/2021 20210618 601.71 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000166689 06/01/2021 20210618 174.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000167234 06/04/2021 20210618 2,209.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 13 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000167235 06/04/2021 20210618 3,019.65 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000158098 02/03/2021 20210618 2,209.50 CHECK 460400 TOTAL: 9,258.36 460401 06/18/2021 PRTD 143585 HENNEPIN COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER 69375 05/28/2021 20210618 3,136.14 CHECK 460401 TOTAL: 3,136.14 460402 06/18/2021 PRTD 102079 HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC 16166 05/20/2021 20210618 2,694.51 CHECK 460402 TOTAL: 2,694.51 460403 06/18/2021 PRTD 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC 414278 06/01/2021 20210618 1,309.50 HOHENSTEINS INC 414264 06/01/2021 20210618 50.40 HOHENSTEINS INC 414271 06/01/2021 20210618 1,173.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 414280 06/01/2021 20210618 75.60 HOHENSTEINS INC 414287 06/01/2021 20210618 1,246.50 CHECK 460403 TOTAL: 3,855.00 460404 06/18/2021 PRTD 100417 HORIZON CHEMICAL CO 210518076-ER 05/24/2021 20210618 411.89 CHECK 460404 TOTAL: 411.89 460405 06/18/2021 PRTD 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 101289 06/01/2021 20210618 270.50 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 101290 06/01/2021 20210618 1,184.50 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 101291 06/01/2021 20210618 442.50 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 101001 05/25/2021 20210618 343.10 CHECK 460405 TOTAL: 2,240.60 460406 06/18/2021 PRTD 150898 INVICTUS BREWING INC 2997 06/02/2021 20210618 319.00 INVICTUS BREWING INC 2996 06/02/2021 20210618 295.00 INVICTUS BREWING INC 2998 06/02/2021 20210618 335.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 14 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460406 TOTAL: 949.00 460407 06/18/2021 PRTD 116776 JASPERSEN ENTERPRISES INC 11060 05/18/2021 20210618 470.00 CHECK 460407 TOTAL: 470.00 460408 06/18/2021 PRTD 100828 GREAT RIVERS PRINTING 66584 05/21/2021 20210618 83.00 CHECK 460408 TOTAL: 83.00 460409 06/18/2021 PRTD 132592 JF AHERN CO 440458 05/19/2021 20210618 260.00 CHECK 460409 TOTAL: 260.00 460410 06/18/2021 PRTD 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 181355 05/05/2021 20210618 177.25 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 182266 05/24/2021 20210618 73.12 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 182267 05/24/2021 20210618 73.12 CHECK 460410 TOTAL: 323.49 460411 06/18/2021 PRTD 160041 JINX TEA, LLC 1270 06/02/2021 20210618 94.10 JINX TEA, LLC 1268 06/02/2021 20210618 34.70 CHECK 460411 TOTAL: 128.80 460412 06/18/2021 PRTD 100741 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189684 06/02/2021 20210618 3,146.40 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189685 06/02/2021 20210618 83.10 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189686 06/02/2021 20210618 5,593.10 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189687 06/02/2021 20210618 43.00 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189688 06/02/2021 20210618 5,405.85 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189624 05/26/2021 20210618 135.05 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189625 05/26/2021 20210618 1,927.95 CHECK 460412 TOTAL: 16,334.45 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 15 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460413 06/18/2021 PRTD 100835 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3476347 05/28/2021 20210618 369.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3476348 05/28/2021 20210618 71.20 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3475979 05/27/2021 20210618 71.20 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3476349 05/28/2021 20210618 900.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3477194 06/03/2021 20210618 1,352.70 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3477193 06/03/2021 20210618 111.20 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3477192 06/03/2021 20210618 1,824.70 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3477196 06/03/2021 20210618 1,935.30 CHECK 460413 TOTAL: 6,635.30 460414 06/18/2021 PRTD 100835 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214671 06/03/2021 20210618 674.76 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214678 06/03/2021 20210618 146.38 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214677 06/03/2021 20210618 1,189.36 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214674 06/03/2021 20210618 708.94 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214676 06/03/2021 20210618 1,140.80 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214665 06/03/2021 20210618 487.14 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214664 06/03/2021 20210618 1,125.62 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214663 06/03/2021 20210618 1,257.85 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214668 06/03/2021 20210618 146.38 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214661 06/03/2021 20210618 937.75 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214662 06/03/2021 20210618 730.71 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214667 06/03/2021 20210618 264.58 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214670 06/03/2021 20210618 728.33 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214669 06/03/2021 20210618 1,294.28 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214666 06/03/2021 20210618 143.57 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214672 06/03/2021 20210618 1,006.27 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 16 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214673 06/03/2021 20210618 568.33 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214686 06/03/2021 20210618 1,294.28 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214685 06/03/2021 20210618 485.95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214681 06/03/2021 20210618 291.37 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214679 06/03/2021 20210618 2,031.75 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214682 06/03/2021 20210618 93.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214683 06/03/2021 20210618 113.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214684 06/03/2021 20210618 291.57 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214675 06/03/2021 20210618 354.47 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6214680 06/03/2021 20210618 839.42 CHECK 460414 TOTAL: 18,346.24 460415 06/18/2021 PRTD 100835 WINE MERCHANTS 7332421 06/03/2021 20210618 1,398.71 WINE MERCHANTS 7332420 06/03/2021 20210618 70.57 WINE MERCHANTS 7332419 06/03/2021 20210618 378.57 WINE MERCHANTS 7332423 06/03/2021 20210618 3,425.37 WINE MERCHANTS 7332422 06/03/2021 20210618 24.19 CHECK 460415 TOTAL: 5,297.41 460416 06/18/2021 PRTD 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1812160 05/28/2021 20210618 170.36 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1812161 05/28/2021 20210618 1,836.57 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1812159 05/28/2021 20210618 1,060.18 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1810769 05/27/2021 20210618 683.97 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1810768 05/27/2021 20210618 2,774.84 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1810767 05/27/2021 20210618 1,414.76 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1810766 05/27/2021 20210618 912.20 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1810764 05/27/2021 20210618 914.55 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 17 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1812162 05/28/2021 20210618 1,927.60 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814915 06/03/2021 20210618 133.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814914 06/03/2021 20210618 1,088.52 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814913 06/03/2021 20210618 1,335.96 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814912 06/03/2021 20210618 269.65 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814909 06/03/2021 20210618 2,655.05 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814910 06/03/2021 20210618 955.90 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814911 06/03/2021 20210618 579.24 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814908 06/03/2021 20210618 919.67 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814907 06/03/2021 20210618 122.63 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814906 06/03/2021 20210618 890.83 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814902 06/03/2021 20210618 38.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814901 06/03/2021 20210618 983.60 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814903 06/03/2021 20210618 157.65 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814905 06/03/2021 20210618 492.57 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814904 06/03/2021 20210618 557.03 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814900 06/03/2021 20210618 257.52 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814899 06/03/2021 20210618 299.90 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814919 06/03/2021 20210618 578.05 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814918 06/03/2021 20210618 916.49 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814917 06/03/2021 20210618 1,425.07 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814916 06/03/2021 20210618 767.86 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814922 06/03/2021 20210618 2,086.05 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814921 06/03/2021 20210618 65.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1814920 06/03/2021 20210618 992.60 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 18 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460416 TOTAL: 30,263.44 460417 06/18/2021 PRTD 103409 KELBRO COMPANY 2626718 05/27/2021 20210618 239.75 KELBRO COMPANY 2628290 05/29/2021 20210618 30.30 KELBRO COMPANY 2630617 06/03/2021 20210618 71.63 KELBRO COMPANY 2629056 06/03/2021 20210618 62.57 KELBRO COMPANY 2630633 06/03/2021 20210618 153.14 KELBRO COMPANY 2628293 05/29/2021 20210618 35.40 KELBRO COMPANY 2628462 05/26/2021 20210618 95.40 CHECK 460417 TOTAL: 688.19 460418 06/18/2021 PRTD 144395 KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED 161043 05/21/2021 20210618 1,558.00 CHECK 460418 TOTAL: 1,558.00 460419 06/18/2021 PRTD 138279 KFT FIRE TRAINER LLC 160.00003767 05/21/2021 20210618 1,410.00 CHECK 460419 TOTAL: 1,410.00 460420 06/18/2021 PRTD 100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 128999 06/01/2021 20210618 609.00 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 128983 06/01/2021 20210618 89.25 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 129012 06/01/2021 20210618 1,360.20 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 128982 06/01/2021 20210618 89.25 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 129005 06/01/2021 20210618 1,252.10 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 128347 05/25/2021 20210618 534.25 CHECK 460420 TOTAL: 3,934.05 460421 06/18/2021 PRTD 144983 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 52523 05/18/2021 20210618 1,080.00 CHECK 460421 TOTAL: 1,080.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 19 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460422 06/18/2021 PRTD 151024 LA DONA SBC 4766 06/02/2001 20210618 114.00 LA DONA SBC 4767 06/02/2021 20210618 108.00 LA DONA SBC 4768 06/02/2021 20210618 108.00 CHECK 460422 TOTAL: 330.00 460423 06/18/2021 PRTD 101220 LANO EQUIPMENT INC 03-832692 05/18/2021 20210618 76.42 CHECK 460423 TOTAL: 76.42 460424 06/18/2021 PRTD 133014 SOCCER SHOTS 05-18-2021 05/18/2021 20210618 7,448.00 SOCCER SHOTS 05-19-2021 #2 05/19/2021 20210618 9,310.00 SOCCER SHOTS 05-19-21 #3 05/19/2021 20210618 9,262.00 SOCCER SHOTS 05-19-21 #4 05/19/2021 20210618 5,985.00 CHECK 460424 TOTAL: 32,005.00 460425 06/18/2021 PRTD 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308465712 05/18/2021 20210618 122.34 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308465713 05/18/2021 20210618 29.95 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308472574 05/20/2021 20210618 349.68 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308472575 05/20/2021 20210618 2,604.71 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308472573 05/20/2021 20210618 131.07 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308475985 05/21/2021 20210618 968.00 CHECK 460425 TOTAL: 4,205.75 460426 06/18/2021 PRTD 128234 LEFFLER PRINTING COMPANY 21437 05/18/2021 20210618 420.00 CHECK 460426 TOTAL: 420.00 460427 06/18/2021 PRTD 135867 LIBATION PROJECT 35975 06/01/2021 20210618 105.50 CHECK 460427 TOTAL: 105.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 20 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460428 06/18/2021 PRTD 146427 LUCID BREWING LLC 10803 06/03/2021 20210618 150.00 CHECK 460428 TOTAL: 150.00 460429 06/18/2021 PRTD 141916 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 37524 06/02/2021 20210618 358.70 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 37523 06/02/2021 20210618 175.70 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 37385 05/25/2021 20210618 110.70 CHECK 460429 TOTAL: 645.10 460430 06/18/2021 PRTD 122878 MARTTI, DOROTHEA J 259 05/21/2021 20210618 660.00 CHECK 460430 TOTAL: 660.00 460431 06/18/2021 PRTD 141215 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV592994 06/02/2021 20210618 193.50 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV593001 06/02/2021 20210618 294.96 CHECK 460431 TOTAL: 488.46 460432 06/18/2021 PRTD 130477 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 582820 06/02/2021 20210618 1,054.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 582819 06/02/2021 20210618 94.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 582818 06/03/2021 20210618 612.80 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 582821 06/02/2021 20210618 1,084.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 582822 06/02/2021 20210618 94.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 582113 05/26/2021 20210618 548.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 582007 05/26/2021 20210618 -74.33 CHECK 460432 TOTAL: 3,412.47 460433 06/18/2021 PRTD 121441 MED ALLIANCE GROUP INC 212655 05/19/2021 20210618 33.40 CHECK 460433 TOTAL: 33.40 460434 06/18/2021 PRTD 103319 MEDALIST CONCERT BAND 21CLP630 06/30/2021 20210618 150.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 21 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460434 TOTAL: 150.00 460435 06/18/2021 PRTD 101483 MENARDS INC 39574 05/21/2021 20210618 21.45 MENARDS INC 39555 05/20/2021 20210618 124.66 MENARDS INC 39514 05/20/2021 20210618 42.97 MENARDS INC 39737 05/24/2021 20210618 18.56 CHECK 460435 TOTAL: 207.64 460436 06/18/2021 PRTD 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 524021 05/24/2021 20210618 713.90 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 523979 05/20/2021 20210618 378.73 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 523981 05/20/2021 20210618 78.12 CHECK 460436 TOTAL: 1,170.75 460437 06/18/2021 PRTD 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY INC 44026 05/21/2021 20210618 731.23 CHECK 460437 TOTAL: 731.23 460438 06/18/2021 PRTD 131673 MILLS AFTERMARKET ACCESSORIES INC BR-1037976-01 05/19/2021 20210618 461.90 CHECK 460438 TOTAL: 461.90 460439 06/18/2021 PRTD 144364 DVS RENEWALS 12950 06/10/2021 20210618 87.25 CHECK 460439 TOTAL: 87.25 460440 06/18/2021 PRTD 123909 MINNESOTA SODDING COMPANY LLC 10500 05/21/2021 20210618 3,746.46 CHECK 460440 TOTAL: 3,746.46 460441 06/18/2021 PRTD 101966 MINNESOTA SYMPHONIC WINDS, INC 21CLP616 06/16/2021 20210618 150.00 CHECK 460441 TOTAL: 150.00 460442 06/18/2021 PRTD 140955 MODIST BREWING LLC E-22285 06/01/2021 20210618 786.75 MODIST BREWING LLC E-22283 06/01/2021 20210618 412.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 22 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET MODIST BREWING LLC E-22284 06/01/2021 20210618 286.00 CHECK 460442 TOTAL: 1,484.75 460443 06/18/2021 PRTD 123649 MONROE TOWMASTER LLC 431821 09/22/2020 20210618 58.48 MONROE TOWMASTER LLC 439279 05/18/2021 20210618 1,311.78 CHECK 460443 TOTAL: 1,370.26 460444 06/18/2021 PRTD 100912 MOTOROLA INC 8230320190 04/15/2021 20210618 1,500.00 CHECK 460444 TOTAL: 1,500.00 460445 06/18/2021 PRTD 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1302261-00 05/18/2021 20210618 642.24 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1302114-00 05/18/2021 20210618 49.66 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1302061-00 05/19/2021 20210618 107.77 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1302371-00 05/19/2021 20210618 -59.16 CHECK 460445 TOTAL: 740.51 460446 06/18/2021 PRTD 121133 NATUS CORPORATION INC 113837-1 05/20/2021 20210618 5,369.00 CHECK 460446 TOTAL: 5,369.00 460447 06/18/2021 PRTD 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 174304 06/02/2021 20210618 402.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 174306 06/02/2021 20210618 736.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 174307 06/02/2021 20210618 614.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 174105 05/26/2021 20210618 554.00 CHECK 460447 TOTAL: 2,306.00 460448 06/18/2021 PRTD 104350 NIKE USA INC 9988782337 05/24/2021 20210618 35.02 CHECK 460448 TOTAL: 35.02 460449 06/18/2021 PRTD 101620 GARELICK STEEL CO INC 487625 05/20/2021 20210618 142.80 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 23 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460449 TOTAL: 142.80 460450 06/18/2021 PRTD 100926 BLUETARP FINANCIAL INC 0031287543 05/18/2021 20210618 329.99 CHECK 460450 TOTAL: 329.99 460451 06/18/2021 PRTD 160048 NELSON/NYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIA 78997 01/26/2021 20210618 2,590.00 CHECK 460451 TOTAL: 2,590.00 460452 06/18/2021 PRTD 100936 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC 670956 05/21/2021 20210618 316.86 CHECK 460452 TOTAL: 316.86 460453 06/18/2021 PRTD 999998 DOUGLAS LENNICK 13140 06/02/2021 20210618 95.34 CHECK 460453 TOTAL: 95.34 460454 06/18/2021 PRTD 999998 DOUGLAS LINDER 13141 06/02/2021 20210618 89.07 CHECK 460454 TOTAL: 89.07 460455 06/18/2021 PRTD 999998 EVELYN LUND 13143 06/02/2021 20210618 1,673.80 CHECK 460455 TOTAL: 1,673.80 460456 06/18/2021 PRTD 999998 JOEL GLOTTER 13142 06/02/2021 20210618 1,687.10 CHECK 460456 TOTAL: 1,687.10 460457 06/18/2021 PRTD 999998 THEODORE HAIDEN 13144 06/02/2021 20210618 1,295.13 CHECK 460457 TOTAL: 1,295.13 460458 06/18/2021 PRTD 999998 TIA MUCHULAS 13145 06/02/2021 20210618 80.83 CHECK 460458 TOTAL: 80.83 460459 06/18/2021 PRTD 999995 ADRIATIC CONSTRUCTION ED187534-REFUND 06/14/2021 20210618 2,500.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 24 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460459 TOTAL: 2,500.00 460460 06/18/2021 PRTD 999995 Bellin Construction ED186777-REFUND 06/14/2021 20210618 2,500.00 CHECK 460460 TOTAL: 2,500.00 460461 06/18/2021 PRTD 999995 Bollig And Sons ED186618-REFUND 06/14/2021 20210618 2,500.00 CHECK 460461 TOTAL: 2,500.00 460462 06/18/2021 PRTD 999995 Hawkins Tree & Landscaping, Inc ED185116-REFUND 06/14/2021 20210618 2,500.00 CHECK 460462 TOTAL: 2,500.00 460463 06/18/2021 PRTD 999995 MICHAEL LEHAN ED189060-REFUND 06/08/2021 20210618 839.11 CHECK 460463 TOTAL: 839.11 460464 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 DPRE LUXE EDINA PHASE I, LLC 12792 06/04/2021 20210618 1,040.00 CHECK 460464 TOTAL: 1,040.00 460465 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 Heidi Jacques 1181637-REFUND 06/13/2021 20210618 209.67 CHECK 460465 TOTAL: 209.67 460466 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 Jamie Rynda 1178107-REFUND 06/09/2021 20210618 141.93 CHECK 460466 TOTAL: 141.93 460467 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 JOAN SCHOEPKE 13345 06/11/2021 20210618 43.01 CHECK 460467 TOTAL: 43.01 460468 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 JOHN MCWHITE 13575 06/11/2021 20210618 70.00 CHECK 460468 TOTAL: 70.00 460469 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 MATHEW FOX 13577 06/11/2021 20210618 99.81 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 25 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460469 TOTAL: 99.81 460470 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 NIKKI CONSIDINE 13360 06/11/2021 20210618 240.00 CHECK 460470 TOTAL: 240.00 460471 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 PROPERTY ADMINISTRATION COMPANY 12829 06/07/2021 20210618 179.39 CHECK 460471 TOTAL: 179.39 460472 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 ROBERT CUPERUS 13569 06/11/2021 20210618 49.24 CHECK 460472 TOTAL: 49.24 460473 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 Robert Hessian 1182748-REFUND 06/14/2021 20210618 125.00 CHECK 460473 TOTAL: 125.00 460474 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 Sedgwick Heating & AC ED189269-REFUND 06/09/2021 20210618 246.33 CHECK 460474 TOTAL: 246.33 460475 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 Standard Heating & AC, Inc ED189292-REFUND 06/14/2021 20210618 108.17 CHECK 460475 TOTAL: 108.17 460476 06/18/2021 PRTD 999994 TRACEY JOHNSON 13359 06/11/2021 20210618 120.00 CHECK 460476 TOTAL: 120.00 460477 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 BENNETT, DAVIS CLASS REF BENNETT 05/31/2021 20210618 194.00 CHECK 460477 TOTAL: 194.00 460478 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 BLOOMQUIST, STEVE LS749918 06/11/2021 20210618 132.78 CHECK 460478 TOTAL: 132.78 460479 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 CARTER, JESSICA CLASS REF CARTER 05/31/2021 20210618 540.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 26 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460479 TOTAL: 540.00 460480 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 CONSIDINE, NIKKI CLASS REF CONSIDINE 05/31/2021 20210618 120.00 CHECK 460480 TOTAL: 120.00 460481 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 DERMODY, CASSI LB REF 05/31/2021 20210618 160.00 CHECK 460481 TOTAL: 160.00 460482 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 ELISA GOMEZ-ROJI 13147 06/08/2021 20210618 40.00 CHECK 460482 TOTAL: 40.00 460483 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 FUERSTNEAU, KATIE CLASS REF FUERSTNEAU05/31/2021 20210618 240.00 CHECK 460483 TOTAL: 240.00 460484 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 HUGHES, JACK LS755629 06/11/2021 20210618 132.78 CHECK 460484 TOTAL: 132.78 460485 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 JENNIFER ENGLISH 13156 06/08/2021 20210618 215.00 CHECK 460485 TOTAL: 215.00 460486 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 JING LIU 12991 06/08/2021 20210618 215.00 CHECK 460486 TOTAL: 215.00 460487 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 JOHNSON, ROBIN LS770363 06/11/2021 20210618 132.78 CHECK 460487 TOTAL: 132.78 460488 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 JUDITH SMITH 13385 06/07/2021 20210618 18.00 CHECK 460488 TOTAL: 18.00 460489 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 KAVANAUGH, MIKE LS75508 06/11/2021 20210618 132.78 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 27 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460489 TOTAL: 132.78 460490 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 KENT, MELISSA LS71829 06/11/2021 20210618 96.78 CHECK 460490 TOTAL: 96.78 460491 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 LANGE, METTE CLASS REF LANGE 05/31/2021 20210618 394.00 CHECK 460491 TOTAL: 394.00 460492 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 LEAH BRZEZINSKI 13012 06/08/2021 20210618 40.00 CHECK 460492 TOTAL: 40.00 460493 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 LEAH BRZEZINSKI 13015 06/08/2021 20210618 40.00 CHECK 460493 TOTAL: 40.00 460494 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 LISS, LIZA CLASS REF LISS 05/31/2021 20210618 120.00 CHECK 460494 TOTAL: 120.00 460495 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 LU, CHENFENG CLASS REF LU 05/31/2021 20210618 120.00 CHECK 460495 TOTAL: 120.00 460496 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 MARTINY, SUSAN CLASS REF MARTINY 05/31/2021 20210618 120.00 CHECK 460496 TOTAL: 120.00 460497 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 MCNEELY, KEVIN CLASS REF MCNEELY 05/31/2021 20210618 125.00 CHECK 460497 TOTAL: 125.00 460498 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 NIELSEN, ALLISON CLASS REF NIELSEN 05/31/2021 20210618 204.00 CHECK 460498 TOTAL: 204.00 460499 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 SHANE, SHEILA CLASS REF SHANE 05/31/2021 20210618 120.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 28 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460499 TOTAL: 120.00 460500 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 SONG, RAN CLASS REF SONG 05/31/2021 20210618 55.00 CHECK 460500 TOTAL: 55.00 460501 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 STEPNES, ALICIA CLASS REF STEPNES 05/31/2021 20210618 270.00 CHECK 460501 TOTAL: 270.00 460502 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 THOMAS, ALYSSA CLASS REF THOMAS 05/31/2021 20210618 55.00 CHECK 460502 TOTAL: 55.00 460503 06/18/2021 PRTD 999996 VON HEYDEKAMPF, MATHIAS LS749871 06/11/2021 20210618 132.78 CHECK 460503 TOTAL: 132.78 460504 06/18/2021 PRTD 999997 THE CREEK HOA 13491 06/15/2021 20210618 49,319.51 CHECK 460504 TOTAL: 49,319.51 460505 06/18/2021 PRTD 100940 OWENS TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES INC 93290 05/24/2021 20210618 2,612.05 CHECK 460505 TOTAL: 2,612.05 460506 06/18/2021 PRTD 151973 PAINTING BY NAKASONE INC 5138 01/08/2021 20210618 1,942.00 CHECK 460506 TOTAL: 1,942.00 460507 06/18/2021 PRTD 129485 PAPCO INC 220921 05/20/2021 20210618 358.09 PAPCO INC 220921 05/20/2021 20210618 358.09 CHECK 460507 TOTAL: 716.18 460508 06/18/2021 PRTD 100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 54439007 06/02/2021 20210618 359.04 CHECK 460508 TOTAL: 359.04 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 29 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460509 06/18/2021 PRTD 100954 PIONEER RIM & WHEEL COMPANY 01CE5024 05/24/2021 20210618 49.00 CHECK 460509 TOTAL: 49.00 460510 06/18/2021 PRTD 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 210529795 05/20/2021 20210618 214.00 CHECK 460510 TOTAL: 214.00 460511 06/18/2021 PRTD 125979 PRECISE MRM LLC 200-1031026 05/19/2021 20210618 150.00 PRECISE MRM LLC 200-1031083 05/24/2021 20210618 167.65 CHECK 460511 TOTAL: 317.65 460512 06/18/2021 PRTD 102728 PRECISION LANDSCAPE AND TREE, INC 82951 05/19/2021 20210618 800.00 PRECISION LANDSCAPE AND TREE, INC 82950 05/19/2021 20210618 1,200.00 CHECK 460512 TOTAL: 2,000.00 460513 06/18/2021 PRTD 129706 PREMIUM WATERS INC 318155822 05/21/2021 20210618 39.99 CHECK 460513 TOTAL: 39.99 460514 06/18/2021 PRTD 128861 PRIMARY PRODUCTS COMPANY 73277 05/18/2021 20210618 1,370.00 CHECK 460514 TOTAL: 1,370.00 460515 06/18/2021 PRTD 143618 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-22896 05/28/2021 20210618 2,196.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-22897 05/28/2021 20210618 389.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-23180 06/02/2021 20210618 196.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-23182 06/02/2021 20210618 274.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-23184 06/02/2021 20210618 338.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-22902 05/28/2021 20210618 1,418.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-23181-CREDIT 06/07/2021 20210618 -189.33 CHECK 460515 TOTAL: 4,621.67 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 30 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460516 06/18/2021 PRTD 112097 PUMP & METER SERVICE 33841-1 05/19/2021 20210618 1,068.31 CHECK 460516 TOTAL: 1,068.31 460517 06/18/2021 PRTD 100972 R & R SPECIALTIES INC 0072880-IN 05/20/2021 20210618 9,995.21 CHECK 460517 TOTAL: 9,995.21 460518 06/18/2021 PRTD 133091 RANGE SERVANT AMERICA INC 107195 05/21/2021 20210618 53.64 RANGE SERVANT AMERICA INC 107225 05/21/2021 20210618 992.04 RANGE SERVANT AMERICA INC 106981 05/18/2021 20210618 682.80 CHECK 460518 TOTAL: 1,728.48 460519 06/18/2021 PRTD 140950 RCM EQUIPMENT COMPANY LLC 7942 05/20/2021 20210618 926.90 CHECK 460519 TOTAL: 926.90 460520 06/18/2021 PRTD 133627 REPUBLIC SERVICES #894 0894-005433442 05/31/2021 20210618 68,126.03 CHECK 460520 TOTAL: 68,126.03 460521 06/18/2021 PRTD 128159 RICHARDS, BRIAN 21CLP6222 06/22/2021 20210618 250.00 CHECK 460521 TOTAL: 250.00 460522 06/18/2021 PRTD 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 82197 05/18/2021 20210618 2,057.70 CHECK 460522 TOTAL: 2,057.70 460523 06/18/2021 PRTD 160124 NICHOLAS FREDERICK MARSDEN 7361 05/20/2021 20210618 7,856.00 CHECK 460523 TOTAL: 7,856.00 460524 06/18/2021 PRTD 101000 RJM PRINTING INC 116146011 05/20/2021 20210618 48.26 RJM PRINTING INC 116143011 05/20/2021 20210618 48.26 CHECK 460524 TOTAL: 96.52 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 31 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460525 06/18/2021 PRTD 101659 ORKIN 210819272 05/18/2021 20210618 30.00 ORKIN 210817870 05/18/2021 20210618 153.42 ORKIN 210818803 05/18/2021 20210618 149.47 ORKIN 210818662 05/18/2021 20210618 26.26 ORKIN 210818665 05/24/2021 20210618 142.36 CHECK 460525 TOTAL: 501.51 460526 06/18/2021 PRTD 132210 RUSCIANO GROUP 66570 05/21/2021 20210618 755.00 CHECK 460526 TOTAL: 755.00 460527 06/18/2021 PRTD 134173 SAFE-FAST INC INV245997 05/19/2021 20210618 243.40 CHECK 460527 TOTAL: 243.40 460528 06/18/2021 PRTD 101431 SCAN AIR FILTER INC 152393 05/18/2021 20210618 1,188.09 SCAN AIR FILTER INC 152392 05/18/2021 20210618 257.56 CHECK 460528 TOTAL: 1,445.65 460529 06/18/2021 PRTD 142252 SEECLICKFIX INC 211328 03/31/2021 20210618 7,371.00 CHECK 460529 TOTAL: 7,371.00 460530 06/18/2021 PRTD 103249 SHANNON, JIM 21CLP629 06/29/2021 20210618 150.00 CHECK 460530 TOTAL: 150.00 460531 06/18/2021 PRTD 104098 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP B13483036 05/18/2021 20210618 1,656.81 SHI INTERNATIONAL CORP B13482539 05/18/2021 20210618 242.85 CHECK 460531 TOTAL: 1,899.66 460532 06/18/2021 PRTD 100995 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 406417 05/29/2021 20210618 5,057.64 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 32 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460532 TOTAL: 5,057.64 460533 06/18/2021 PRTD 101556 SHRED-IT USA 8182080139 05/22/2021 20210618 64.90 CHECK 460533 TOTAL: 64.90 460534 06/18/2021 PRTD 132195 SMALL LOT MN MN43141 06/01/2021 20210618 412.88 SMALL LOT MN MN43140 06/01/2021 20210618 92.96 CHECK 460534 TOTAL: 505.84 460535 06/18/2021 PRTD 100430 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL ARV/48168301 05/18/2021 20210618 226.68 CHECK 460535 TOTAL: 226.68 460536 06/18/2021 PRTD 141332 SOUTH TOWN REFRIGERATION INC W65626 05/24/2021 20210618 8,281.69 SOUTH TOWN REFRIGERATION INC W65625 05/24/2021 20210618 8,281.69 CHECK 460536 TOTAL: 16,563.38 460537 06/18/2021 PRTD 102188 ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY BAND 21CLP623 06/23/2021 20210618 150.00 CHECK 460537 TOTAL: 150.00 460538 06/18/2021 PRTD 146960 STACKED DECK BREWING 002654 05/26/2021 20210618 160.00 CHECK 460538 TOTAL: 160.00 460539 06/18/2021 PRTD 145599 SSI MN TRANCHE 1 LLC 14685 05/17/2021 20210618 37,030.61 CHECK 460539 TOTAL: 37,030.61 460540 06/18/2021 PRTD 100438 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC 1774507 04/07/2021 20210618 500.00 CHECK 460540 TOTAL: 500.00 460541 06/18/2021 PRTD 101638 STATE OF MINNESOTA 11914 05/19/2021 20210618 35.00 CHECK 460541 TOTAL: 35.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 33 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460542 06/18/2021 PRTD 101638 STATE OF MINNESOTA 897930/847516 06/01/2021 20210618 80.00 CHECK 460542 TOTAL: 80.00 460543 06/18/2021 PRTD 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40300 06/02/2021 20210618 309.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40299 06/02/2021 20210618 456.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40187 05/26/2021 20210618 405.00 CHECK 460543 TOTAL: 1,170.00 460544 06/18/2021 PRTD 101015 STREICHERS INC I1504737 05/21/2021 20210618 29.08 CHECK 460544 TOTAL: 29.08 460545 06/18/2021 PRTD 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10178620 05/19/2021 20210618 943.36 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10178698 05/24/2021 20210618 66.00 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10177394 03/17/2021 20210618 66.00 CHECK 460545 TOTAL: 1,075.36 460546 06/18/2021 PRTD 133512 SUDDATH RELOCATION SYSTEMS OF MIN 690600 05/25/2021 20210618 1,106.00 CHECK 460546 TOTAL: 1,106.00 460547 06/18/2021 PRTD 113841 SUMMIT 1549910 12/31/2020 20210618 -13.90 SUMMIT 130016366 05/20/2021 20210618 325.00 SUMMIT 130016367 05/20/2021 20210618 291.00 SUMMIT 130016365 05/20/2021 20210618 297.00 CHECK 460547 TOTAL: 899.10 460548 06/18/2021 PRTD 135803 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN May 2021 05/18/2021 20210618 5,201.50 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN May 2021 #2 05/18/2021 20210618 2,982.17 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN May 2021 #3 05/18/2021 20210618 7,570.25 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN May 2021 #4 05/18/2021 20210618 73.20 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 34 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460548 TOTAL: 15,827.12 460549 06/18/2021 PRTD 142259 SUNBELT RENTALS INC 113642369-0001 05/20/2021 20210618 195.00 SUNBELT RENTALS INC 113647574-0001 05/20/2021 20210618 225.00 CHECK 460549 TOTAL: 420.00 460550 06/18/2021 PRTD 142316 T-MOBILE USA INC 477067848-5/21 05/27/2021 20210618 35.00 CHECK 460550 TOTAL: 35.00 460551 06/18/2021 PRTD 160081 GREAT CIRCLE VENTURES HOLDINGS, L 1051180 05/21/2021 20210618 1,013.65 CHECK 460551 TOTAL: 1,013.65 460552 06/18/2021 PRTD 101326 TERMINAL SUPPLY INC 39287-01 05/21/2021 20210618 26.90 CHECK 460552 TOTAL: 26.90 460553 06/18/2021 PRTD 101038 TOLL COMPANY 10406769 05/21/2021 20210618 359.07 CHECK 460553 TOTAL: 359.07 460554 06/18/2021 PRTD 102150 TWIN CITY SEED CO 49576 05/18/2021 20210618 205.00 CHECK 460554 TOTAL: 205.00 460555 06/18/2021 PRTD 146436 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-328813a 01/31/2021 20210618 700.00 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-338176 04/30/2021 20210618 11,418.75 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-338175 04/30/2021 20210618 10,740.25 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-338174 04/30/2021 20210618 22,951.00 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-338172 04/30/2021 20210618 46,496.25 CHECK 460555 TOTAL: 92,306.25 460556 06/18/2021 PRTD 103973 ULINE INC 133656478 05/12/2021 20210618 419.13 ULINE INC 133980295 05/19/2021 20210618 94.51 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 35 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460556 TOTAL: 513.64 460557 06/18/2021 PRTD 131957 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC BOZEMAN 150-0054723-01 05/19/2021 20210618 179.94 CHECK 460557 TOTAL: 179.94 460558 06/18/2021 PRTD 140009 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2012697 05/18/2021 20210618 147.11 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2012895 05/19/2021 20210618 209.49 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2013998 05/24/2021 20210618 202.78 CHECK 460558 TOTAL: 559.38 460559 06/18/2021 PRTD 100050 USPS 08050094-061021 06/10/2021 20210618 2,000.00 USPS 0000075983-061121 06/11/2021 20210618 6,000.00 CHECK 460559 TOTAL: 8,000.00 460560 06/18/2021 PRTD 144209 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2591 06/02/2021 20210618 366.00 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2589 06/02/2021 20210618 85.50 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2590 06/02/2021 20210618 265.50 CHECK 460560 TOTAL: 717.00 460561 06/18/2021 PRTD 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY S004709178.001 05/18/2021 20210618 932.10 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY S004721642.001 05/21/2021 20210618 15.87 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY S004723488.001 05/21/2021 20210618 14.48 CHECK 460561 TOTAL: 962.45 460562 06/18/2021 PRTD 119454 VINOCOPIA INC 0279885-IN 05/27/2021 20210618 360.75 VINOCOPIA INC 0279884-IN 05/27/2021 20210618 530.00 VINOCOPIA INC 0280274-IN 06/03/2021 20210618 127.50 VINOCOPIA INC 0280273-IN 06/03/2021 20210618 768.75 VINOCOPIA INC 0280271-IN 06/03/2021 20210618 121.25 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 36 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET VINOCOPIA INC 0280275-IN 06/03/2021 20210618 570.00 VINOCOPIA INC 0280269-IN 06/03/2021 20210618 1,099.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0280268-IN 06/03/2021 20210618 1,414.50 VINOCOPIA INC 0280270-IN 06/03/2021 20210618 450.00 CHECK 460562 TOTAL: 5,442.00 460563 06/18/2021 PRTD 100571 DIAMOND VOGEL PAINTS 802200865 05/18/2021 20210618 776.50 CHECK 460563 TOTAL: 776.50 460564 06/18/2021 PRTD 143468 VONDENKAMP, MARK 000765 06/01/2021 20210618 150.00 VONDENKAMP, MARK 000766 06/01/2021 20210618 150.00 CHECK 460564 TOTAL: 300.00 460565 06/18/2021 PRTD 120784 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16165 05/20/2021 20210618 22.51 CHECK 460565 TOTAL: 22.51 460566 06/18/2021 PRTD 132751 WARNING LITES OF MINNESOTA 227012 05/06/2021 20210618 1,900.00 CHECK 460566 TOTAL: 1,900.00 460567 06/18/2021 PRTD 123616 WATER CONSERVATION SERVICES INC 11333 05/20/2021 20210618 594.50 CHECK 460567 TOTAL: 594.50 460568 06/18/2021 PRTD 150986 WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN INC 9010610462 05/22/2021 20210618 1,367.25 CHECK 460568 TOTAL: 1,367.25 460569 06/18/2021 PRTD 101033 WINE COMPANY 173983 06/02/2021 20210618 1,357.45 WINE COMPANY 173984 06/02/2021 20210618 1,019.20 WINE COMPANY 173985 06/02/2021 20210618 1,561.45 WINE COMPANY 173351 05/26/2021 20210618 2,062.75 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 37 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460569 TOTAL: 6,000.85 460570 06/18/2021 PRTD 130471 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 64187402 12/07/2020 20210618 8,936.93 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 64187400 12/07/2020 20210618 5,638.61 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 64187397 12/07/2020 20210618 4,185.32 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 64134207 10/21/2020 20210618 7,518.15 CHECK 460570 TOTAL: 26,279.01 460571 06/18/2021 PRTD 124503 WINSUPPLY EDEN PRAIRIE MN CO 210859 01 05/20/2021 20210618 78.01 CHECK 460571 TOTAL: 78.01 460572 06/18/2021 PRTD 142162 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2769 05/28/2021 20210618 262.80 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2768 05/28/2021 20210618 340.80 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2773 05/28/2021 20210618 -298.80 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2774 06/02/2001 20210618 59.70 CHECK 460572 TOTAL: 364.50 460573 06/18/2021 PRTD 127774 WORLDWIDE CELLARS INC R21-52044 06/02/2021 20210618 662.50 WORLDWIDE CELLARS INC R21-52046 06/02/2021 20210618 319.00 CHECK 460573 TOTAL: 981.50 460574 06/18/2021 PRTD 101103 WW GRAINGER 9905143237 05/18/2021 20210618 445.90 WW GRAINGER 9904832509 05/18/2021 20210618 73.00 WW GRAINGER 9906172730 05/19/2021 20210618 386.73 WW GRAINGER 9906172748 05/19/2021 20210618 103.40 WW GRAINGER 9908002273 05/20/2021 20210618 212.64 WW GRAINGER 9906847620 05/20/2021 20210618 26.28 WW GRAINGER 9907703152 05/20/2021 20210618 18.53 WW GRAINGER 9911675032 05/24/2021 20210618 201.36 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 06/17/2021 12:30User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 38 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET WW GRAINGER 9910023481 05/24/2021 20210618 473.83 WW GRAINGER 9911481753 05/24/2021 20210618 9.60 CHECK 460574 TOTAL: 1,951.27 460575 06/18/2021 PRTD 160077 YETI HOLDINGS, INC 990060600 05/13/2021 20210618 2,998.00 CHECK 460575 TOTAL: 2,998.00 460576 06/18/2021 PRTD 103266 YORKDALE SHOPPES PARTNERS, LLC MAY 2021 05/21/2021 20210618 1,079.25 YORKDALE SHOPPES PARTNERS, LLC JUNE 2021 05/21/2021 20210618 1,079.25 CHECK 460576 TOTAL: 2,158.50 460577 06/18/2021 PRTD 101091 ZIEGLER INC IN000108803 05/19/2021 20210618 89.91 ZIEGLER INC IN000109382 05/19/2021 20210618 125.01 CHECK 460577 TOTAL: 214.92 NUMBER OF CHECKS 255 *** CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL *** 834,344.57 COUNT AMOUNT TOTAL PRINTED CHECKS 255 834,344.57 *** GRAND TOTAL *** 834,344.57 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 47 JOURNAL ENTRIES TO BE CREATED FUND SUB FUND DUE TO DUE FR 1000 General 162,917.442100 Police Special Revenue 1,242.002500 Conservation & Sustainability 7,140.472600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 85,000.004000 Capital Projects 65,348.184200 Equipment Replacement 80,759.834400 PIR Capital Projects 43,270.255100 Art Center 3,867.195200 Braemar Golf Course 19,996.325300 Aquatic Center 16,722.565400 Edinborough Park 986.765500 Braemar Arena 19,555.305600 Braemar Field 355.205700 Centennial Lakes 2,776.355800 Liquor 252,050.425900 Utility Fund 92,102.135900 Utility Fund 13,963.965900 Utility Fund 28,941.125900 Utility Fund 490.996000 Risk Management 29,568.976100 Equipment Operations 51,109.236200 Information Technology 5,476.076300 Facilities Management 11,053.527100 PS Training Facility 3,124.427200 MN Task Force 1 285,760.329000 Payroll 416,416.479999 Pooled Cash Fund 1,699,995.47 TOTAL 1,699,995.47 1,699,995.47 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Shirleng Tan Geil ** City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 1 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460864 07/02/2021 PRTD 120831 1ST SCRIBE INC 254550 06/01/2021 20210702 425.00 CHECK 460864 TOTAL: 425.00 460865 07/02/2021 PRTD 118261 2ND WIND EXERCISE EQUIPMENT INC 21-066991 12/16/2020 20210702 151.50 CHECK 460865 TOTAL: 151.50 460866 07/02/2021 PRTD 101304 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY 0167670-IN 06/01/2021 20210702 251.11 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY 0167689-IN 06/03/2021 20210702 818.11 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY 0167693-IN 06/03/2021 20210702 863.43 CHECK 460866 TOTAL: 1,932.65 460867 07/02/2021 PRTD 129458 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 8794702 06/03/2021 20210702 107.64 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 8638549 04/19/2021 20210702 178.90 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 8624419 04/14/2021 20210702 466.95 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 8115481-1 11/30/2020 20210702 -641.76 CHECK 460867 TOTAL: 111.73 460868 07/02/2021 PRTD 135922 ACUSHNET COMPANY 911158429 06/04/2021 20210702 122.66 ACUSHNET COMPANY 911168902 06/04/2021 20210702 404.62 CHECK 460868 TOTAL: 527.28 460869 07/02/2021 PRTD 130792 AIRGAS NATIONAL CARBONATION 9114042252 06/07/2021 20210702 353.31 AIRGAS NATIONAL CARBONATION 9114394289 06/16/2021 20210702 548.79 CHECK 460869 TOTAL: 902.10 460870 07/02/2021 PRTD 120796 ALERUS RETIREMENT AND BENEFITS C108200 06/02/2021 20210702 196.00 CHECK 460870 TOTAL: 196.00 460871 07/02/2021 PRTD 141960 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1QDX-7K4P-3VJD 05/25/2021 20210702 222.47 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1GKM-FCJ6-V69T 06/03/2021 20210702 62.90 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 2 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1X6K-TYCQ-TTRM 06/03/2021 20210702 904.93 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16C1-GMRW-JYR9 06/03/2021 20210702 271.11 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1PKQ-HFL4-K3PR 06/03/2021 20210702 37.08 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1PKQ-HFL4-FQNL 06/03/2021 20210702 257.75 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1FVX-PVCV-YR9G 06/03/2021 20210702 118.40 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 17DR-DRDV-TQHM 06/04/2021 20210702 39.70 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1FJC-4XQQ-W9GK 06/04/2021 20210702 239.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1CCL-NKKR-6K9Y 06/04/2021 20210702 -15.62 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1HYR-1QX1-DXXX 06/04/2021 20210702 141.00 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1HYR-1QX1-VDPX 06/05/2021 20210702 61.61 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16PF-VFXR-6YL7 06/05/2021 20210702 44.28 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1WFY-VGLP-CRDT 06/05/2021 20210702 216.53 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 173H-HKKY-91GV 06/06/2021 20210702 13.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16PF-VFXR-KXHQ 06/06/2021 20210702 214.54 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1WFY-VGLP-PR6C 06/06/2021 20210702 89.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 19KV-QVH7-PN6G 06/06/2021 20210702 74.29 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1LWR-LHF1-1D74 06/07/2021 20210702 114.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1Q41-RFHC-CX6K 06/07/2021 20210702 159.96 CHECK 460871 TOTAL: 3,269.89 460872 07/02/2021 PRTD 118491 APPLE INC AF09475618 05/28/2021 20210702 3,178.00 CHECK 460872 TOTAL: 3,178.00 460873 07/02/2021 PRTD 135988 APPRIZE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS INC 20012062021 06/01/2021 20210702 1,108.40 CHECK 460873 TOTAL: 1,108.40 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 3 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460874 07/02/2021 PRTD 151441 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005065181 06/01/2021 20210702 262.95 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005067009 06/02/2021 20210702 426.54 CHECK 460874 TOTAL: 689.49 460875 07/02/2021 PRTD 151756 ARBEITER BREWING COMPANY LLC 333 06/17/2021 20210702 72.00 ARBEITER BREWING COMPANY LLC 334 06/17/2021 20210702 72.00 CHECK 460875 TOTAL: 144.00 460876 07/02/2021 PRTD 106304 ASPEN MILLS INC 275298 06/01/2021 20210702 241.40 CHECK 460876 TOTAL: 241.40 460877 07/02/2021 PRTD 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA S1406543-060121 06/01/2021 20210702 2,582.55 CHECK 460877 TOTAL: 2,582.55 460878 07/02/2021 PRTD 151126 DANIEL Q MCDOWELL JR AND JENNIFER MAY 2021 06/01/2021 20210702 315.00 CHECK 460878 TOTAL: 315.00 460879 07/02/2021 PRTD 132408 AUTHENTIC EDGE LLC 1403 06/03/2021 20210702 3,875.00 CHECK 460879 TOTAL: 3,875.00 460880 07/02/2021 PRTD 101195 AUTO ELECTRIC OF BLOOMINGTON INC 166401 06/03/2021 20210702 179.95 CHECK 460880 TOTAL: 179.95 460881 07/02/2021 PRTD 101718 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380057031 06/01/2021 20210702 9.94 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380057175 06/01/2021 20210702 -64.09 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380057307 06/02/2021 20210702 15.10 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380057525 06/03/2021 20210702 4.52 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380057801 06/04/2021 20210702 16.80 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380058403 06/08/2021 20210702 12.05 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 4 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380059400 06/14/2021 20210702 4.82 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380059565 06/14/2021 20210702 4.62 CHECK 460881 TOTAL: 3.76 460882 07/02/2021 PRTD 103241 BALDINGER, WENDY 21CLP7202 06/21/2021 20210702 250.00 CHECK 460882 TOTAL: 250.00 460883 07/02/2021 PRTD 142186 BAYCOM INC PB2111 06/04/2021 20210702 18,042.00 CHECK 460883 TOTAL: 18,042.00 460884 07/02/2021 PRTD 102709 BDS LAUNDRY SYSTEMS V415499 06/10/2021 20210702 271.95 CHECK 460884 TOTAL: 271.95 460885 07/02/2021 PRTD 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089635800 06/03/2021 20210702 6,074.80 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089709200 06/10/2021 20210702 6,216.25 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089716200 06/10/2021 20210702 7,707.46 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089868200 06/17/2021 20210702 3,604.48 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103414800 06/17/2021 20210702 45.70 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089828700 06/17/2021 20210702 89.55 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089866700 06/17/2021 20210702 6,016.23 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103410100 06/17/2021 20210702 60.77 BELLBOY CORPORATION 089710000 06/10/2021 20210702 8,838.15 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089867500 06/17/2021 20210702 6,833.95 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103420000 06/17/2021 20210702 23.60 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089828800 06/17/2021 20210702 264.65 CHECK 460885 TOTAL: 45,775.59 460886 07/02/2021 PRTD 160009 APH STORES, INC 406001197 01/06/2021 20210702 385.80 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 5 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460886 TOTAL: 385.80 460887 07/02/2021 PRTD 117379 BENIEK PROPERTY SERVICES INC 156301 06/01/2021 20210702 978.79 CHECK 460887 TOTAL: 978.79 460888 07/02/2021 PRTD 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 838943 06/07/2021 20210702 303.60 CHECK 460888 TOTAL: 303.60 460889 07/02/2021 PRTD 100653 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC 14658 06/07/2021 20210702 29,561.17 CHECK 460889 TOTAL: 29,561.17 460890 07/02/2021 PRTD 142153 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 13153 06/17/2021 20210702 354.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 13154 06/17/2021 20210702 354.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 13156 06/17/2021 20210702 354.00 CHECK 460890 TOTAL: 1,062.00 460891 07/02/2021 PRTD 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 84085441 06/07/2021 20210702 535.51 CHECK 460891 TOTAL: 535.51 460892 07/02/2021 PRTD 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 178435 06/15/2021 20210702 181.75 BOURGET IMPORTS 178445 06/15/2021 20210702 2,558.50 BOURGET IMPORTS 178444 06/15/2021 20210702 291.50 CHECK 460892 TOTAL: 3,031.75 460893 07/02/2021 PRTD 117040 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC DE-06395 05/28/2021 20210702 80,759.83 CHECK 460893 TOTAL: 80,759.83 460894 07/02/2021 PRTD 138682 BOYER MASONRY AND CONCRETE INC 12394 06/01/2021 20210702 3,420.00 CHECK 460894 TOTAL: 3,420.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 6 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460895 07/02/2021 PRTD 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339809106 06/09/2021 20210702 5,877.84 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339852444 06/11/2021 20210702 1,574.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897721 06/16/2021 20210702 2,044.84 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897726 06/16/2021 20210702 3,759.60 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897722 06/16/2021 20210702 1,458.45 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897723 06/16/2021 20210702 178.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897725 06/16/2021 20210702 742.35 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897724 06/16/2021 20210702 77.15 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897748 06/16/2021 20210702 178.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897749 06/16/2021 20210702 1,292.65 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897751 06/16/2021 20210702 1,534.03 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897750 06/16/2021 20210702 2,968.75 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897747 06/16/2021 20210702 1,401.66 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897740 06/16/2021 20210702 3,961.91 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897744 06/16/2021 20210702 178.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897741 06/16/2021 20210702 201.59 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897743 06/16/2021 20210702 851.50 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 408741938 06/16/2021 20210702 1,312.01 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 360011536 06/22/2021 20210702 -29.62 CHECK 460895 TOTAL: 29,566.51 460896 07/02/2021 PRTD 124529 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339785563 06/08/2021 20210702 7,434.10 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339874836 06/15/2021 20210702 2,204.00 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339874845 06/16/2021 20210702 2,204.00 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339903227 06/16/2021 20210702 6,386.80 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339903228 06/16/2021 20210702 1,596.30 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 7 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 339903210 06/16/2021 20210702 9,682.40 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 360009364 06/21/2021 20210702 -31.05 CHECK 460896 TOTAL: 29,476.55 460897 07/02/2021 PRTD 103244 BURTIS, ROBERT 21CLP71 06/23/2021 20210702 250.00 CHECK 460897 TOTAL: 250.00 460898 07/02/2021 PRTD 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 933330643 06/04/2021 20210702 225.48 CHECK 460898 TOTAL: 225.48 460899 07/02/2021 PRTD 120935 CAMPBELL KNUTSON PA 2851G-5/21 05/31/2021 20210702 27,099.37 CHECK 460899 TOTAL: 27,099.37 460900 07/02/2021 PRTD 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2556819 06/08/2021 20210702 5,684.54 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2558398 06/11/2021 20210702 526.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2558397 06/11/2021 20210702 73.98 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2558399 06/11/2021 20210702 3,688.65 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2556585 06/11/2021 20210702 433.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2558393 06/11/2021 20210702 1,858.55 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 14490205 06/11/2021 20210702 42.00 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2559684 06/15/2021 20210702 6,715.35 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2559683 06/15/2021 20210702 59.98 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2560925 06/17/2021 20210702 351.00 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 6251096 06/28/2021 20210702 -49.20 CHECK 460900 TOTAL: 19,384.85 460901 07/02/2021 PRTD 148017 CARBON DAY AUTOMOTIVE 2863 06/07/2021 22100025 20210702 341.22 CARBON DAY AUTOMOTIVE 2866 06/11/2021 22100025 20210702 6,799.25 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 8 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460901 TOTAL: 7,140.47 460902 07/02/2021 PRTD 150883 CARLTON DILDY JR 21CLP722 06/21/2021 20210702 250.00 CHECK 460902 TOTAL: 250.00 460903 07/02/2021 PRTD 101515 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2351207 06/03/2021 20210702 1,341.00 CHECK 460903 TOTAL: 1,341.00 460904 07/02/2021 PRTD 135835 CENTURYLINK-ACCESS BILL 5142XLP683-2021128 05/08/2021 20210702 1,242.00 CHECK 460904 TOTAL: 1,242.00 460905 07/02/2021 PRTD 160149 CHA CONSULTING, INC. X71482 06/28/2021 20210702 3,000.00 CHECK 460905 TOTAL: 3,000.00 460906 07/02/2021 PRTD 100683 CHEMSEARCH 7394517 06/07/2021 20210702 657.22 CHECK 460906 TOTAL: 657.22 460907 07/02/2021 PRTD 142028 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085781662 06/01/2021 20210702 17.52 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085781721 06/01/2021 20210702 11.78 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085781720 06/01/2021 20210702 36.88 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085781749 06/01/2021 20210702 30.25 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085781775 06/01/2021 20210702 40.85 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085781679 06/01/2021 20210702 28.62 CINTAS CORPORATION 4085781541 06/01/2021 20210702 74.44 CINTAS CORPORATION 4086429942 06/07/2021 20210702 28.62 CINTAS CORPORATION 4086429922 06/07/2021 20210702 11.78 CINTAS CORPORATION 4086429994 06/07/2021 20210702 30.25 CINTAS CORPORATION 4086429948 06/07/2021 20210702 44.45 CINTAS CORPORATION 4086313199 06/04/2021 20210702 68.64 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 9 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CINTAS CORPORATION 408642987 06/07/2021 20210702 37.28 CINTAS CORPORATION 4086429510 06/07/2021 20210702 3.69 CINTAS CORPORATION 4086992991 06/11/2021 20210702 57.68 CHECK 460907 TOTAL: 522.73 460908 07/02/2021 PRTD 122317 CITY OF EDINA - COMMUNICATIONS COM-2433 06/12/2021 20210702 100.00 CHECK 460908 TOTAL: 100.00 460909 07/02/2021 PRTD 103216 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS 431-00005.300-5/202106/04/2021 20210702 17,575.74 CHECK 460909 TOTAL: 17,575.74 460910 07/02/2021 PRTD 146472 CITY WIDE MAINTENANCE OF MN 32009001762 06/01/2021 20210702 1,395.00 CITY WIDE MAINTENANCE OF MN 32009001615 06/01/2021 20210702 3,840.00 CITY WIDE MAINTENANCE OF MN 32009001535 06/01/2021 20210702 3,372.25 CHECK 460910 TOTAL: 8,607.25 460911 07/02/2021 PRTD 145926 CLEARWATER ANALYTICS LLC 522200 06/04/2021 20210702 849.32 CHECK 460911 TOTAL: 849.32 460912 07/02/2021 PRTD 120433 COMCAST HOLDINGS CORPORATION 0740105-6/21 06/18/2021 20210702 48.03 CHECK 460912 TOTAL: 48.03 460913 07/02/2021 PRTD 141193 COMMERCIAL STEAM TEAM INC 23162 06/03/2021 20210702 1,203.15 CHECK 460913 TOTAL: 1,203.15 460914 07/02/2021 PRTD 136737 CONTINENTAL BALLET COMPANY 21CLP721 06/21/2021 20210702 150.00 CHECK 460914 TOTAL: 150.00 460915 07/02/2021 PRTD 100012 CORE & MAIN P021772 06/07/2021 20210702 194.40 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 10 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460915 TOTAL: 194.40 460916 07/02/2021 PRTD 142772 CREATIVE ARCADE 1114 06/01/2021 20210702 950.00 CHECK 460916 TOTAL: 950.00 460917 07/02/2021 PRTD 123653 CROSSTOWN CONCRETE & BRICK PAVING 052821 05/28/2021 20210702 6,890.00 CHECK 460917 TOTAL: 6,890.00 460918 07/02/2021 PRTD 101418 CUMMINS NPOWER LLC E4-44841 06/07/2021 20210702 316.07 CHECK 460918 TOTAL: 316.07 460919 07/02/2021 PRTD 119214 CUSTOM HOSE TECH 106303 06/07/2021 20210702 95.54 CHECK 460919 TOTAL: 95.54 460920 07/02/2021 PRTD 100130 DAKOTA COUNTY 14186 04/29/2021 20210702 4,121.62 CHECK 460920 TOTAL: 4,121.62 460921 07/02/2021 PRTD 100718 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 38243/1 06/07/2021 20210702 80.37 CHECK 460921 TOTAL: 80.37 460922 07/02/2021 PRTD 118375 PAUL DEUTSCH 66308 06/02/2021 20210702 130.00 CHECK 460922 TOTAL: 130.00 460923 07/02/2021 PRTD 123995 DICKS SANITATION INC DT0003977469 05/31/2021 20210702 386.34 CHECK 460923 TOTAL: 386.34 460924 07/02/2021 PRTD 121103 DIRECTV GROUP INC 016523692X210613 06/13/2021 20210702 105.23 CHECK 460924 TOTAL: 105.23 460925 07/02/2021 PRTD 160094 DISGRUNTLED BREWERY, LLC 1737 06/16/2021 20210702 300.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 11 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460925 TOTAL: 300.00 460926 07/02/2021 PRTD 129079 DRAIN KING INC 108864 06/03/2021 20210702 500.00 DRAIN KING INC 108884 06/07/2021 20210702 750.00 DRAIN KING INC 108863 06/03/2021 20210702 750.00 CHECK 460926 TOTAL: 2,000.00 460927 07/02/2021 PRTD 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 838117 06/03/2021 20210702 89.25 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 838116 06/03/2021 20210702 101.15 CHECK 460927 TOTAL: 190.40 460928 07/02/2021 PRTD 117483 ENGELE, LEE 21CLP617 06/23/2021 20210702 200.00 CHECK 460928 TOTAL: 200.00 460929 07/02/2021 PRTD 100752 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC BB3695 06/03/2021 20210702 4,750.00 CHECK 460929 TOTAL: 4,750.00 460930 07/02/2021 PRTD 148012 EVEREST EMERGENCY VEHICLES INC P05585 06/01/2021 20210702 680.35 CHECK 460930 TOTAL: 680.35 460931 07/02/2021 PRTD 100146 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6954670 06/02/2021 20210702 92.18 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-418117 06/02/2021 20210702 95.46 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-417948 06/02/2021 20210702 159.04 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-418055 06/01/2021 20210702 102.56 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419233 06/03/2021 20210702 256.62 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419928 06/21/2021 20210702 -105.40 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6990050 06/22/2021 20210702 -16.00 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6324745 04/10/2021 20210702 4.26 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-420354 06/24/2021 20210702 -92.18 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 12 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-418233 06/03/2021 20210702 256.62 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-418136 06/02/2021 20210702 13.12 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6952333 06/01/2021 20210702 276.00 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6939678 05/24/2021 20210702 41.40 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-416921 05/19/2021 20210702 109.40 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-416692 05/18/2021 20210702 5.49 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-415748 05/26/2021 20210702 352.36 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-414309 04/21/2021 20210702 3.28 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6830642 03/26/2021 20210702 11.10 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-Z24793 03/10/2021 20210702 129.38 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-410136 03/09/2021 20210702 102.12 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-409156 02/25/2021 20210702 42.23 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-408644 02/19/2021 20210702 25.91 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-404638 01/04/2021 20210702 189.27 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6692376 01/04/2021 20210702 65.89 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 24-2170948 12/28/2020 20210702 57.35 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-Z23820 12/16/2020 20210702 -132.63 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-399405 10/28/2020 20210702 7.20 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-398735 10/21/2020 20210702 71.94 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-394201 09/01/2020 20210702 125.22 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6522902 08/31/2020 20210702 2.39 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6501466 08/14/2020 20210702 52.89 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-389998 07/20/2020 20210702 32.33 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6461804 07/14/2020 20210702 238.25 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-387200 06/19/2020 20210702 5.40 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-387153 06/19/2020 20210702 286.91 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 13 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6414432 06/04/2020 20210702 39.44 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-383789 05/13/2020 20210702 202.60 CHECK 460931 TOTAL: 3,109.40 460932 07/02/2021 PRTD 147181 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-3737 06/16/2021 20210702 180.00 CHECK 460932 TOTAL: 180.00 460933 07/02/2021 PRTD 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY MNTC2165645 06/02/2021 20210702 26.88 CHECK 460933 TOTAL: 26.88 460934 07/02/2021 PRTD 103600 FERGUSON US HOLDINGS INC 0473577 06/03/2021 20210702 124.10 FERGUSON US HOLDINGS INC 0474251 06/02/2021 20210702 1,715.64 CHECK 460934 TOTAL: 1,839.74 460935 07/02/2021 PRTD 102727 FORCE AMERICA DISTRIBUTING LLC 001-1546964 06/04/2021 20210702 171.36 CHECK 460935 TOTAL: 171.36 460936 07/02/2021 PRTD 122414 FORKLIFTS OF MINNESOTA INC 01P8488620 06/07/2021 20210702 261.94 CHECK 460936 TOTAL: 261.94 460937 07/02/2021 PRTD 102456 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1368750 06/01/2021 20210702 1,898.33 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1372812 06/07/2021 20210702 438.92 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1373361 06/07/2021 20210702 15.98 CHECK 460937 TOTAL: 2,353.23 460938 07/02/2021 PRTD 146848 GHELLER MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC 21GMG06-022 06/01/2021 20210702 400.00 CHECK 460938 TOTAL: 400.00 460939 07/02/2021 PRTD 143454 GLEASON ENTERPRISES LLC 85455 04/30/2021 20210702 381.92 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 14 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460939 TOTAL: 381.92 460940 07/02/2021 PRTD 116190 GLOBAL EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC. 117397509 03/17/2021 20210702 1,692.23 CHECK 460940 TOTAL: 1,692.23 460941 07/02/2021 PRTD 102383 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC 3011720 06/15/2021 20210702 2,100.00 CHECK 460941 TOTAL: 2,100.00 460942 07/02/2021 PRTD 144412 WINEBOW MN00095802 06/10/2021 20210702 117.00 WINEBOW MN00096041 06/15/2021 20210702 419.50 WINEBOW MN00096025 06/15/2021 20210702 256.75 WINEBOW MN00095978 06/15/2021 20210702 156.00 WINEBOW MN00095979 06/15/2021 20210702 1,600.00 WINEBOW MN00096112 06/17/2021 20210702 112.00 CHECK 460942 TOTAL: 2,661.25 460943 07/02/2021 PRTD 122093 GROUP HEALTHPLAN INC 105514713 06/01/2021 20210702 416,416.47 GROUP HEALTHPLAN INC 105492902 06/01/2021 20210702 14,869.76 CHECK 460943 TOTAL: 431,286.23 460944 07/02/2021 PRTD 106431 HALL, MARY 21CLP6242 06/24/2021 20210702 250.00 CHECK 460944 TOTAL: 250.00 460945 07/02/2021 PRTD 106431 HALL, MARY 21CLP713 06/21/2021 20210702 250.00 CHECK 460945 TOTAL: 250.00 460946 07/02/2021 PRTD 151168 HAMMER SPORTS LLC 418 06/06/2021 20210702 118.00 CHECK 460946 TOTAL: 118.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 15 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460947 07/02/2021 PRTD 129205 HARRIS ST PAUL INC 71688-002 05/24/2021 20210702 24,035.00 CHECK 460947 TOTAL: 24,035.00 460948 07/02/2021 PRTD 100797 HAWKINS INC 4953443 06/04/2021 20210702 5,650.90 CHECK 460948 TOTAL: 5,650.90 460949 07/02/2021 PRTD 143563 HEADFLYER BREWING E-2861 06/08/2021 20210702 236.00 CHECK 460949 TOTAL: 236.00 460950 07/02/2021 PRTD 160135 PERFORMANCE PLUS, LLC 9199 01/18/2021 20210702 972.00 CHECK 460950 TOTAL: 972.00 460951 07/02/2021 PRTD 101503 HCT 13331 06/11/2021 20210702 2,149.73 HCT 14941 06/28/2021 20210702 5,422.97 CHECK 460951 TOTAL: 7,572.70 460952 07/02/2021 PRTD 101503 HCT 14915 06/28/2021 20210702 2,149.73 CHECK 460952 TOTAL: 2,149.73 460953 07/02/2021 PRTD 101503 HCT 14916 06/28/2021 20210702 51.00 CHECK 460953 TOTAL: 51.00 460954 07/02/2021 PRTD 101503 HCT 14917 06/28/2021 20210702 13,403.25 CHECK 460954 TOTAL: 13,403.25 460955 07/02/2021 PRTD 103085 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000166660 06/01/2021 20210702 145.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000167533 06/16/2021 20210702 702.50 CHECK 460955 TOTAL: 847.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 16 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460956 07/02/2021 PRTD 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC 418324 06/15/2021 20210702 1,362.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 418334 06/15/2021 20210702 2,872.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 418335 06/15/2021 20210702 1,233.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 422271 06/28/2021 20210702 -22.20 CHECK 460956 TOTAL: 5,444.80 460957 07/02/2021 PRTD 100417 HORIZON CHEMICAL CO 210527068-ER 06/02/2021 20210702 4,976.58 HORIZON CHEMICAL CO 210603226-ER 06/07/2021 20210702 1,480.00 CHECK 460957 TOTAL: 6,456.58 460958 07/02/2021 PRTD 129508 IMPACT MAILING OF MINNESOTA INC 153226 06/04/2021 20210702 3,208.50 CHECK 460958 TOTAL: 3,208.50 460959 07/02/2021 PRTD 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 101809 06/15/2021 20210702 921.10 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 101808 06/15/2021 20210702 275.50 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 101810 06/15/2021 20210702 985.80 CHECK 460959 TOTAL: 2,182.40 460960 07/02/2021 PRTD 145030 INTECH SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS INC 1943 05/16/2021 20210702 9,430.00 CHECK 460960 TOTAL: 9,430.00 460961 07/02/2021 PRTD 141969 ESPRESSO SERVICES, INC MN3100408 06/03/2021 20210702 525.00 CHECK 460961 TOTAL: 525.00 460962 07/02/2021 PRTD 116776 JASPERSEN ENTERPRISES INC 87058 06/01/2021 20210702 94.00 CHECK 460962 TOTAL: 94.00 460963 07/02/2021 PRTD 140784 JEFFREY JOHN OLNESS 1479 06/07/2021 20210702 600.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 17 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460963 TOTAL: 600.00 460964 07/02/2021 PRTD 100828 JERRY'S ENTERPRISES INC 87703 06/07/2021 20210702 190.00 JERRY'S ENTERPRISES INC 87702 06/07/2021 20210702 185.00 CHECK 460964 TOTAL: 375.00 460965 07/02/2021 PRTD 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183083 06/02/2021 20210702 68.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183084 06/02/2021 20210702 68.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183085 06/02/2021 20210702 68.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183086 06/02/2021 20210702 68.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183087 06/02/2021 20210702 68.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183088 06/02/2021 20210702 68.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183089 06/02/2021 20210702 201.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 183090 06/02/2021 20210702 95.72 CHECK 460965 TOTAL: 704.72 460966 07/02/2021 PRTD 160041 JINX TEA, LLC 1304 06/15/2021 20210702 64.40 JINX TEA, LLC 1303 06/15/2021 20210702 94.10 CHECK 460966 TOTAL: 158.50 460967 07/02/2021 PRTD 100741 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189722 06/09/2021 20210702 6,471.40 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189768 06/16/2021 20210702 6,683.85 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189760 06/16/2021 20210702 445.00 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189766 06/16/2021 20210702 445.00 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189767 06/16/2021 20210702 1,949.95 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189770 06/16/2021 20210702 3,183.80 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3189769 06/16/2021 20210702 109.50 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3169788 06/28/2021 20210702 -24.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 18 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460967 TOTAL: 19,264.50 460968 07/02/2021 PRTD 100835 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3479766 06/17/2021 20210702 2,159.57 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3479763 06/17/2021 20210702 1,897.30 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3479764 06/17/2021 20210702 3,514.30 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3479765 06/17/2021 20210702 40.00 CHECK 460968 TOTAL: 7,611.17 460969 07/02/2021 PRTD 100835 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6219193 06/10/2021 20210702 81.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223097 06/17/2021 20210702 405.95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223096 06/17/2021 20210702 1,180.81 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223095 06/17/2021 20210702 96.93 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223094 06/17/2021 20210702 903.77 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223093 06/17/2021 20210702 699.21 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223110 06/17/2021 20210702 243.57 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223108 06/17/2021 20210702 266.82 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223107 06/17/2021 20210702 363.74 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223106 06/17/2021 20210702 1,558.63 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223105 06/17/2021 20210702 2,636.81 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223099 06/17/2021 20210702 1,344.72 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223100 06/17/2021 20210702 1,155.84 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223098 06/17/2021 20210702 93.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223101 06/17/2021 20210702 45.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223102 06/17/2021 20210702 1,258.09 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223103 06/17/2021 20210702 1,028.09 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223104 06/17/2021 20210702 1,514.36 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 634030 06/10/2021 20210702 -14.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 19 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 460969 TOTAL: 14,862.41 460970 07/02/2021 PRTD 100835 WINE MERCHANTS 7333910 06/15/2021 20210702 411.57 WINE MERCHANTS 7333911 06/15/2021 20210702 411.57 WINE MERCHANTS 7333912 06/15/2021 20210702 411.57 WINE MERCHANTS 7334407 06/17/2021 20210702 1,067.95 WINE MERCHANTS 7334405 06/17/2021 20210702 2,415.47 WINE MERCHANTS 7334409 06/17/2021 20210702 2,802.85 WINE MERCHANTS 7334406 06/17/2021 20210702 1,931.90 WINE MERCHANTS 7334408 06/17/2021 20210702 2,430.18 CHECK 460970 TOTAL: 11,883.06 460971 07/02/2021 PRTD 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825958 06/17/2021 20210702 130.38 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825957 06/17/2021 20210702 714.76 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825956 06/17/2021 20210702 49.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825955 06/17/2021 20210702 483.57 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825954 06/17/2021 20210702 527.68 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825952 06/17/2021 20210702 652.76 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825950 06/17/2021 20210702 277.01 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825949 06/17/2021 20210702 1,601.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825948 06/17/2021 20210702 318.76 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825947 06/17/2021 20210702 260.73 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825946 06/17/2021 20210702 858.56 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825976 06/17/2021 20210702 2,307.51 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825953 06/17/2021 20210702 652.76 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825977 06/17/2021 20210702 1,022.75 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825975 06/17/2021 20210702 160.11 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 20 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825974 06/17/2021 20210702 161.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825973 06/17/2021 20210702 247.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825972 06/17/2021 20210702 29.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825970 06/17/2021 20210702 1,285.38 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825969 06/17/2021 20210702 886.83 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825971 06/17/2021 20210702 956.28 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825945 06/17/2021 20210702 274.94 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825951 06/17/2021 20210702 280.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825962 06/17/2021 20210702 621.63 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825967 06/17/2021 20210702 1,330.36 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825959 06/17/2021 20210702 1,405.02 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825961 06/17/2021 20210702 721.97 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825965 06/17/2021 20210702 596.08 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825960 06/17/2021 20210702 1,533.75 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825963 06/17/2021 20210702 1,001.52 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825964 06/17/2021 20210702 211.57 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825966 06/17/2021 20210702 2,032.54 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1825968 06/17/2021 20210702 362.26 CHECK 460971 TOTAL: 23,955.61 460972 07/02/2021 PRTD 142504 JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROTECTION 22296351 06/01/2021 20210702 646.16 CHECK 460972 TOTAL: 646.16 460973 07/02/2021 PRTD 102113 AUDRANN INC 1313980 06/01/2021 20210702 134.10 CHECK 460973 TOTAL: 134.10 460974 07/02/2021 PRTD 103409 KELBRO COMPANY 2633739 06/14/2021 20210702 234.66 KELBRO COMPANY 2633735 06/12/2021 20210702 80.68 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 21 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET KELBRO COMPANY 2633742 06/14/2021 20210702 200.70 KELBRO COMPANY 2634763 06/17/2021 20210702 77.29 KELBRO COMPANY 2634669 06/17/2021 20210702 86.34 CHECK 460974 TOTAL: 679.67 460975 07/02/2021 PRTD 124002 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 18995816 05/31/2021 20210702 85,000.00 CHECK 460975 TOTAL: 85,000.00 460976 07/02/2021 PRTD 100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 130440 06/15/2021 20210702 178.50 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 130515 06/16/2021 20210702 3,382.15 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 130511 06/16/2021 20210702 1,279.65 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 130510 06/16/2021 20210702 1,479.25 CHECK 460976 TOTAL: 6,319.55 460977 07/02/2021 PRTD 100605 LANDS' END INC SIN9247466 06/03/2021 20210702 6,600.00 CHECK 460977 TOTAL: 6,600.00 460978 07/02/2021 PRTD 140923 LANEE J WILLEY 21CLP719 06/21/2021 20210702 150.00 CHECK 460978 TOTAL: 150.00 460979 07/02/2021 PRTD 101220 LANO EQUIPMENT INC 02-836364 06/02/2021 20210702 88.77 LANO EQUIPMENT INC 02-826364 06/02/2021 20210702 88.77 CHECK 460979 TOTAL: 177.54 460980 07/02/2021 PRTD 138280 LAURSEN PIANO SERVICE 060121 06/01/2021 20210702 110.00 CHECK 460980 TOTAL: 110.00 460981 07/02/2021 PRTD 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308501959 06/02/2021 20210702 135.27 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308513191 06/07/2021 20210702 507.02 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 22 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308513192 06/07/2021 20210702 92.45 CHECK 460981 TOTAL: 734.74 460982 07/02/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 344306 06/03/2021 20210702 400.00 CHECK 460982 TOTAL: 400.00 460983 07/02/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 6604 06/03/2021 20210702 1,000.00 CHECK 460983 TOTAL: 1,000.00 460984 07/02/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 14117 06/01/2021 20210702 1,708.19 CHECK 460984 TOTAL: 1,708.19 460985 07/02/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 14118 06/01/2021 20210702 74.05 CHECK 460985 TOTAL: 74.05 460986 07/02/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 14119 05/28/2021 20210702 10,530.87 CHECK 460986 TOTAL: 10,530.87 460987 07/02/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 14120 05/28/2021 20210702 1,386.10 CHECK 460987 TOTAL: 1,386.10 460988 07/02/2021 PRTD 135867 LIBATION PROJECT 36402 06/15/2021 20210702 105.50 LIBATION PROJECT 36401 06/15/2021 20210702 113.50 CHECK 460988 TOTAL: 219.00 460989 07/02/2021 PRTD 116575 LIFELINE INC LL-14689 06/01/2021 20210702 100.00 CHECK 460989 TOTAL: 100.00 460990 07/02/2021 PRTD 146427 LUCID BREWING LLC 10908 06/16/2021 20210702 146.00 CHECK 460990 TOTAL: 146.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 23 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 460991 07/02/2021 PRTD 141916 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 37872 06/16/2021 20210702 195.00 CHECK 460991 TOTAL: 195.00 460992 07/02/2021 PRTD 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT LLC P35164 06/02/2021 20210702 61.56 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT LLC P00147 03/17/2021 22100008 20210702 281,638.70 CHECK 460992 TOTAL: 281,700.26 460993 07/02/2021 PRTD 131685 MAILFINANCE INC N8894998 05/31/2021 20210702 209.22 CHECK 460993 TOTAL: 209.22 460994 07/02/2021 PRTD 134063 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 22406382 06/04/2021 20210702 1,175.52 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 22406381 06/04/2021 20210702 12,245.54 CHECK 460994 TOTAL: 13,421.06 460995 07/02/2021 PRTD 141215 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV598986 06/15/2021 20210702 261.48 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV598994 06/15/2021 20210702 133.50 CHECK 460995 TOTAL: 394.98 460996 07/02/2021 PRTD 130477 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 583895 06/09/2021 20210702 245.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 584926 06/16/2021 20210702 757.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 584923 06/16/2021 20210702 104.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 584922 06/16/2021 20210702 408.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 584928 06/16/2021 20210702 313.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 584929 06/16/2021 20210702 52.00 CHECK 460996 TOTAL: 1,879.00 460997 07/02/2021 PRTD 101483 MENARDS INC 40200 06/01/2021 20210702 11.83 MENARDS INC 40182 06/01/2021 20210702 29.12 MENARDS INC 40269 06/02/2021 20210702 57.66 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 24 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET MENARDS INC 40316 06/03/2021 20210702 42.67 MENARDS INC 40420 06/04/2021 20210702 93.46 MENARDS INC 40558 06/07/2021 20210702 75.28 CHECK 460997 TOTAL: 310.02 460998 07/02/2021 PRTD 100883 MESSERLI & KRAMER 391787 05/26/2021 20210702 8,000.00 CHECK 460998 TOTAL: 8,000.00 460999 07/02/2021 PRTD 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 524206 06/07/2021 20210702 260.59 CHECK 460999 TOTAL: 260.59 461000 07/02/2021 PRTD 138732 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS LLC 26721 06/15/2021 20210702 326.00 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS LLC 26733 06/17/2021 20210702 165.00 CHECK 461000 TOTAL: 491.00 461001 07/02/2021 PRTD 104650 MICRO CENTER 8721330 06/01/2021 20210702 20.98 MICRO CENTER 8722481 06/02/2021 20210702 123.97 CHECK 461001 TOTAL: 144.95 461002 07/02/2021 PRTD 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & WA 36231 06/07/2021 20210702 2,340.00 CHECK 461002 TOTAL: 2,340.00 461003 07/02/2021 PRTD 102770 MINNESOTA CASTERS LLC 25084 06/02/2021 20210702 279.62 CHECK 461003 TOTAL: 279.62 461004 07/02/2021 PRTD 128914 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 31286 06/04/2021 20210702 490.99 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 31288 06/04/2021 20210702 32.00 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 31074 04/15/2021 20210702 28.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 25 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 461004 TOTAL: 551.49 461005 07/02/2021 PRTD 140955 MODIST BREWING LLC E-22696 06/15/2021 20210702 250.00 MODIST BREWING LLC E-22698 06/15/2021 20210702 564.00 MODIST BREWING LLC E-22697 06/15/2021 20210702 250.00 CHECK 461005 TOTAL: 1,064.00 461006 07/02/2021 PRTD 129657 MS INDUSTRIES INC 308150 06/01/2021 20210702 3,350.00 CHECK 461006 TOTAL: 3,350.00 461007 07/02/2021 PRTD 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1303539-00 06/02/2021 20210702 57.37 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1304905-00 06/02/2021 20210702 60.04 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1305170-00 06/03/2021 20210702 378.72 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1305488-00 06/07/2021 20210702 720.10 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1293810-00 03/26/2021 20210702 116.58 CHECK 461007 TOTAL: 1,332.81 461008 07/02/2021 PRTD 132591 MUSKA ELECTRIC COMPANY 35852 06/04/2021 20210702 12,080.04 MUSKA ELECTRIC COMPANY 35850 06/04/2021 20210702 2,151.38 CHECK 461008 TOTAL: 14,231.42 461009 07/02/2021 PRTD 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 174891 06/16/2021 20210702 1,316.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 174892 06/16/2021 20210702 1,480.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 174890 06/16/2021 20210702 2,734.00 CHECK 461009 TOTAL: 5,530.00 461010 07/02/2021 PRTD 122449 NEW LIFE ENTERPRISES INC 15356 06/07/2021 20210702 230.40 CHECK 461010 TOTAL: 230.40 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 26 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461011 07/02/2021 PRTD 132620 NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRIC 2021-06-1 RJA 06/02/2021 20210702 14,998.75 CHECK 461011 TOTAL: 14,998.75 461012 07/02/2021 PRTD 142880 NORDIC SOLAR HOLDCO LLC INV-NSH002065 05/31/2021 20210702 7,328.39 CHECK 461012 TOTAL: 7,328.39 461013 07/02/2021 PRTD 115616 NORTH IMAGE APPAREL INC NIA14666F 06/01/2021 20210702 612.00 CHECK 461013 TOTAL: 612.00 461014 07/02/2021 PRTD 101620 GARELICK STEEL CO INC 488458 06/02/2021 20210702 537.00 GARELICK STEEL CO INC 488457 06/02/2021 20210702 651.00 CHECK 461014 TOTAL: 1,188.00 461015 07/02/2021 PRTD 100926 BLUETARP FINANCIAL INC 0035074229 06/02/2021 20210702 102.40 BLUETARP FINANCIAL INC 0193172665 06/02/2021 20210702 190.79 CHECK 461015 TOTAL: 293.19 461016 07/02/2021 PRTD 141965 OMNI BREWING COMPANY LLC E-10044 06/16/2021 20210702 135.00 CHECK 461016 TOTAL: 135.00 461017 07/02/2021 PRTD 141990 OMODT, PAUL G 2021-5 06/07/2021 20210702 1,850.00 CHECK 461017 TOTAL: 1,850.00 461018 07/02/2021 PRTD 999995 Bollig & Sons ED185978-REFUND 06/24/2021 20210702 2,500.00 CHECK 461018 TOTAL: 2,500.00 461019 07/02/2021 PRTD 999995 C ALLEN HOMES ED174002-REFUND 06/29/2021 20210702 9,885.00 CHECK 461019 TOTAL: 9,885.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 27 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461020 07/02/2021 PRTD 999995 CRAFT HOMES ED176995-REFUND 06/29/2021 20210702 2,270.00 CHECK 461020 TOTAL: 2,270.00 461021 07/02/2021 PRTD 999995 CRAFT HOMES LLC ED177758-REFUND 06/29/2021 20210702 2,500.00 CHECK 461021 TOTAL: 2,500.00 461022 07/02/2021 PRTD 999995 MINNESOTA RUSCO ED186888-REFUND 06/22/2021 20210702 32.68 CHECK 461022 TOTAL: 32.68 461023 07/02/2021 PRTD 999995 Scherber Companies LLC ED182447-REFUND 06/24/2021 20210702 2,500.00 CHECK 461023 TOTAL: 2,500.00 461024 07/02/2021 PRTD 999994 Gerald Hulbert 14405 06/24/2021 20210702 100.00 CHECK 461024 TOTAL: 100.00 461025 07/02/2021 PRTD 999994 Sharon Maynard 1174865-REFUND 05/23/2021 20210702 296.00 CHECK 461025 TOTAL: 296.00 461026 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Arenson-Uhr, Vicky 1368394 06/22/2021 20210702 35.00 CHECK 461026 TOTAL: 35.00 461027 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Bernier, Alexandra 1360038 06/22/2021 20210702 70.00 CHECK 461027 TOTAL: 70.00 461028 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 CHANDRA KAVATI 14751 06/24/2021 20210702 74.19 CHECK 461028 TOTAL: 74.19 461029 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Crowley, Jennifer 1346098 06/22/2021 20210702 155.00 CHECK 461029 TOTAL: 155.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 28 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461030 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Dusil, Krista 1352681 06/22/2021 20210702 165.00 CHECK 461030 TOTAL: 165.00 461031 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Fiddelke, Brandy 1352304 06/22/2021 20210702 95.00 CHECK 461031 TOTAL: 95.00 461032 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Fiddelke, Brandy 1352770 06/22/2021 20210702 35.00 CHECK 461032 TOTAL: 35.00 461033 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Gomez-Roji, Eliza Art Refund - Gomez-R06/22/2021 20210702 210.00 CHECK 461033 TOTAL: 210.00 461034 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Howard, Amy 1349233 06/22/2021 20210702 140.00 CHECK 461034 TOTAL: 140.00 461035 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Jonas, Lenore Art Refund - Jonas, 06/22/2021 20210702 108.90 CHECK 461035 TOTAL: 108.90 461036 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 JUDITH MATTISON 13385 06/07/2021 20210702 18.00 CHECK 461036 TOTAL: 18.00 461037 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Kvamme, Beverly 1381777 06/22/2021 20210702 35.00 CHECK 461037 TOTAL: 35.00 461038 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Larson, Leah 1346964 06/22/2021 20210702 420.00 CHECK 461038 TOTAL: 420.00 461039 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 LINDSEY WENNGATZ 14317 06/23/2021 20210702 184.00 CHECK 461039 TOTAL: 184.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 29 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461040 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Liu, Jing 1358011 06/22/2021 20210702 210.00 CHECK 461040 TOTAL: 210.00 461041 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Lofness, Julia 1369104 06/22/2021 20210702 70.00 CHECK 461041 TOTAL: 70.00 461042 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Metzger, Anne 1353116 06/22/2021 20210702 165.00 CHECK 461042 TOTAL: 165.00 461043 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Nascene, Shannon 1350818 06/22/2021 20210702 165.00 CHECK 461043 TOTAL: 165.00 461044 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 PAGE KINNER 14841 06/25/2021 20210702 72.00 CHECK 461044 TOTAL: 72.00 461045 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Parry, Sarah Art Refund - Parry, 06/22/2021 20210702 140.00 CHECK 461045 TOTAL: 140.00 461046 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Plank, Hillary Plank, Hillary 06/16/2021 20210702 440.00 CHECK 461046 TOTAL: 440.00 461047 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Schlomer, Sarah 1348491 06/22/2021 20210702 30.00 CHECK 461047 TOTAL: 30.00 461048 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Seaberg, Meredith 1351756 06/22/2021 20210702 30.00 CHECK 461048 TOTAL: 30.00 461049 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Van Eeckhout, Barbara 1352718 06/22/2021 20210702 430.00 CHECK 461049 TOTAL: 430.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 30 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461050 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 Vasaly, Mary 1354195 06/22/2021 20210702 30.00 CHECK 461050 TOTAL: 30.00 461051 07/02/2021 PRTD 999996 XINPING ZHANG 15083 06/29/2021 20210702 108.00 CHECK 461051 TOTAL: 108.00 461052 07/02/2021 PRTD 999993 TRADITION CAPITAL BANK 15002 06/29/2021 20210702 1,050.00 CHECK 461052 TOTAL: 1,050.00 461053 07/02/2021 PRTD 999997 ALISON DEER SQUILLANTE 14302 06/23/2021 20210702 59.90 CHECK 461053 TOTAL: 59.90 461054 07/02/2021 PRTD 999997 Heritage of Edina Inc 00092228-0112004054 06/16/2021 20210702 22,488.49 CHECK 461054 TOTAL: 22,488.49 461055 07/02/2021 PRTD 999997 Heritage of Edina Inc 00092260-0112004385 06/16/2021 20210702 11,477.40 CHECK 461055 TOTAL: 11,477.40 461056 07/02/2021 PRTD 999997 Heritage of Edina Inc 00112596-0112004045 06/16/2021 20210702 7,048.67 CHECK 461056 TOTAL: 7,048.67 461057 07/02/2021 PRTD 999997 JOHN SCHUETZLE 15046 06/29/2021 20210702 89.89 CHECK 461057 TOTAL: 89.89 461058 07/02/2021 PRTD 999997 KATHLEEN MEEHAN 14740 06/24/2021 20210702 89.26 CHECK 461058 TOTAL: 89.26 461059 07/02/2021 PRTD 130917 OWL ENGINEERING AND EMC TEST LABS 4044 06/02/2021 20210702 850.00 CHECK 461059 TOTAL: 850.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 31 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461060 07/02/2021 PRTD 151973 PAINTING BY NAKASONE INC 5434 06/03/2021 20210702 6,959.00 CHECK 461060 TOTAL: 6,959.00 461061 07/02/2021 PRTD 100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 54935257 06/11/2021 20210702 271.86 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 53342551 06/15/2021 20210702 900.34 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 46857512 06/17/2021 20210702 808.50 CHECK 461061 TOTAL: 1,980.70 461062 07/02/2021 PRTD 149249 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-104293 06/11/2021 20210702 658.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-104966 06/17/2021 20210702 730.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-104959 06/17/2021 20210702 852.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-104974 06/17/2021 20210702 1,401.50 CHECK 461062 TOTAL: 3,641.50 461063 07/02/2021 PRTD 120627 PERFORMANCE FOOD GROUP INC 60866647 06/04/2021 20210702 882.41 CHECK 461063 TOTAL: 882.41 461064 07/02/2021 PRTD 100954 PIONEER RIM & WHEEL COMPANY 01CE7280 06/02/2021 20210702 14.99 CHECK 461064 TOTAL: 14.99 461065 07/02/2021 PRTD 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 210531652 06/02/2021 20210702 766.00 CHECK 461065 TOTAL: 766.00 461066 07/02/2021 PRTD 129706 PREMIUM WATERS INC 318179468 06/02/2021 20210702 38.19 CHECK 461066 TOTAL: 38.19 461067 07/02/2021 PRTD 108875 PRESCRIPTION LANDSCAPE 58916 06/01/2021 20210702 739.15 PRESCRIPTION LANDSCAPE 58917 06/01/2021 20210702 1,172.75 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 32 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 461067 TOTAL: 1,911.90 461068 07/02/2021 PRTD 143618 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-23809 06/16/2021 20210702 324.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-23810 06/16/2021 20210702 233.17 CHECK 461068 TOTAL: 557.17 461069 07/02/2021 PRTD 123078 QUALIFIED LABORATORIES INC 59308 06/04/2021 20210702 1,300.00 QUALIFIED LABORATORIES INC 59307 06/04/2021 20210702 82.87 CHECK 461069 TOTAL: 1,382.87 461070 07/02/2021 PRTD 142588 QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP INC 2063281 12/16/2020 20210702 412.16 QUALITY RESOURCE GROUP INC 2043412 05/12/2021 20210702 4,638.26 CHECK 461070 TOTAL: 5,050.42 461071 07/02/2021 PRTD 104643 RECREATION SUPPLY COMPANY INC 421564 05/29/2021 20210702 778.84 CHECK 461071 TOTAL: 778.84 461072 07/02/2021 PRTD 138298 RED BULL DISTRIBUTION COMPANY INC K-99630663 06/14/2021 20210702 392.00 CHECK 461072 TOTAL: 392.00 461073 07/02/2021 PRTD 125936 REINDERS INC 3078638-00 05/03/2021 20210702 1,716.00 CHECK 461073 TOTAL: 1,716.00 461074 07/02/2021 PRTD 102408 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED 1928550253 06/04/2021 20210702 18.97 CHECK 461074 TOTAL: 18.97 461075 07/02/2021 PRTD 100981 ROCHESTER MIDLAND CORP INV00261421 06/08/2021 20210702 320.67 ROCHESTER MIDLAND CORP INV00261461 06/09/2021 20210702 2,660.90 CHECK 461075 TOTAL: 2,981.57 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 33 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461076 07/02/2021 PRTD 101659 ORKIN 210819213 05/11/2021 20210702 63.00 ORKIN 211912522 06/01/2021 20210702 142.36 ORKIN 217697070 06/03/2021 20210702 150.00 CHECK 461076 TOTAL: 355.36 461077 07/02/2021 PRTD 151777 SCHREIBER MULLANEY CONSTRUCTION C 1852-21-04 06/08/2021 20210702 20,302.29 CHECK 461077 TOTAL: 20,302.29 461078 07/02/2021 PRTD 142252 SEECLICKFIX INC 210331 03/21/2021 20210702 10,085.04 CHECK 461078 TOTAL: 10,085.04 461079 07/02/2021 PRTD 144403 SENTEXT SOLUTIONS 213236 06/03/2021 20210702 118.33 CHECK 461079 TOTAL: 118.33 461080 07/02/2021 PRTD 140434 SHERMAN, JULIE 05.04.2022 06/07/2021 20210702 220.00 CHECK 461080 TOTAL: 220.00 461081 07/02/2021 PRTD 100998 SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO 0738-4 06/02/2021 20210702 23.05 CHECK 461081 TOTAL: 23.05 461082 07/02/2021 PRTD 100995 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 406155 06/07/2021 20210702 6,398.71 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 406095 06/07/2021 20210702 2,306.01 CHECK 461082 TOTAL: 8,704.72 461083 07/02/2021 PRTD 111824 SIDEKICK INC 1004 06/04/2021 20210702 166.95 CHECK 461083 TOTAL: 166.95 461084 07/02/2021 PRTD 137482 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 109948308-001 06/07/2021 20210702 458.50 CHECK 461084 TOTAL: 458.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 34 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461085 07/02/2021 PRTD 104928 SMITH CONSTRUCTION SERVICES INC 20836 06/07/2021 20210702 240.00 CHECK 461085 TOTAL: 240.00 461086 07/02/2021 PRTD 100430 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL ARV/48395729 06/04/2021 20210702 55.58 CHECK 461086 TOTAL: 55.58 461087 07/02/2021 PRTD 141332 SOUTH TOWN REFRIGERATION INC W65980 05/31/2021 20210702 1,359.45 CHECK 461087 TOTAL: 1,359.45 461088 07/02/2021 PRTD 104408 SPEEDWAY LLC 057501062100 06/01/2021 20210702 5.00 CHECK 461088 TOTAL: 5.00 461089 07/02/2021 PRTD 134700 SPOK INC E0319246R 06/07/2021 20210702 128.58 CHECK 461089 TOTAL: 128.58 461090 07/02/2021 PRTD 101004 SPS COMPANIES INC S4475068.001 05/27/2021 20210702 306.09 CHECK 461090 TOTAL: 306.09 461091 07/02/2021 PRTD 146960 STACKED DECK BREWING 002747 06/15/2021 20210702 336.00 CHECK 461091 TOTAL: 336.00 461092 07/02/2021 PRTD 145599 SSI MN TRANCHE 1 LLC 15259 05/17/2021 20210702 8,251.47 CHECK 461092 TOTAL: 8,251.47 461093 07/02/2021 PRTD 160130 STAR SEAL OF MINNESOTA, INC 8307432 06/09/2021 20210702 1,223.50 CHECK 461093 TOTAL: 1,223.50 461094 07/02/2021 PRTD 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40596 06/16/2021 20210702 165.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40597 06/16/2021 20210702 249.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40595 06/16/2021 20210702 366.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 35 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 461094 TOTAL: 780.00 461095 07/02/2021 PRTD 101015 STREICHERS INC I1509164 06/18/2021 20210702 93.96 STREICHERS INC I1508904 06/16/2021 20210702 26.99 CHECK 461095 TOTAL: 120.95 461096 07/02/2021 PRTD 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 151888 06/07/2021 20210702 107.87 CHECK 461096 TOTAL: 107.87 461097 07/02/2021 PRTD 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10178852 06/01/2021 20210702 391.96 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10177504 06/01/2021 20210702 192.00 CHECK 461097 TOTAL: 583.96 461098 07/02/2021 PRTD 113841 SUMMIT 130017689 06/03/2021 20210702 520.00 CHECK 461098 TOTAL: 520.00 461099 07/02/2021 PRTD 141066 SW LAWN AND SNOW LLC 2291 06/01/2021 20210702 1,440.00 CHECK 461099 TOTAL: 1,440.00 461100 07/02/2021 PRTD 160147 WILKES, JOHN 21CLP75 06/21/2021 20210702 150.00 CHECK 461100 TOTAL: 150.00 461101 07/02/2021 PRTD 104932 TAYLOR MADE 34921895 04/12/2021 20210702 1,502.14 CHECK 461101 TOTAL: 1,502.14 461102 07/02/2021 PRTD 145168 TAYLOR SALES LLC 060321 06/03/2021 20210702 400.00 CHECK 461102 TOTAL: 400.00 461103 07/02/2021 PRTD 136495 THINGVOLD, STEVEN 393 06/01/2021 20210702 1,798.20 CHECK 461103 TOTAL: 1,798.20 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 36 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461104 07/02/2021 PRTD 102798 THOMSON REUTERS - WEST 844467622 06/07/2021 20210702 715.00 CHECK 461104 TOTAL: 715.00 461105 07/02/2021 PRTD 104064 TRANS UNION RISK AND ALTERNATIVE 269634-202105-1 06/01/2021 20210702 209.40 CHECK 461105 TOTAL: 209.40 461106 07/02/2021 PRTD 103218 TRI-STATE BOBCAT P56283 06/04/2021 20210702 273.00 CHECK 461106 TOTAL: 273.00 461107 07/02/2021 PRTD 101360 TWIN CITY HARDWARE COMPANY INC PSI2047737 06/04/2021 20210702 3,080.00 CHECK 461107 TOTAL: 3,080.00 461108 07/02/2021 PRTD 121153 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BAND ALUM 21CLP7282 06/21/2021 20210702 150.00 CHECK 461108 TOTAL: 150.00 461109 07/02/2021 PRTD 140009 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2015028 06/01/2021 20210702 141.04 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2015306 06/02/2021 20210702 166.72 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2016356 06/10/2021 20210702 115.45 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2006546 04/07/2021 20210702 215.61 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2006953 04/09/2021 20210702 254.66 CHECK 461109 TOTAL: 893.48 461110 07/02/2021 PRTD 100050 USPS 14770 06/25/2021 20210702 499.72 CHECK 461110 TOTAL: 499.72 461111 07/02/2021 PRTD 103590 VALLEY-RICH COMPANY INC 29539 06/07/2021 20210702 8,490.25 CHECK 461111 TOTAL: 8,490.25 461112 07/02/2021 PRTD 143544 VAN DYKE, ALICE K 50 06/01/2021 20210702 375.00 VAN DYKE, ALICE K #51 06/03/2021 20210702 3,102.50 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 37 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 461112 TOTAL: 3,477.50 461113 07/02/2021 PRTD 144209 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2633 06/16/2021 20210702 270.00 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2634 06/16/2021 20210702 351.00 CHECK 461113 TOTAL: 621.00 461114 07/02/2021 PRTD 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES 59118 06/01/2021 20210702 1,164.94 VERSATILE VEHICLES 59117 06/01/2021 20210702 7,138.00 CHECK 461114 TOTAL: 8,302.94 461115 07/02/2021 PRTD 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY S004588732.003 06/07/2021 20210702 645.44 CHECK 461115 TOTAL: 645.44 461116 07/02/2021 PRTD 119454 VINOCOPIA INC 0281190-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 485.00 VINOCOPIA INC 0281177-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 113.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0281176-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 259.50 VINOCOPIA INC 0281178-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 256.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0281175-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 976.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0281181-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 227.75 VINOCOPIA INC 0281180-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 105.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0281179-IN 06/17/2021 20210702 970.00 CHECK 461116 TOTAL: 3,393.25 461117 07/02/2021 PRTD 100571 VOGEL PAINT INC 802201170 06/03/2021 20210702 709.00 CHECK 461117 TOTAL: 709.00 461118 07/02/2021 PRTD 143468 VONDENKAMP, MARK 000782 06/14/2021 20210702 144.00 VONDENKAMP, MARK 000784 06/14/2021 20210702 144.00 VONDENKAMP, MARK 000783 06/14/2021 20210702 144.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 38 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 461118 TOTAL: 432.00 461119 07/02/2021 PRTD 106699 WALSER HOPKINS CJ, LLC 689757 06/03/2021 20210702 341.60 CHECK 461119 TOTAL: 341.60 461120 07/02/2021 PRTD 101033 WINE COMPANY 174980 06/11/2021 20210702 137.65 WINE COMPANY 175296 06/16/2021 20210702 954.85 WINE COMPANY 175295 06/16/2021 20210702 2,202.15 WINE COMPANY 175297 06/16/2021 20210702 1,545.45 CHECK 461120 TOTAL: 4,840.10 461121 07/02/2021 PRTD 124503 WINSUPPLY EDEN PRAIRIE MN CO 211484 01 06/02/2021 20210702 154.19 CHECK 461121 TOTAL: 154.19 461122 07/02/2021 PRTD 148067 WITLINGO INC INV-COE-062021 06/01/2021 20210702 250.00 CHECK 461122 TOTAL: 250.00 461123 07/02/2021 PRTD 118395 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC E2080849 06/03/2021 20210702 101.08 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC E2073853.001 06/05/2021 20210702 343.92 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC E2073835 06/05/2021 20210702 70.97 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC E2080849.001 06/03/2021 20210702 243.27 CHECK 461123 TOTAL: 759.24 461124 07/02/2021 PRTD 142162 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2789 06/11/2021 20210702 382.20 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2790 06/11/2021 20210702 316.50 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2788 06/11/2021 20210702 191.10 CHECK 461124 TOTAL: 889.80 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/01/2021 13:18User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 39 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 461125 07/02/2021 PRTD 127774 WORLDWIDE CELLARS INC R21-52322 06/15/2021 20210702 221.50 WORLDWIDE CELLARS INC R21-52331 06/15/2021 20210702 221.50 CHECK 461125 TOTAL: 443.00 461126 07/02/2021 PRTD 105740 WSB & ASSOCIATES R-017897-000 - 1 05/31/2021 20210702 36,566.50 WSB & ASSOCIATES R-017423-000-5 05/31/2021 20210702 5,424.00 WSB & ASSOCIATES R-015816-000-8 04/28/2021 20210702 870.00 CHECK 461126 TOTAL: 42,860.50 461127 07/02/2021 PRTD 101103 WW GRAINGER 9922868501 06/04/2021 20210702 153.42 WW GRAINGER 9922476248 06/04/2021 20210702 59.76 WW GRAINGER 9922868493 06/04/2021 20210702 11.21 WW GRAINGER 9924238299 06/07/2021 20210702 27.42 CHECK 461127 TOTAL: 251.81 461128 07/02/2021 PRTD 160132 PATTY ANDERSON 06.04.21-ESC 06/04/2021 20210702 140.00 CHECK 461128 TOTAL: 140.00 NUMBER OF CHECKS 265 *** CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL *** 1,699,995.47 COUNT AMOUNT TOTAL PRINTED CHECKS 265 1,699,995.47 *** GRAND TOTAL *** 1,699,995.47 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 48 JOURNAL ENTRIES TO BE CREATED FUND SUB FUND DUE TO DUE FR 1000 General 343,903.862100 Police Special Revenue 1,546.272100 Police Special Revenue 190.002500 Conservation & Sustainability 815.822600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 821.224000 Capital Projects 51,116.524200 Equipment Replacement 72,815.204400 PIR Capital Projects 335,535.735100 Art Center 343.945200 Braemar Golf Course 30,391.295200 Braemar Golf Course 260.005300 Aquatic Center 26,234.605400 Edinborough Park 5,815.155500 Braemar Arena 61,230.745600 Braemar Field 140.005700 Centennial Lakes 7,182.675800 Liquor 205,602.955900 Utility Fund 665,178.815900 Utility Fund 35,005.195900 Utility Fund 105,531.765900 Utility Fund 136,111.036000 Risk Management 39.606100 Equipment Operations 20,985.246200 Information Technology 1,746.486300 Facilities Management 3,903.077100 PS Training Facility 417.367200 MN Task Force 1 197,049.649000 Payroll 21,939.549999 Pooled Cash Fund 2,331,853.68 TOTAL 2,331,853.68 2,331,853.68 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Shirleng Tan Geil ** City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 1 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462372 07/16/2021 PRTD 101304 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY 0167802-IN 06/16/2021 20210716 41.99 ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY 0167809-IN 06/16/2021 20210716 44.43 CHECK 462372 TOTAL: 86.42 462373 07/16/2021 PRTD 129458 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 8839120 06/16/2021 20210716 87.78 CHECK 462373 TOTAL: 87.78 462374 07/16/2021 PRTD 143143 ACT CLEANING SERVICE 1694 06/17/2021 20210716 3,295.40 CHECK 462374 TOTAL: 3,295.40 462375 07/16/2021 PRTD 135922 ACUSHNET COMPANY 910881904 04/27/2021 20210716 142.23 ACUSHNET COMPANY 911104183 05/27/2021 20210716 1,655.97 ACUSHNET COMPANY 911270653 06/18/2021 20210716 4,108.93 CHECK 462375 TOTAL: 5,907.13 462376 07/16/2021 PRTD 160119 ADAM'S PEST CONTROL 3316434 06/16/2021 20210716 399.00 CHECK 462376 TOTAL: 399.00 462377 07/16/2021 PRTD 100575 AMERICAN CYLINDER LLC 188511 06/17/2021 20210716 35.70 AMERICAN CYLINDER LLC 188513 06/17/2021 20210716 62.60 AMERICAN CYLINDER LLC 188512 06/17/2021 20210716 173.37 CHECK 462377 TOTAL: 271.67 462378 07/16/2021 PRTD 112033 ALLDATA INC INVC00751669 06/17/2021 20210716 1,500.00 CHECK 462378 TOTAL: 1,500.00 462379 07/16/2021 PRTD 103357 ALPHA VIDEO & AUDIO INC 4400 06/15/2021 20210716 210.00 CHECK 462379 TOTAL: 210.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 2 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462380 07/16/2021 PRTD 141960 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 11FF-GPX1-MGPR 06/15/2021 20210716 736.34 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1DTD-WF7D-9DGM 06/15/2021 20210716 38.31 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1XTT-3RPX-9331 06/15/2021 20210716 25.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1PQR-HGCQ-CHPH 06/15/2021 20210716 69.06 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1CWJ-F7WW-VNHV 06/16/2021 20210716 1,979.82 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1PL7-PHT7-VV9K 06/16/2021 20210716 37.90 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1PL7-PHT7-WFFP 06/16/2021 20210716 258.51 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1743-MXFQ-YLYP 06/16/2021 20210716 -51.16 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1GYG-QJMQ-9MDW 06/17/2021 20210716 17.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1GDD-LJWQ-JQ7Q 06/18/2021 20210716 34.22 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1K71-19LM-NDPD 06/18/2021 20210716 213.94 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1Q1J-T6KK-VGKH 06/18/2021 20210716 7.95 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 13HG-TWGP-DJMM 06/19/2021 20210716 17.94 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1LP4-9LHP-TF6F 06/19/2021 20210716 42.09 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1MVV-G16M-VRYW 06/19/2021 20210716 94.95 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16R9-7DTX-Y71V 06/21/2021 20210716 7.24 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1G9D-VKTR-W3TW 06/21/2021 20210716 48.74 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1YTM-4DDK-HFCN 06/27/2021 20210716 68.88 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1NL6-3M9M-46FK 07/07/2021 20210716 -50.12 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1MXQ-6WJJ-P6G4 07/10/2021 20210716 -77.91 CHECK 462380 TOTAL: 3,520.68 462381 07/16/2021 PRTD 151441 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005022558 04/06/2021 20210716 204.61 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005065101 06/01/2021 20210716 204.61 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005074999 06/14/2021 20210716 204.18 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005076493 06/15/2021 20210716 204.61 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 3 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 1005078024 06/16/2021 20210716 385.70 CHECK 462381 TOTAL: 1,203.71 462382 07/16/2021 PRTD 151756 ARBEITER BREWING COMPANY LLC 343 07/01/2021 20210716 144.00 ARBEITER BREWING COMPANY LLC 342 07/01/2021 20210716 144.00 CHECK 462382 TOTAL: 288.00 462383 07/16/2021 PRTD 106304 ASPEN MILLS INC 275920 06/15/2021 20210716 216.75 ASPEN MILLS INC 276112 06/18/2021 20210716 15.95 ASPEN MILLS INC 276150 06/18/2021 20210716 239.05 ASPEN MILLS INC 276151 06/18/2021 20210716 547.00 ASPEN MILLS INC 276139 06/18/2021 20210716 24.50 CHECK 462383 TOTAL: 1,043.25 462384 07/16/2021 PRTD 102774 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA S1405453-070121 07/01/2021 20210716 1,952.09 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA S1422086-070121 07/01/2021 20210716 4,498.99 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA S1406543-070121 07/01/2021 20210716 7,968.07 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS OF MINNESOTA S1146354-070121 07/01/2021 20210716 270.15 CHECK 462384 TOTAL: 14,689.30 462385 07/16/2021 PRTD 100636 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 02P6948 06/17/2021 20210716 33.35 CHECK 462385 TOTAL: 33.35 462386 07/16/2021 PRTD 101718 AUTO PLUS - FORMERLY PARTS PLUS 380059651 06/15/2021 20210716 9.48 CHECK 462386 TOTAL: 9.48 462387 07/16/2021 PRTD 141881 FIDELITY SECURITY LIFE 2738770 06/21/2021 20210716 787.90 CHECK 462387 TOTAL: 787.90 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 4 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462388 07/16/2021 PRTD 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103388200 06/10/2021 20210716 37.17 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103518600 07/01/2021 20210716 307.45 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0090042000 07/01/2021 20210716 85.55 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0090084800 07/01/2021 20210716 1,921.30 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103496100 07/01/2021 20210716 253.46 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0090084600 07/01/2021 20210716 3,867.31 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0090042200 07/01/2021 20210716 213.10 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0090042300 07/01/2021 20210716 85.55 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0103496200 07/01/2021 20210716 200.82 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0089794200 06/11/2021 20210716 -46.26 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0090084500 07/01/2021 20210716 6,761.90 CHECK 462388 TOTAL: 13,687.35 462389 07/16/2021 PRTD 131191 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC 4980817 06/15/2021 20210716 936.00 BERNATELLO'S PIZZA INC 4981749 06/18/2021 20210716 936.00 CHECK 462389 TOTAL: 1,872.00 462390 07/16/2021 PRTD 142153 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 13359 07/01/2021 20210716 172.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 13360 07/01/2021 20210716 370.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 13358 07/01/2021 20210716 172.00 CHECK 462390 TOTAL: 714.00 462391 07/16/2021 PRTD 100666 BMI GENERAL LICENSING 40259714 06/02/2021 20210716 368.00 CHECK 462391 TOTAL: 368.00 462392 07/16/2021 PRTD 101010 BORDER STATES INDUSTRIES INC 921742624 03/19/2021 20210716 194.12 CHECK 462392 TOTAL: 194.12 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 5 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462393 07/16/2021 PRTD 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 84099038 06/17/2021 20210716 179.00 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 84100673 06/18/2021 20210716 445.06 CHECK 462393 TOTAL: 624.06 462394 07/16/2021 PRTD 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 178822 06/29/2021 20210716 620.75 BOURGET IMPORTS 178832 06/29/2021 20210716 848.73 BOURGET IMPORTS 178833 06/29/2021 20210716 1,029.98 CHECK 462394 TOTAL: 2,499.46 462395 07/16/2021 PRTD 117040 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 08P1297 06/17/2021 20210716 66.50 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 05W1007 04/13/2021 20210716 3,799.91 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 05P3151 05/25/2021 20210716 88.38 CHECK 462395 TOTAL: 3,954.79 462396 07/16/2021 PRTD 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340027698 06/25/2021 20210716 178.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340077207 06/30/2021 20210716 723.73 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340077206 06/30/2021 20210716 41.27 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340077208 06/30/2021 20210716 246.64 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340077209 06/30/2021 20210716 2,706.98 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111063 06/30/2021 20210716 140.55 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111065 06/30/2021 20210716 851.50 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111066 06/30/2021 20210716 2,771.58 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111064 06/30/2021 20210716 2,131.71 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111057 06/30/2021 20210716 3,630.00 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111058 06/30/2021 20210716 27.24 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111056 06/30/2021 20210716 1,778.38 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 339897745 06/16/2021 20210716 590.70 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 6 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 340111055 06/30/2021 20210716 4,871.75 CHECK 462396 TOTAL: 20,690.98 462397 07/16/2021 PRTD 103239 BRIN GLASS CO 11731 06/18/2021 20210716 384.00 BRIN GLASS CO 11682 06/18/2021 20210716 397.50 CHECK 462397 TOTAL: 781.50 462398 07/16/2021 PRTD 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 933404167 06/17/2021 20210716 450.96 CHECK 462398 TOTAL: 450.96 462399 07/16/2021 PRTD 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2564450 06/25/2021 20210716 14.00 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2564451 06/25/2021 20210716 1,923.65 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2564449 06/25/2021 20210716 58.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2564453 06/25/2021 20210716 4,722.45 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2564452 06/25/2021 20210716 117.00 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2565493 06/29/2021 20210716 5,002.60 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2565607 06/29/2021 20210716 123.74 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2565608 06/29/2021 20210716 207.00 CHECK 462399 TOTAL: 12,168.94 462400 07/16/2021 PRTD 151132 CARDNO INC 313854 06/15/2021 20210716 10,989.89 CARDNO INC 311965 05/17/2021 20210716 9,992.98 CHECK 462400 TOTAL: 20,982.87 462401 07/16/2021 PRTD 101515 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2362735 06/16/2021 20210716 828.00 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2365419 06/15/2021 20210716 828.00 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2365448 06/21/2021 20210716 1,003.82 CHECK 462401 TOTAL: 2,659.82 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 7 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462402 07/16/2021 PRTD 142028 CINTAS CORPORATION 4087742788 06/21/2021 20210716 11.78 CINTAS CORPORATION 4087742863 06/21/2021 20210716 28.62 CINTAS CORPORATION 4087742918 06/21/2021 20210716 23.84 CINTAS CORPORATION 4087742963 06/21/2021 20210716 30.25 CINTAS CORPORATION 4087742903 06/21/2021 20210716 34.88 CINTAS CORPORATION 4087742565 06/21/2021 20210716 3.69 CINTAS CORPORATION 4088287581 06/25/2021 20210716 81.48 CINTAS CORPORATION 4088394755 06/28/2021 20210716 103.69 CHECK 462402 TOTAL: 318.23 462403 07/16/2021 PRTD 101837 CITY OF EDINA 15022 06/28/2021 20210716 7,075.42 CHECK 462403 TOTAL: 7,075.42 462404 07/16/2021 PRTD 101837 CITY OF EDINA 15023 06/28/2021 20210716 9,693.07 CHECK 462404 TOTAL: 9,693.07 462405 07/16/2021 PRTD 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD 7775 06/30/2021 20210716 404.35 CHECK 462405 TOTAL: 404.35 462406 07/16/2021 PRTD 139927 CITY OF ROCHESTER MN 15026 06/29/2021 20210716 153,359.10 CHECK 462406 TOTAL: 153,359.10 462407 07/16/2021 PRTD 139927 CITY OF ROCHESTER MN 15189 06/29/2021 20210716 927.00 CHECK 462407 TOTAL: 927.00 462408 07/16/2021 PRTD 100087 CITY OF SAINT PAUL 11384 04/07/2021 20210716 843.03 CITY OF SAINT PAUL 17896 06/30/2021 20210716 9,033.24 CHECK 462408 TOTAL: 9,876.27 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 8 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462409 07/16/2021 PRTD 100087 CITY OF SAINT PAUL 11383 04/07/2021 20210716 8,505.41 CITY OF SAINT PAUL 11385 04/07/2021 20210716 1,383.87 CHECK 462409 TOTAL: 9,889.28 462410 07/16/2021 PRTD 120433 COMCAST HOLDINGS CORPORATION 0161120 6/21 06/26/2021 20210716 2.42 CHECK 462410 TOTAL: 2.42 462411 07/16/2021 PRTD 105981 TILLER CORPORATION 210615 06/15/2021 20210716 28,232.25 CHECK 462411 TOTAL: 28,232.25 462412 07/16/2021 PRTD 145952 COMPUTER INTEGRATION TECHNOLOGIES 311342 06/21/2021 20210716 171.00 CHECK 462412 TOTAL: 171.00 462413 07/16/2021 PRTD 118805 DISCOUNT STEEL INC 5186550 06/15/2021 20210716 376.68 DISCOUNT STEEL INC 5186551 06/15/2021 20210716 51.66 CHECK 462413 TOTAL: 428.34 462414 07/16/2021 PRTD 160162 C.O.D SERVICES LLC EAC-0001 07/03/2021 20210716 89.96 CHECK 462414 TOTAL: 89.96 462415 07/16/2021 PRTD 100701 CUSHMAN MOTOR CO INC C0530 04/06/2021 20210716 49.90 CHECK 462415 TOTAL: 49.90 462416 07/16/2021 PRTD 104020 DALCO ENTERPRISES INC 3794082 06/17/2021 20210716 281.64 CHECK 462416 TOTAL: 281.64 462417 07/16/2021 PRTD 160070 TOYS BY DAPHNE, INC 0304945-IN 06/21/2021 20210716 61.30 CHECK 462417 TOTAL: 61.30 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 9 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462418 07/16/2021 PRTD 118190 DAVIS EQUIPMENT CORPORATION EI14127 06/21/2021 20210716 67.57 CHECK 462418 TOTAL: 67.57 462419 07/16/2021 PRTD 100718 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 43815/1 06/21/2021 20210716 13.46 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 42791/1 06/16/2021 20210716 179.44 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 44135/1 06/21/2021 20210716 136.40 CHECK 462419 TOTAL: 329.30 462420 07/16/2021 PRTD 145811 EASTLAKE CRAFT BREWERY LLC 1355 06/30/2021 20210716 120.00 CHECK 462420 TOTAL: 120.00 462421 07/16/2021 PRTD 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 840535 06/17/2021 20210716 148.75 CHECK 462421 TOTAL: 148.75 462422 07/16/2021 PRTD 143018 ECO WORKS SUPPLY 6204 06/18/2021 20210716 3,166.20 ECO WORKS SUPPLY 6205 06/18/2021 20210716 63.88 CHECK 462422 TOTAL: 3,230.08 462423 07/16/2021 PRTD 146139 EDINA/EDEN PRAIRIE EXPLORER POST CONFERENCE FUNDING 06/23/2021 20210716 4,248.01 CHECK 462423 TOTAL: 4,248.01 462424 07/16/2021 PRTD 160062 ELM CREEK BREWING COMPANY E-1167 06/25/2021 20210716 286.00 CHECK 462424 TOTAL: 286.00 462425 07/16/2021 PRTD 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC 2251690 04/28/2021 20210716 55.25 CHECK 462425 TOTAL: 55.25 462426 07/16/2021 PRTD 117483 ENGELE, LEE 21FM0722 07/12/2021 20210716 200.00 CHECK 462426 TOTAL: 200.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 10 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462427 07/16/2021 PRTD 138265 ERANGE INC 106647 06/16/2021 20210716 365.00 CHECK 462427 TOTAL: 365.00 462428 07/16/2021 PRTD 102179 EULL'S MANUFACTURING COMPANY INC 051227 06/04/2021 20210716 266.10 CHECK 462428 TOTAL: 266.10 462429 07/16/2021 PRTD 122879 RALPH BRINDLE 21CLP726 06/21/2021 20210716 150.00 CHECK 462429 TOTAL: 150.00 462430 07/16/2021 PRTD 134730 EXPLORE EDINA 15303 06/30/2021 20210716 31,379.74 CHECK 462430 TOTAL: 31,379.74 462431 07/16/2021 PRTD 100146 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419434 06/15/2021 20210716 103.12 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419584 06/16/2021 20210716 45.76 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419618 06/17/2021 20210716 41.64 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419639 06/17/2021 20210716 364.69 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419641 06/17/2021 20210716 21.15 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6980887 06/16/2021 20210716 296.33 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6985619 06/18/2021 20210716 54.95 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6980361 06/16/2021 20210716 41.40 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6983443 06/17/2021 20210716 53.38 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 75-411398 06/17/2021 20210716 19.53 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-6987398 06/21/2021 20210716 39.90 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419989 06/21/2021 20210716 248.85 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 158-052584 06/21/2021 20210716 219.08 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419932 06/21/2021 20210716 -122.89 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-419987 06/21/2021 20210716 -21.15 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 11 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462431 TOTAL: 1,405.74 462432 07/16/2021 PRTD 147181 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-3853 07/01/2021 20210716 165.00 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-3852 07/01/2021 20210716 345.00 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-3854 07/01/2021 20210716 165.00 CHECK 462432 TOTAL: 675.00 462433 07/16/2021 PRTD 106035 FASTENAL COMPANY MNTC2165293 04/30/2021 20210716 46.44 CHECK 462433 TOTAL: 46.44 462434 07/16/2021 PRTD 103600 FERGUSON US HOLDINGS INC 0476243 06/17/2021 20210716 1,222.92 CHECK 462434 TOTAL: 1,222.92 462435 07/16/2021 PRTD 160061 FILTER BREWING COMPANY LLC 1532 07/01/2021 20210716 109.00 CHECK 462435 TOTAL: 109.00 462436 07/16/2021 PRTD 105066 FITTING REFLECTIONS LLC 3111 06/15/2021 20210716 3,763.50 CHECK 462436 TOTAL: 3,763.50 462437 07/16/2021 PRTD 130699 FLEETPRIDE INC BRV012264 06/18/2021 20210716 379.75 CHECK 462437 TOTAL: 379.75 462438 07/16/2021 PRTD 102727 FORCE AMERICA DISTRIBUTING LLC 001-1550207 06/17/2021 20210716 342.72 FORCE AMERICA DISTRIBUTING LLC 001-1550253 06/17/2021 20210716 845.83 CHECK 462438 TOTAL: 1,188.55 462439 07/16/2021 PRTD 122414 FORKLIFTS OF MINNESOTA INC 01P8514960 06/21/2021 20210716 788.08 CHECK 462439 TOTAL: 788.08 462440 07/16/2021 PRTD 102456 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1379849 06/15/2021 20210716 25.98 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1383933 06/21/2021 20210716 151.20 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 12 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462440 TOTAL: 177.18 462441 07/16/2021 PRTD 120079 GOODPOINTE TECHNOLOGY INC 4175 06/16/2021 20210716 11,000.00 CHECK 462441 TOTAL: 11,000.00 462442 07/16/2021 PRTD 144412 WINEBOW MN00096838 06/29/2021 20210716 801.00 WINEBOW MN00096820 06/29/2021 20210716 293.71 WINEBOW MN00096821 06/29/2021 20210716 1,900.00 WINEBOW MN00096864 06/29/2021 20210716 1,616.00 WINEBOW MN00096918 06/30/2021 20210716 560.00 WINEBOW MN00096863 06/29/2021 20210716 162.00 CHECK 462442 TOTAL: 5,332.71 462443 07/16/2021 PRTD 160164 BECHT,JENI 062421 06/24/2021 20210716 286.46 CHECK 462443 TOTAL: 286.46 462444 07/16/2021 PRTD 129108 HAAG COMPANIES INC 2-270945 06/21/2021 20210716 108.00 HAAG COMPANIES INC 4-423429 06/21/2021 20210716 108.00 CHECK 462444 TOTAL: 216.00 462445 07/16/2021 PRTD 102060 HALLOCK COMPANY INC 239561-1 06/17/2021 20210716 40.00 CHECK 462445 TOTAL: 40.00 462446 07/16/2021 PRTD 151168 HAMMER SPORTS LLC 438 06/20/2021 20210716 442.50 CHECK 462446 TOTAL: 442.50 462447 07/16/2021 PRTD 100797 HAWKINS INC 4964341 06/18/2021 20210716 4,841.10 CHECK 462447 TOTAL: 4,841.10 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 13 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462448 07/16/2021 PRTD 100798 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPANY R0024701 06/16/2021 20210716 6,000.00 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPANY R0021701 06/14/2021 20210716 7,900.00 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPANY R0030401 06/21/2021 20210716 6,000.00 CHECK 462448 TOTAL: 19,900.00 462449 07/16/2021 PRTD 143563 HEADFLYER BREWING E-2914 06/29/2021 20210716 126.00 CHECK 462449 TOTAL: 126.00 462450 07/16/2021 PRTD 101503 HCT 14941 06/28/2021 20210716 5,422.97 CHECK 462450 TOTAL: 5,422.97 462451 07/16/2021 PRTD 103085 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000168552 07/01/2021 20210716 145.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000167788 07/01/2021 20210716 2,209.50 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000167789 07/01/2021 20210716 3,483.10 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000167917 06/30/2021 20210716 1,598.91 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000168582 07/01/2021 20210716 174.00 CHECK 462451 TOTAL: 7,610.51 462452 07/16/2021 PRTD 115599 HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 1000167833 07/01/2021 20210716 1,816.70 CHECK 462452 TOTAL: 1,816.70 462453 07/16/2021 PRTD 102079 HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC 16202 06/18/2021 20210716 257.40 CHECK 462453 TOTAL: 257.40 462454 07/16/2021 PRTD 100805 HIRSHFIELDS INC 20181847 06/17/2021 20210716 23.99 CHECK 462454 TOTAL: 23.99 462455 07/16/2021 PRTD 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC 422234 06/29/2021 20210716 2,590.20 HOHENSTEINS INC 422235 06/29/2021 20210716 75.60 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 14 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET HOHENSTEINS INC 422262 06/29/2021 20210716 2,907.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 422236 06/29/2021 20210716 126.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 422266 06/29/2021 20210716 2,211.38 CHECK 462455 TOTAL: 7,910.18 462456 07/16/2021 PRTD 151094 HOPKINS SPORTS CAMPS LLC 20629R1-1 06/15/2021 20210716 3,836.40 HOPKINS SPORTS CAMPS LLC 20629R1-2 06/15/2021 20210716 7,144.60 CHECK 462456 TOTAL: 10,981.00 462457 07/16/2021 PRTD 100417 HORIZON CHEMICAL CO 210611071-ER 06/16/2021 20210716 5,509.90 CHECK 462457 TOTAL: 5,509.90 462458 07/16/2021 PRTD 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 102351 06/29/2021 20210716 315.70 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 102355 06/29/2021 20210716 949.90 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 102354 06/29/2021 20210716 983.70 CHECK 462458 TOTAL: 2,249.30 462459 07/16/2021 PRTD 100814 INDELCO PLASTICS CORPORATION INV264038 06/16/2021 20210716 199.74 CHECK 462459 TOTAL: 199.74 462460 07/16/2021 PRTD 146407 INGCO INTERNATIONAL 202-600331 06/15/2021 20210716 4,000.00 CHECK 462460 TOTAL: 4,000.00 462461 07/16/2021 PRTD 105052 INNOVATIVE GRAPHICS 50195 04/15/2021 20210716 1,440.00 CHECK 462461 TOTAL: 1,440.00 462462 07/16/2021 PRTD 141969 ESPRESSO SERVICES, INC MN3100841 06/15/2021 20210716 577.50 ESPRESSO SERVICES, INC MN3100852 06/15/2021 20210716 472.50 CHECK 462462 TOTAL: 1,050.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 15 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462463 07/16/2021 PRTD 150898 INVICTUS BREWING INC 3150 06/29/2021 20210716 155.00 INVICTUS BREWING INC 3149 06/29/2021 20210716 186.00 CHECK 462463 TOTAL: 341.00 462464 07/16/2021 PRTD 116776 JASPERSEN ENTERPRISES INC 85278 08/21/2020 20210716 190.00 CHECK 462464 TOTAL: 190.00 462465 07/16/2021 PRTD 102157 JEFF ELLIS AND ASSOCIATES INC 20102802 06/18/2021 20210716 5,170.00 CHECK 462465 TOTAL: 5,170.00 462466 07/16/2021 PRTD 132592 JF AHERN CO 446011 06/21/2021 20210716 260.00 CHECK 462466 TOTAL: 260.00 462467 07/16/2021 PRTD 160129 JIM BIRD ENTERPRISES, INC. 21FM0729 07/12/2021 20210716 200.00 CHECK 462467 TOTAL: 200.00 462468 07/16/2021 PRTD 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 184386 06/21/2021 20210716 73.12 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 184387 06/21/2021 20210716 73.12 CHECK 462468 TOTAL: 146.24 462469 07/16/2021 PRTD 160041 JINX TEA, LLC 1338 06/30/2021 20210716 64.40 CHECK 462469 TOTAL: 64.40 462470 07/16/2021 PRTD 100741 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3201266 06/30/2021 20210716 25.45 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3201264 06/30/2021 20210716 1,741.95 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3201263 06/30/2021 20210716 25.45 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3201265 06/30/2021 20210716 4,269.20 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3201260 06/30/2021 20210716 5,000.45 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 16 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462470 TOTAL: 11,062.50 462471 07/16/2021 PRTD 100835 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3481615 06/28/2021 20210716 225.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 309362 06/11/2021 20210716 -36.12 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3482463 07/01/2021 20210716 2,608.55 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3482465 07/01/2021 20210716 4,673.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3482464 07/01/2021 20210716 5,841.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 309524 06/16/2021 20210716 -174.00 CHECK 462471 TOTAL: 13,137.43 462472 07/16/2021 PRTD 100835 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231159 07/01/2021 20210716 73.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231158 07/01/2021 20210716 617.64 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231157 07/01/2021 20210716 1,259.47 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6230482 07/01/2021 20210716 243.57 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6230481 07/01/2021 20210716 1,410.49 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6230480 07/01/2021 20210716 113.88 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6230479 07/01/2021 20210716 2,024.55 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6230478 07/01/2021 20210716 1,710.47 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 635415 06/25/2021 20210716 -9.72 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6230483 07/01/2021 20210716 1,004.53 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231167 07/01/2021 20210716 325.03 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231166 07/01/2021 20210716 81.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6223109 06/17/2021 20210716 1,222.16 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231162 07/01/2021 20210716 1,891.37 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231163 07/01/2021 20210716 1,128.80 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231164 07/01/2021 20210716 101.79 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6231165 07/01/2021 20210716 1,364.18 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 17 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 635416 06/25/2021 20210716 -7.67 CHECK 462472 TOTAL: 14,554.92 462473 07/16/2021 PRTD 100835 WINE MERCHANTS 7336424 07/01/2021 20210716 2,711.59 WINE MERCHANTS 7336425 07/01/2021 20210716 815.47 WINE MERCHANTS 7336288 07/01/2021 20210716 2,982.99 WINE MERCHANTS 7336287 07/01/2021 20210716 48.38 WINE MERCHANTS 7336426 07/01/2021 20210716 2,187.47 CHECK 462473 TOTAL: 8,745.90 462474 07/16/2021 PRTD 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 153206 06/25/2021 20210716 -12.67 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 153207 06/25/2021 20210716 -14.16 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836044 07/01/2021 20210716 3,430.94 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836042 07/01/2021 20210716 757.37 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836041 07/01/2021 20210716 1,329.45 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836040 07/01/2021 20210716 578.28 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836039 07/01/2021 20210716 1,838.31 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836038 07/01/2021 20210716 420.40 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836037 07/01/2021 20210716 162.54 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836036 07/01/2021 20210716 56.34 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835290 07/01/2021 20210716 4,156.38 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835289 07/01/2021 20210716 2,499.43 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835293 07/01/2021 20210716 3,430.94 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835291 07/01/2021 20210716 603.09 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835288 07/01/2021 20210716 1,007.97 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835287 07/01/2021 20210716 1,774.83 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835292 07/01/2021 20210716 223.98 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 18 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835286 07/01/2021 20210716 1,430.13 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835285 07/01/2021 20210716 373.69 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1835284 07/01/2021 20210716 822.80 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 153208 06/25/2021 20210716 -305.44 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836049 07/01/2021 20210716 737.99 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836051 07/01/2021 20210716 2,901.43 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836048 07/01/2021 20210716 681.94 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836043 07/01/2021 20210716 1,204.75 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836050 07/01/2021 20210716 1,261.20 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836052 07/01/2021 20210716 1,926.00 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836056 07/01/2021 20210716 543.23 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836053 07/01/2021 20210716 642.65 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1836055 07/01/2021 20210716 3,430.94 CHECK 462474 TOTAL: 37,894.73 462475 07/16/2021 PRTD 142504 JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROTECTION 87862682 06/17/2021 20210716 2,257.68 CHECK 462475 TOTAL: 2,257.68 462476 07/16/2021 PRTD 103409 KELBRO COMPANY 2641205 06/26/2021 20210716 83.51 KELBRO COMPANY 2641201 06/26/2021 20210716 44.10 KELBRO COMPANY 2643525 06/26/2021 20210716 40.50 KELBRO COMPANY 2641208 06/26/2021 20210716 167.29 KELBRO COMPANY 2642111 07/01/2021 20210716 58.04 KELBRO COMPANY 2642112 07/01/2021 20210716 111.25 KELBRO COMPANY 2642207 07/01/2021 20210716 195.03 CHECK 462476 TOTAL: 699.72 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 19 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462477 07/16/2021 PRTD 100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 131938 06/29/2021 20210716 1,391.65 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 131935 06/29/2021 20210716 251.50 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 131934 06/29/2021 20210716 885.95 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 132098 06/30/2021 20210716 586.50 CHECK 462477 TOTAL: 3,115.60 462478 07/16/2021 PRTD 151024 LA DONA SBC 4835 06/30/2021 20210716 108.00 LA DONA SBC 4834 06/30/2021 20210716 108.00 CHECK 462478 TOTAL: 216.00 462479 07/16/2021 PRTD 101220 LANO EQUIPMENT INC 03-839681 06/15/2021 20210716 185.04 CHECK 462479 TOTAL: 185.04 462480 07/16/2021 PRTD 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308539637 06/16/2021 20210716 56.66 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308546867 06/18/2021 20210716 416.17 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308546866 06/18/2021 20210716 404.96 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308546865 06/18/2021 20210716 157.02 CHECK 462480 TOTAL: 1,034.81 462481 07/16/2021 PRTD 134957 LEACH LAW OFFICE LLC 13604 05/31/2021 20210716 21,649.40 CHECK 462481 TOTAL: 21,649.40 462482 07/16/2021 PRTD 135867 LIBATION PROJECT 36809 06/29/2021 20210716 436.50 LIBATION PROJECT 36810 06/29/2021 20210716 631.50 LIBATION PROJECT 36811 06/29/2021 20210716 201.50 CHECK 462482 TOTAL: 1,269.50 462483 07/16/2021 PRTD 130046 LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH A MAY 2021 06/15/2021 20210716 2,913.05 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 20 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462483 TOTAL: 2,913.05 462484 07/16/2021 PRTD 130046 LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH A JUNE 2021 06/21/2021 20210716 2,837.23 CHECK 462484 TOTAL: 2,837.23 462485 07/16/2021 PRTD 146427 LUCID BREWING LLC 11074 06/30/2021 20210716 200.00 LUCID BREWING LLC 11075 06/30/2021 20210716 326.00 CHECK 462485 TOTAL: 526.00 462486 07/16/2021 PRTD 141916 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 38188 06/29/2021 20210716 130.00 CHECK 462486 TOTAL: 130.00 462487 07/16/2021 PRTD 141215 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV606375 06/30/2021 20210716 161.46 CHECK 462487 TOTAL: 161.46 462488 07/16/2021 PRTD 101254 MCCORMICK, CAROL 21CLP762 06/21/2021 20210716 250.00 CHECK 462488 TOTAL: 250.00 462489 07/16/2021 PRTD 130477 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587042 06/30/2021 20210716 308.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587044 06/30/2021 20210716 94.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587048 06/30/2021 20210716 1,049.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587196 06/29/2021 20210716 -7.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 578176 04/28/2021 20210716 1,210.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 578177 04/28/2021 20210716 42.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587041 07/01/2021 20210716 356.80 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587047 07/01/2021 20210716 2,542.20 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587051 06/30/2021 20210716 391.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587052 06/30/2021 20210716 94.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 587050 07/01/2021 20210716 1,739.40 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 21 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462489 TOTAL: 7,819.40 462490 07/16/2021 PRTD 137002 MELTWATER NEWS US INC IN-S151-523118 06/17/2021 20210716 9,999.00 CHECK 462490 TOTAL: 9,999.00 462491 07/16/2021 PRTD 101483 MENARDS INC 41204 06/16/2021 20210716 656.39 MENARDS INC 41210 06/16/2021 20210716 59.94 MENARDS INC 41205 06/16/2021 20210716 12.99 MENARDS INC 41223 06/16/2021 20210716 53.84 MENARDS INC 41221 06/16/2021 20210716 194.80 MENARDS INC 39456 05/19/2021 20210716 120.37 CHECK 462491 TOTAL: 1,098.33 462492 07/16/2021 PRTD 115377 METRO FURNITURE SOLUTIONS BY HENR 715068 06/15/2021 20210716 1,177.47 CHECK 462492 TOTAL: 1,177.47 462493 07/16/2021 PRTD 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL JUNE 2021 SAC 07/07/2021 20210716 157,449.60 CHECK 462493 TOTAL: 157,449.60 462494 07/16/2021 PRTD 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 524418 06/21/2021 20210716 25.74 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 523514 04/16/2021 20210716 2.09 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 523249 03/29/2021 20210716 29.81 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 392589 04/16/2021 20210716 138.95 CHECK 462494 TOTAL: 196.59 462495 07/16/2021 PRTD 138732 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS LLC 26982 06/29/2021 20210716 133.00 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS LLC 26981 06/29/2021 20210716 165.00 CHECK 462495 TOTAL: 298.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 22 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462496 07/16/2021 PRTD 104650 MICRO CENTER 8745494 06/18/2021 20210716 328.86 CHECK 462496 TOTAL: 328.86 462497 07/16/2021 PRTD 127639 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY CM439431 05/18/2021 20210716 -52.33 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY CM424778 05/18/2021 20210716 -50.00 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY CM441482 05/18/2021 20210716 -32.45 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY 14026 06/18/2021 22100013 20210716 36,262.60 MIDWAY FORD COMPANY 14105 06/16/2021 22100013 20210716 36,262.60 CHECK 462497 TOTAL: 72,390.42 462498 07/16/2021 PRTD 100913 MINNEAPOLIS & SUBURBAN SEWER & WA 36240 06/15/2021 20210716 3,315.00 CHECK 462498 TOTAL: 3,315.00 462499 07/16/2021 PRTD 127062 MINNEHAHA BUILDING MAINTENANCE IN 180182196 06/13/2021 20210716 10.75 CHECK 462499 TOTAL: 10.75 462500 07/16/2021 PRTD 101684 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCI 12061 07/08/2021 20210716 760.00 CHECK 462500 TOTAL: 760.00 462501 07/16/2021 PRTD 136248 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT INC P48779 05/28/2021 20210716 244.25 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT INC P49746 06/07/2021 20210716 211.17 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT INC P49958 06/09/2021 20210716 7.95 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT INC P50415 06/15/2021 20210716 118.59 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT INC P50513 06/16/2021 20210716 -7.95 MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT INC P50742 06/18/2021 20210716 -455.42 CHECK 462501 TOTAL: 118.59 462502 07/16/2021 PRTD 101459 MINNESOTA RECREATION AND PARK ASS 10168 06/17/2021 20210716 125.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 23 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462502 TOTAL: 125.00 462503 07/16/2021 PRTD 112908 MINNESOTA ROADWAYS COMPANY 84849 06/21/2021 20210716 971.25 CHECK 462503 TOTAL: 971.25 462504 07/16/2021 PRTD 128914 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 31340 06/18/2021 20210716 32.00 CHECK 462504 TOTAL: 32.00 462505 07/16/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0259018X 06/26/2021 20210716 10.00 CHECK 462505 TOTAL: 10.00 462506 07/16/2021 PRTD 122793 MAS MODERN MARKETING INC MMI141642 06/16/2021 20210716 586.73 CHECK 462506 TOTAL: 586.73 462507 07/16/2021 PRTD 140955 MODIST BREWING LLC E-23098 06/29/2021 20210716 276.00 MODIST BREWING LLC E-23100 06/29/2021 20210716 540.00 MODIST BREWING LLC E-23099 06/29/2021 20210716 332.25 CHECK 462507 TOTAL: 1,148.25 462508 07/16/2021 PRTD 143339 MR CUTTING EDGE 3424 06/17/2021 20210716 110.00 CHECK 462508 TOTAL: 110.00 462509 07/16/2021 PRTD 129657 MS INDUSTRIES INC 308201 06/15/2021 20210716 994.00 CHECK 462509 TOTAL: 994.00 462510 07/16/2021 PRTD 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1307770-00 06/15/2021 20210716 89.06 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1307773-00 06/16/2021 20210716 155.96 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1307886-00 06/16/2021 20210716 33.72 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1308013-00 06/17/2021 20210716 102.46 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1309154-00 06/21/2021 20210716 130.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 24 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462510 TOTAL: 511.20 462511 07/16/2021 PRTD 100920 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY 2122-726143 06/17/2021 20210716 92.06 CHECK 462511 TOTAL: 92.06 462512 07/16/2021 PRTD 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 175452 06/30/2021 20210716 758.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 175423 06/30/2021 20210716 378.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 175422 06/30/2021 20210716 1,202.00 CHECK 462512 TOTAL: 2,338.00 462513 07/16/2021 PRTD 160165 NPARALLEL LLC 19605 05/05/2021 20210716 1,675.00 CHECK 462513 TOTAL: 1,675.00 462514 07/16/2021 PRTD 100936 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC 672127 06/16/2021 20210716 15.75 CHECK 462514 TOTAL: 15.75 462515 07/16/2021 PRTD 999998 EVELYN LUND 18339 07/07/2021 20210716 50.00 CHECK 462515 TOTAL: 50.00 462516 07/16/2021 PRTD 999998 HARRY WALLER 18341 07/07/2021 20210716 92.44 CHECK 462516 TOTAL: 92.44 462517 07/16/2021 PRTD 999998 JOEL GLOTTER 18338 07/07/2021 20210716 87.70 CHECK 462517 TOTAL: 87.70 462518 07/16/2021 PRTD 999995 PERSONAL PRIDE CONSTRUCTION ED182554-REFUND 07/12/2021 20210716 2,500.00 CHECK 462518 TOTAL: 2,500.00 462519 07/16/2021 PRTD 999994 Air Mechanical ED184525-REFUND 07/09/2021 20210716 205.52 CHECK 462519 TOTAL: 205.52 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 25 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462520 07/16/2021 PRTD 999994 BARBARA WESTON 18120 07/01/2021 20210716 322.57 CHECK 462520 TOTAL: 322.57 462521 07/16/2021 PRTD 999994 Johnson, Scott 18109 07/09/2021 20210716 110.00 CHECK 462521 TOTAL: 110.00 462522 07/16/2021 PRTD 999994 Midland HVAC, LLC ED190176-REFUND 07/08/2021 20210716 60.20 CHECK 462522 TOTAL: 60.20 462523 07/16/2021 PRTD 999994 SCHERBER CO. 17953 07/02/2021 20210716 56.68 CHECK 462523 TOTAL: 56.68 462524 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 ANGELLA MCGARVEY 18418 07/13/2021 20210716 204.00 CHECK 462524 TOTAL: 204.00 462525 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 ANNE BLAES 18124 07/08/2021 20210716 270.00 CHECK 462525 TOTAL: 270.00 462526 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 DORMANEN, BRUCE LS0093280 07/09/2021 20210716 134.41 CHECK 462526 TOTAL: 134.41 462527 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 ELIZABETH WINDLER 18126 07/09/2021 20210716 154.00 CHECK 462527 TOTAL: 154.00 462528 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 HEATHER BENNETT 18370 07/13/2021 20210716 220.00 CHECK 462528 TOTAL: 220.00 462529 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 HEATHER BENNETT 18416 07/13/2021 20210716 204.00 CHECK 462529 TOTAL: 204.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 26 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462530 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 JEVNE BENNETT 18393 07/13/2021 20210716 194.00 CHECK 462530 TOTAL: 194.00 462531 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 KATHRYN REDDIN 18256 07/12/2021 20210716 220.00 CHECK 462531 TOTAL: 220.00 462532 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 KIMBERLY PERRY 18371 07/13/2021 20210716 270.00 CHECK 462532 TOTAL: 270.00 462533 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 Liss,Liza 1206699-REFUND 07/12/2021 20210716 120.00 CHECK 462533 TOTAL: 120.00 462534 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 Lysen, Erin 1206784-REFUND 07/12/2021 20210716 220.00 CHECK 462534 TOTAL: 220.00 462535 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 MATTHEW DOSCOTCH 18122 07/09/2021 20210716 120.00 CHECK 462535 TOTAL: 120.00 462536 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 MATTHEW DOSCOTCH 18145 07/09/2021 20210716 204.00 CHECK 462536 TOTAL: 204.00 462537 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 MILLER, JOHN LS0099454 07/09/2021 20210716 132.78 CHECK 462537 TOTAL: 132.78 462538 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 MINDY DEMPSEY 18125 07/09/2021 20210716 184.00 CHECK 462538 TOTAL: 184.00 462539 07/16/2021 PRTD 999996 TRADITIONS BY DONNAY HOMES ED179774-REFUND 07/07/2021 20210716 10,000.00 CHECK 462539 TOTAL: 10,000.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 27 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462540 07/16/2021 PRTD 999993 Andrea Rich 18123 07/13/2021 20210716 3,000.00 CHECK 462540 TOTAL: 3,000.00 462541 07/16/2021 PRTD 130917 OWL ENGINEERING AND EMC TEST LABS 4052 06/17/2021 20210716 850.00 CHECK 462541 TOTAL: 850.00 462542 07/16/2021 PRTD 102722 PEAVEY CORPORATION 380629 06/15/2021 20210716 191.89 CHECK 462542 TOTAL: 191.89 462543 07/16/2021 PRTD 100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 47397461 06/28/2021 20210716 334.90 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 47397462 06/28/2021 20210716 875.04 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 52652355 06/29/2021 20210716 451.10 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 51724051 06/22/2021 20210716 1,345.08 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 47373452 07/01/2021 20210716 217.56 CHECK 462543 TOTAL: 3,223.68 462544 07/16/2021 PRTD 149249 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-105866 06/24/2021 20210716 1,231.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-105865 06/24/2021 20210716 37.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-105867 06/24/2021 20210716 326.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-105875 06/24/2021 20210716 170.00 CHECK 462544 TOTAL: 1,764.00 462545 07/16/2021 PRTD 100954 PIONEER RIM & WHEEL COMPANY 01CE7285 06/02/2021 20210716 14.99 CHECK 462545 TOTAL: 14.99 462546 07/16/2021 PRTD 140243 PK BLOODY MARY CORP 1670 06/30/2021 20210716 72.00 CHECK 462546 TOTAL: 72.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 28 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462547 07/16/2021 PRTD 100957 PLANT & FLANGED EQUIPMENT LLC 0079383-IN 06/15/2021 20210716 233.45 CHECK 462547 TOTAL: 233.45 462548 07/16/2021 PRTD 100958 PLUNKETT'S PEST CONTROL 7112675 06/17/2021 20210716 96.55 CHECK 462548 TOTAL: 96.55 462549 07/16/2021 PRTD 119620 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 210534438 06/17/2021 20210716 110.66 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 210524573 04/19/2021 20210716 215.99 POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC 210527659 05/07/2021 20210716 107.00 CHECK 462549 TOTAL: 433.65 462550 07/16/2021 PRTD 106072 PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC 28724 06/15/2021 20210716 775.00 CHECK 462550 TOTAL: 775.00 462551 07/16/2021 PRTD 129706 PREMIUM WATERS INC 318203020 06/18/2021 20210716 35.49 CHECK 462551 TOTAL: 35.49 462552 07/16/2021 PRTD 106322 SCHENCK, DAVID 158711 06/16/2021 20210716 442.36 SCHENCK, DAVID 158719 06/16/2021 20210716 79.70 SCHENCK, DAVID 158720 06/16/2021 20210716 112.38 SCHENCK, DAVID 158709 06/16/2021 20210716 132.55 CHECK 462552 TOTAL: 766.99 462553 07/16/2021 PRTD 143618 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18577 02/08/2021 20210716 426.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18579 02/08/2021 20210716 142.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18578 02/10/2021 20210716 284.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18702 02/10/2021 20210716 256.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18698 02/10/2021 20210716 414.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18697 02/10/2021 20210716 256.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 29 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W18964 02/23/2021 20210716 954.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18965 02/23/2021 20210716 397.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-18963 02/23/2021 20210716 557.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-24424 06/30/2021 20210716 351.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-24425 06/30/2021 20210716 338.00 CHECK 462553 TOTAL: 4,375.00 462554 07/16/2021 PRTD 100763 QUADIENT, INC N8914753 06/15/2021 20210716 979.23 CHECK 462554 TOTAL: 979.23 462555 07/16/2021 PRTD 101744 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC 41122 06/21/2021 20210716 826.00 CHECK 462555 TOTAL: 826.00 462556 07/16/2021 PRTD 160142 QUINLIVAN & HUGHES, PA 150150 06/10/2021 20210716 6,229.50 CHECK 462556 TOTAL: 6,229.50 462557 07/16/2021 PRTD 133091 RANGE SERVANT AMERICA INC 108281 06/23/2021 20210716 919.46 CHECK 462557 TOTAL: 919.46 462558 07/16/2021 PRTD 160075 RECORD AUTOMATIC DOORS, INC 095627 05/12/2021 20210716 1,576.93 RECORD AUTOMATIC DOORS, INC 092450 02/15/2021 20210716 738.64 RECORD AUTOMATIC DOORS, INC 094343 04/06/2021 20210716 604.55 CHECK 462558 TOTAL: 2,920.12 462559 07/16/2021 PRTD 133627 REPUBLIC SERVICES #894 0894-005452717 06/30/2021 20210716 68,126.03 CHECK 462559 TOTAL: 68,126.03 462560 07/16/2021 PRTD 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 82349 06/16/2021 20210716 1,961.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 30 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462560 TOTAL: 1,961.00 462561 07/16/2021 PRTD 101659 ORKIN 211912668 06/15/2021 20210716 149.47 ORKIN 211912519 06/15/2021 20210716 52.56 ORKIN 211913149 06/15/2021 20210716 30.00 CHECK 462561 TOTAL: 232.03 462562 07/16/2021 PRTD 100988 SAFETY KLEEN SYSTEMS INC 86276462 06/21/2021 20210716 408.88 CHECK 462562 TOTAL: 408.88 462563 07/16/2021 PRTD 144553 SALTCO LLC 64806 06/15/2021 20210716 70.00 CHECK 462563 TOTAL: 70.00 462564 07/16/2021 PRTD 144403 SENTEXT SOLUTIONS 215936 06/20/2021 20210716 299.00 SENTEXT SOLUTIONS 211066 05/20/2021 20210716 299.00 CHECK 462564 TOTAL: 598.00 462565 07/16/2021 PRTD 132210 RUSCIANO GROUP 66677 06/15/2021 20210716 755.00 RUSCIANO GROUP 66706 06/18/2021 20210716 755.00 CHECK 462565 TOTAL: 1,510.00 462566 07/16/2021 PRTD 103249 SHANNON, JIM 21CLP0713 07/12/2021 20210716 150.00 CHECK 462566 TOTAL: 150.00 462567 07/16/2021 PRTD 103249 SHANNON, JIM 21CLP0727 07/12/2021 20210716 150.00 CHECK 462567 TOTAL: 150.00 462568 07/16/2021 PRTD 120784 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16147 05/12/2021 20210716 104.94 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16212 06/07/2021 20210716 190.12 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16220 06/11/2021 20210716 811.45 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 31 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16230 06/11/2021 20210716 1,500.71 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16240 06/17/2021 20210716 76.21 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16203 06/18/2021 20210716 436.64 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16057 04/20/2021 20210716 53.92 CHECK 462568 TOTAL: 3,173.99 462569 07/16/2021 PRTD 137482 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110234452-001 06/15/2021 20210716 233.35 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110230931-001 06/15/2021 20210716 730.28 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110267965-001 06/16/2021 20210716 740.66 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110324484-001 06/17/2021 20210716 539.67 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110320321-001 06/17/2021 20210716 195.37 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110016924-001 06/17/2021 20210716 977.06 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110372548-001 06/18/2021 20210716 1,776.88 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 110421276-001 06/21/2021 20210716 47.83 CHECK 462569 TOTAL: 5,241.10 462570 07/16/2021 PRTD 127878 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097743 06/30/2021 20210716 1,024.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097744 06/30/2021 20210716 851.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097745 06/30/2021 20210716 562.60 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097749 06/30/2021 20210716 2,119.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097750 06/30/2021 20210716 662.30 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097748 06/30/2021 20210716 228.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097747 06/30/2021 20210716 295.63 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097746 06/30/2021 20210716 988.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097730 06/30/2021 20210716 1,024.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097733 06/30/2021 20210716 228.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097731 06/30/2021 20210716 1,023.08 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 32 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097729 06/30/2021 20210716 358.63 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097734 06/30/2021 20210716 264.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097732 06/30/2021 20210716 318.14 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097742 06/30/2021 20210716 662.30 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097740 06/30/2021 20210716 295.63 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097737 06/30/2021 20210716 523.50 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097741 06/30/2021 20210716 2,119.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097738 06/30/2021 20210716 250.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097739 06/30/2021 20210716 608.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2097735 06/30/2021 20210716 819.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9173686 05/02/2019 20210716 -108.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9179931 07/09/2019 20210716 -180.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9180138 07/10/2019 20210716 -150.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9180139 07/10/2019 20210716 -450.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9180295 07/11/2019 20210716 -330.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9180296 07/11/2019 20210716 -670.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9180983 07/18/2019 20210716 -58.60 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9182383 08/02/2019 20210716 -104.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9185432 09/05/2019 20210716 -28.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9185434 09/05/2019 20210716 -3.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9189420 10/14/2019 20210716 -20.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9189842 10/17/2019 20210716 -12.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9190387 10/22/2019 20210716 -11.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9191258 10/30/2019 20210716 -386.92 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9195268 12/11/2019 20210716 -400.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9195269 12/11/2019 20210716 -250.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 33 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9198963 01/13/2020 20210716 -101.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9198964 01/13/2020 20210716 -111.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9204288 03/13/2020 20210716 -36.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9204289 03/13/2020 20210716 -60.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9215903 07/08/2020 20210716 -108.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9215904 07/08/2020 20210716 -252.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9220550 08/13/2020 20210716 -52.50 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9223852 09/10/2020 20210716 -39.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9224932 09/12/2020 20210716 -50.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9224933 09/12/2020 20210716 -50.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9227857 10/14/2020 20210716 -56.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9227858 10/14/2020 20210716 -132.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9227994 10/14/2020 20210716 -120.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9227995 10/14/2020 20210716 -372.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9232347 11/18/2020 20210716 -54.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 21368 06/30/2020 20210716 -29.19 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 21736 07/08/2020 20210716 -5.60 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 23020 10/21/2020 20210716 -112.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 18533 10/22/2019 20210716 -390.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 21353 06/02/2020 20210716 -1,060.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9220549 08/13/2020 20210716 -57.75 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 9234929-1 12/09/2020 20210716 18.00 CHECK 462570 TOTAL: 8,832.85 462571 07/16/2021 PRTD 104672 SPRINT SPECTRUM LP 873184124-223 06/18/2021 20210716 135.36 CHECK 462571 TOTAL: 135.36 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 34 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462572 07/16/2021 PRTD 124116 SPRUNG SERVICES, INCORPORATED 78908 06/18/2021 20210716 1,180.00 CHECK 462572 TOTAL: 1,180.00 462573 07/16/2021 PRTD 101004 SPS COMPANIES INC S4483174.001 06/15/2021 20210716 169.32 CHECK 462573 TOTAL: 169.32 462574 07/16/2021 PRTD 146960 STACKED DECK BREWING 002801 06/28/2021 20210716 128.00 STACKED DECK BREWING 002803 06/28/2021 20210716 128.00 STACKED DECK BREWING 002802 06/28/2021 20210716 128.00 CHECK 462574 TOTAL: 384.00 462575 07/16/2021 PRTD 145599 SSI MN TRANCHE 1 LLC 16422 06/18/2021 20210716 6,043.38 SSI MN TRANCHE 1 LLC 15854 06/19/2021 20210716 50,234.71 CHECK 462575 TOTAL: 56,278.09 462576 07/16/2021 PRTD 100438 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC 1800877 06/21/2021 20210716 10,499.12 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC 1800878 06/21/2021 20210716 15,999.12 STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC 1800880 06/21/2021 20210716 7,200.00 CHECK 462576 TOTAL: 33,698.24 462577 07/16/2021 PRTD 139006 OFFICE OF MNIT SERVICES W21050637 06/14/2021 20210716 84.79 OFFICE OF MNIT SERVICES W21050560 06/14/2021 20210716 4,341.04 OFFICE OF MNIT SERVICES W21050563 06/14/2021 20210716 299.40 CHECK 462577 TOTAL: 4,725.23 462578 07/16/2021 PRTD 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40814 06/30/2021 20210716 165.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40812 06/30/2021 20210716 375.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 40813 06/30/2021 20210716 267.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 35 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462578 TOTAL: 807.00 462579 07/16/2021 PRTD 102786 STOP STICK LTD 2021-15875 06/09/2021 20210716 80.00 CHECK 462579 TOTAL: 80.00 462580 07/16/2021 PRTD 143698 STORM COMBATIVES TRAINING AND CON 0000138 07/08/2021 20210716 208.95 CHECK 462580 TOTAL: 208.95 462581 07/16/2021 PRTD 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10179175 06/16/2021 20210716 296.00 CHECK 462581 TOTAL: 296.00 462582 07/16/2021 PRTD 135803 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN June 2021 06/21/2021 20210716 5,149.71 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN June 2021 #2 06/21/2021 20210716 2,954.85 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN June 2021 #3 06/21/2021 20210716 7,296.80 SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CAN June 2021 #4 06/21/2021 20210716 39.60 CHECK 462582 TOTAL: 15,440.96 462583 07/16/2021 PRTD 122511 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC DB 3031404 06/15/2021 20210716 665.00 CHECK 462583 TOTAL: 665.00 462584 07/16/2021 PRTD 119864 SYSCO MINNESOTA INC 347519471 06/15/2021 20210716 1,418.76 SYSCO MINNESOTA INC 347520755 06/15/2021 20210716 294.35 SYSCO MINNESOTA INC 347521840 06/16/2021 20210716 956.60 SYSCO MINNESOTA INC 347524421 06/18/2021 20210716 1,392.07 SYSCO MINNESOTA INC 347524049 06/18/2021 20210716 12.39 SYSCO MINNESOTA INC 347529069 06/21/2021 20210716 1,658.93 CHECK 462584 TOTAL: 5,733.10 462585 07/16/2021 PRTD 104932 TAYLOR MADE 34949649 04/20/2021 20210716 406.90 TAYLOR MADE 34949867 04/20/2021 20210716 3,304.92 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 36 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET TAYLOR MADE 35112659 06/12/2021 20210716 150.54 TAYLOR MADE 35096023 06/07/2021 20210716 100.58 TAYLOR MADE 35135857 06/19/2021 20210716 203.39 TAYLOR MADE 35050977 05/21/2021 20210716 291.23 TAYLOR MADE 35050895 05/21/2021 20210716 372.68 CHECK 462585 TOTAL: 4,830.24 462586 07/16/2021 PRTD 101326 TERMINAL SUPPLY INC 52393-00 06/18/2021 20210716 95.18 CHECK 462586 TOTAL: 95.18 462587 07/16/2021 PRTD 101038 TOLL COMPANY 10407040 05/24/2021 20210716 54.82 CHECK 462587 TOTAL: 54.82 462588 07/16/2021 PRTD 134673 TOTAL MECHANICAL SYSTEMS INC S1195 06/10/2021 20210716 2,240.83 CHECK 462588 TOTAL: 2,240.83 462589 07/16/2021 PRTD 103218 TRI-STATE BOBCAT P57009 06/17/2021 20210716 12.69 CHECK 462589 TOTAL: 12.69 462590 07/16/2021 PRTD 146436 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-328813a-1 01/31/2021 20210716 700.00 CHECK 462590 TOTAL: 700.00 462591 07/16/2021 PRTD 100689 ULTIMATE SAFETY CONCEPTS INC 194994 06/21/2021 20210716 131.84 CHECK 462591 TOTAL: 131.84 462592 07/16/2021 PRTD 131793 UNITED STATES CONFERENCES OF MAYO INV001647 06/16/2021 20210716 5,269.00 CHECK 462592 TOTAL: 5,269.00 462593 07/16/2021 PRTD 131957 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC, LLC 150-0055336-01 06/18/2021 20210716 68.24 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 37 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462593 TOTAL: 68.24 462594 07/16/2021 PRTD 114236 USA BLUE BOOK 635375 06/16/2021 20210716 116.26 CHECK 462594 TOTAL: 116.26 462595 07/16/2021 PRTD 100050 USPS 18285 07/12/2021 20210716 815.82 USPS 18287 07/12/2021 20210716 821.22 CHECK 462595 TOTAL: 1,637.04 462596 07/16/2021 PRTD 144033 USS MINNESOTA ONE MT LLC 16872 06/18/2021 20210716 7,232.53 CHECK 462596 TOTAL: 7,232.53 462597 07/16/2021 PRTD 103500 VALLEY PAVING INC ENG 21-2 MELODY #1 06/09/2021 20210716 1,089,361.90 CHECK 462597 TOTAL: 1,089,361.90 462598 07/16/2021 PRTD 101058 VAN PAPER COMPANY 577598-00 06/16/2021 20210716 122.87 VAN PAPER COMPANY 577599-00 06/16/2021 20210716 461.89 VAN PAPER COMPANY 577877 CM 06/16/2021 20210716 -100.97 VAN PAPER COMPANY 578785-00 06/25/2021 20210716 788.07 CHECK 462598 TOTAL: 1,271.86 462599 07/16/2021 PRTD 144209 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2666 06/30/2021 20210716 345.00 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2668 06/30/2021 20210716 609.00 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2667 06/30/2021 20210716 357.00 CHECK 462599 TOTAL: 1,311.00 462600 07/16/2021 PRTD 148579 VIERKANT DISPOSAL LLC 6/1/21 - 6/30/21 06/15/2021 20210716 67,985.00 CHECK 462600 TOTAL: 67,985.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 38 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462601 07/16/2021 PRTD 160088 VINIFERA IMPORTS 325809 06/21/2021 20210716 198.00 CHECK 462601 TOTAL: 198.00 462602 07/16/2021 PRTD 119454 VINOCOPIA INC 0282217-IN 07/01/2021 20210716 132.96 VINOCOPIA INC 0282218-IN 07/01/2021 20210716 105.50 CHECK 462602 TOTAL: 238.46 462603 07/16/2021 PRTD 100023 VOGEL, ROBERT C 221014 06/21/2021 20210716 3,750.00 CHECK 462603 TOTAL: 3,750.00 462604 07/16/2021 PRTD 140285 WALSER BLOOMINGTON TOYOTA 433043 02/24/2021 20210716 187.05 CHECK 462604 TOTAL: 187.05 462605 07/16/2021 PRTD 106699 WALSER HOPKINS CJ, LLC 683087 08/27/2020 20210716 373.52 WALSER HOPKINS CJ, LLC 237251 06/08/2021 20210716 27.98 CHECK 462605 TOTAL: 401.50 462606 07/16/2021 PRTD 100183 WASHINGTON COUNTY 190742 06/30/2021 20210716 1,546.27 CHECK 462606 TOTAL: 1,546.27 462607 07/16/2021 PRTD 142351 WATCHGUARD VIDEO ACCINV0031419 06/21/2021 20210716 277.00 CHECK 462607 TOTAL: 277.00 462608 07/16/2021 PRTD 101033 WINE COMPANY 176526 06/30/2021 20210716 1,322.85 WINE COMPANY 176522 06/30/2021 20210716 1,202.53 WINE COMPANY 176525 06/30/2021 20210716 1,373.90 CHECK 462608 TOTAL: 3,899.28 462609 07/16/2021 PRTD 130471 WINFIELD SOLUTIONS LLC 64525237 06/17/2021 20210716 5,161.20 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 39 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 462609 TOTAL: 5,161.20 462610 07/16/2021 PRTD 124503 WINSUPPLY EDEN PRAIRIE MN CO 210939 04 06/16/2021 20210716 43.62 WINSUPPLY EDEN PRAIRIE MN CO 212167 01 06/16/2021 20210716 4.95 CHECK 462610 TOTAL: 48.57 462611 07/16/2021 PRTD 142162 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2833 07/01/2021 20210716 316.50 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2832 07/01/2021 20210716 573.30 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2830 07/01/2021 20210716 51.00 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 2831 07/01/2021 20210716 567.30 CHECK 462611 TOTAL: 1,508.10 462612 07/16/2021 PRTD 127774 WORLDWIDE CELLARS INC R21-52572 06/29/2021 20210716 257.50 WORLDWIDE CELLARS INC R21-52573 06/29/2021 20210716 509.50 CHECK 462612 TOTAL: 767.00 462613 07/16/2021 PRTD 103410 WW GOETSCH ASSOCIATES INC 105909 03/22/2021 20210716 6,640.00 CHECK 462613 TOTAL: 6,640.00 462614 07/16/2021 PRTD 101103 WW GRAINGER 9933585714 06/15/2021 20210716 22.95 WW GRAINGER 9935342668 06/16/2021 20210716 15.80 WW GRAINGER 9934777021 06/16/2021 20210716 26.67 WW GRAINGER 9940107445 06/21/2021 20210716 116.75 WW GRAINGER 9939859675 06/21/2021 20210716 4.77 CHECK 462614 TOTAL: 186.94 462615 07/16/2021 PRTD 160077 YETI HOLDINGS, INC 990536419 06/17/2021 20210716 194.99 CHECK 462615 TOTAL: 194.99 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 07/15/2021 12:33User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 40 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 462616 07/16/2021 PRTD 136192 ZOLL MEDICAL CORPORATION 3308567 06/18/2021 20210716 548.73 CHECK 462616 TOTAL: 548.73 NUMBER OF CHECKS 245 *** CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL *** 2,331,853.68 COUNT AMOUNT TOTAL PRINTED CHECKS 245 2,331,853.68 *** GRAND TOTAL *** 2,331,853.68 Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.C. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: 2021 Pavement Rejuvenation Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for pavement rejuvenation services from Corrective Asphalt Materials, LLC for $172,136.60. INTRODUCTION: See attached Request for Purchase. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: 2021 Pavement Rejuvenation Contract Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100159 Department:Engineering Buyer:Andrew Scipioni Date: 07/12/2021 Requisition Description:2021 Pavement Rejuvenation Vendor:CORRECTIVE ASPHALT MATERALS, LLC Cost:$172,136.60 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:QUOTE/BD - QUOTE/BID DESCRIPTION: This project involves maintenance of 12 miles of recently reconstructed roadways through the application of Reclamite, a maltene-based asphalt rejuvenating agent. The application of this product is an alternative treatment to traditional seal coating or fog sealing applications. BUDGET IMPACT: This project will be funded by the Public Works Street Department General Fund Budget and Municipal State Aid Maintenance Funds. The application of this product instead of traditional seal coating will result in additional cost savings as pavement markings (including centerline striping and marked crosswalks) will not have to be protected or replaced after construction. 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT: Pavement rejuvenation will occur between the months of August and September with a completion date of October 1, 2021. Residents along affected streets will receive a letter explaining the process and typical duration of work to be expecting. Impact during construction is generally limited to temporary on-street parking restrictions and lane closures. This project helps protect preceding infrastructure investments on behalf of the City and its residents. Proactive maintenance strategies like this extend the service life of pavements from 20-30 years to 50-60 years. This practice is consistent with Vision Edina's mission statement to "maintain a sound public infrastructure" and results in better roads for longer periods of time throughout the community. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Compared to seal coating, this produce requires up to 90% less surface aggregate, significantly reducing carbon emissions associated with transporting material to the project locations. This project will not increase or reduce impervious surfaces, but merely treat existing pavements to delay further deterioration and maintenance expenses. The Proactive Pavement Management Program seeks to utilize resources efficiently by performing infrastructure renewal that will provide the greatest lifespan increase for the lowest cost. 140400v01 RNK:08/06/2010 ENG 21-11NB Engineering 2/7/2014 FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF EDINA AND CONTRACTOR FOR NON-BID CONTRACT ENG 21-11NB 2021 PAVEMENT REJUVENATION THIS AGREEMENT made this 21st day of July, 2021, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“Owner” or “City”) and CORRECTIVE ASPHALT MATERIALS, LLC a corporation (“Contractor”). Owner and Contractor, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, 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. City of Edina General Contract Conditions C. Specifications prepared by the City of Edina D. Contractor’s Quote. 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. CONTRACT PRICE. Owner shall pay Contractor for completion of the Work, in accordance with the Contract $172,136.60 inclusive of taxes, if any. 4. PAYMENT PROCEDURES. A. Contractor shall submit Applications for Payment. Applications for Payment will be processed by the City Engineer. B. Progress Payments; Retainage. Owner shall make 95% progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of Contractor’s Applications for Payment during performance of the Work. C. Payments to Subcontractors. (1) Prompt Payment to Subcontractors. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.25, Subd. 4a, the Contractor must pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Contractor’s receipt of payment from the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Contractor must pay interest of 1 ½ percent per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest 140400v01 RNK:08/06/2010 ENG 21-11NB Engineering 2/7/2014 penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Contractor shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. (2) Form IC-134 (attached) required from general contractor. Minn. Stat. § 290.92 requires that the City of Edina obtain a Withholding Affidavit for Contractors, Form IC-134, before making final payments to Contractors. This form needs to be submitted by the Contractor to the Minnesota Department of Revenue for approval. The form is used to receive certification from the state that the vendor has complied with the requirement to withhold and remit state withholding taxes for employee salaries paid. D. Final Payment. Final payment will not be made until the Contractor has filed with the Owner a fully and duly executed Affidavit, General Waiver and Indemnity Agreement, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit B and hereby made a part hereof, together with such other and additional evidence as Owner may request, in form and substance satisfactory to the Owner, that all labor, materials and services expended or used in the Work have been paid for in full and that no liens or other claims for such labor, materials or services can be made or claimed against Contractor, Owner or any other person or any property. In case such evidence is not furnished, the Owner may retain out of any amount due said Contractor a sum sufficient, in the reasonable discretion of Owner, but in any event not less than one and one-half times the sum determined by Owner to be necessary, to pay for all labor, material, services or other claims which are then unpaid or which are then believed by Owner, in its reasonable discretion, to be unpaid. Upon final completion of the Work, Owner shall pay the remainder of the Contract Price as recommended by the City Engineer. 5. COMPLETION DATE. The Work must be completed by October 1, 2021. 6. CONTRACTOR’S REPRESENTATIONS. A. Contractor has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents and other related data identified in the Contract Documents. B. Contractor has visited the Site and become familiar with and is satisfied as to the general, local, and Site conditions that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. C. Contractor is familiar with and is satisfied as to all federal, state, and local laws and regulations that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. D. Contractor has carefully studied all: (1) reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions at or contiguous to the Site and all drawings of physical conditions in or relating to existing surface or subsurface 140400v01 RNK:08/06/2010 ENG 21-11NB Engineering 2/7/2014 structures at or contiguous to the Site (except Underground Facilities) which have been identified in the General Conditions and (2) reports and drawings of a Hazardous Environmental Condition, if any, at the Site. E. Contractor has obtained and carefully studied (or assumes responsibility for doing so) all additional or supplementary examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data concerning conditions (surface, subsurface, and Underground Facilities) at or contiguous to the Site which may affect cost, progress, or performance of the Work or which relate to any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction to be employed by Contractor, including any specific means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction expressly required by the Bidding Documents, and safety precautions and programs incident thereto. F. Contractor does not consider that any further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the performance of the Work at the Contract Price, within the Contract Times, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract Documents. G. Contractor is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by Owner and others at the Site that relates to the Work as indicated in the Contract Documents. H. Contractor has correlated the information known to Contractor, information and observations obtained from visits to the Site, reports and drawings identified in the Contract Documents, and all additional examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data with the Contract Documents. I. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and conditions for performance and furnishing of the Work. J. Subcontracts: (1) Unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall, upon receipt of the executed Contract Documents, submit in writing to the Owner the names of the Subcontractors proposed for the work. Subcontractors may not be changed except at the request or with the consent of the Owner. (2) The Contractor is responsible to the Owner for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's subcontractors, and of their direct and indirect employees, to the same extent as the Contractor is responsible for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's employees. (3) The Contract Documents shall not be construed as creating any contractual relation between the Owner and any subcontractor. 140400v01 RNK:08/06/2010 ENG 21-11NB Engineering 2/7/2014 (4) The Contractor shall bind every subcontractor by the terms of the Contract Documents. 7. WORKER’S COMPENSATION. The Contractor shall obtain and maintain for the duration of this Contract, statutory Worker’s Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance as required under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 8. COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL LIABILITY. Contractor shall obtain the following minimum insurance coverage and maintain it at all times throughout the life of the Contract, with the City included as an additional name insured on the general liability insurance on a primary and noncontributory basis. The Contractor shall furnish the City a certificate of insurance satisfactory to the City evidencing the required coverage: Bodily Injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 aggregate products and completed operations Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 aggregate Contractual Liability (identifying the contract): Bodily Injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 aggregate Comprehensive Automobile Liability (owned, non-owned, hired): Bodily Injury: $1,000,000 each occurrence $1,000,000 each accident Property Damage: $1,000,000 each occurrence 9. WARRANTY. The Contractor guarantees that all new equipment warranties as specified within the quote shall be in full force and transferred to the City upon payment by the City. The Contractor shall be held responsible for any and all defects in workmanship, materials, and equipment which may develop in any part of the contracted service, and upon proper notification by the City shall immediately replace, without cost to the City, any such faulty part or parts and damage done by reason of the same in accordance with the bid specifications. 10. INDEMNITY. The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any claim made by third parties as a result of the services performed by it. In addition, the Contractor shall reimburse the City for any cost of reasonable attorney’s fees it may incur as a result of any such claims. 11. PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS. Performance and payment bonds are not required for the doing of any public work if the contract price is $175,000 or less. On projects of more than $175,000 for the doing of public work a payment bond and a performance bond each in the amount of the contract price must be furnished to the City prior to 140400v01 RNK:08/06/2010 ENG 21-11NB Engineering 2/7/2014 commencement of work. The form of the bonds must satisfy statutory requirements for such bonds. 12. MISCELLANEOUS. A. Terms used in this Agreement have the meanings stated in the General Conditions. B. Owner and Contractor each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements, and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. C. Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or unenforceable under any law or regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon Owner and Contractor, who agree that the Contract Documents shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provisions. D. Data Practices/Records. (1) All data created, collected, received, maintained or disseminated for any purpose in the course of this Contract is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, any other applicable state statute, or any state rules adopted to implement the act, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. (2) All books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices to the Contractor and its subcontractors, if any, relative to this Contract are subject to examination by the City. E. Software License. If the equipment provided by the Contractor pursuant to this Contract contains software, including that which the manufacturer may have embedded into the hardware as an integral part of the equipment, the Contractor shall pay all software licensing fees. The Contractor shall also pay for all software updating fees for a period of one year following cutover. The Contractor shall have no obligation to pay for such fees thereafter. Nothing in the software license or licensing agreement shall obligate the City to pay any additional fees as a condition for continuing to use the software. F. Patented devices, materials and processes. If the Contract requires, or the Contractor desires, the use of any design, device, material or process covered by letters, patent or copyright, trademark or trade name, the Contractor shall provide for such use by suitable legal agreement with the patentee or owner and a copy of said agreement shall be filed with the Owner. If no such agreement is made or filed as noted, the Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the Owner from any and all claims for infringement by reason of the use of any such patented designed, device, 140400v01 RNK:08/06/2010 ENG 21-11NB Engineering 2/7/2014 material or process, or any trademark or trade name or copyright in connection with the Project agreed to be performed under the Contract, and shall indemnify and defend the Owner for any costs, liability, expenses and attorney's fees that result from any such infringement. G. Assignment. Neither party may assign, sublet, or transfer any interest or obligation in this Contract without the prior written consent of the other party, and then only upon such terms and conditions as both parties may agree to and set forth in writing. H. Waiver. In the particular event that either party shall at any time or times waive any breach of this Contract by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or any succeeding breach of this Contract by either party, whether of the same or any other covenant, condition or obligation. I. Governing Law/Venue. The laws of the State of Minnesota govern the interpretation of this Contract. In the event of litigation, the exclusive venue shall be in the District Court of the State of Minnesota for Hennepin County. J. Severability. If any provision, term or condition of this Contract is found to be or become unenforceable or invalid, it shall not effect the remaining provisions, terms and conditions of this Contract, unless such invalid or unenforceable provision, term or condition renders this Contract impossible to perform. Such remaining terms and conditions of the Contract shall continue in full force and effect and shall continue to operate as the parties’ entire contract. K. Entire Agreement. This Contract represents the entire agreement of the parties and is a final, complete and all inclusive statement of the terms thereof, and supersedes and terminates any prior agreement(s), understandings or written or verbal representations made between the parties with respect thereto. L. Permits and Licenses; Rights-of-Way and Easements. The Contractor shall give all notices necessary and incidental to the construction and completion of the Project. The City will obtain all necessary rights-of- way and easements. The Contractor shall not be entitled to any additional compensation for any construction delay resulting from the City’s not timely obtaining rights-of-way or easements. M. If the work is delayed or the sequencing of work is altered because of the action or inaction of the Owner, the Contractor shall be allowed a time extension to complete the work but shall not be entitled to any other compensation. 140400v01 RNK:08/06/2010 ENG 21-11NB Engineering 2/7/2014 CITY OF EDINA CONTRACTOR BY: ____________________________ BY: ___________________________ Its Mayor Its AND ___________________________ AND ___________________________ Its City Manager Its Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.D. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Aaron T. Ditzler, PE, Assistant City Engineer Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Hansen Road Railroad Crossing Improvements Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for Hansen Road Railroad Crossing Improvements with Canadian Pacific for $56,104.17, and Railroad Right of Way Maintenance Agreement with Canadian Pacific. INTRODUCTION: This project will replace the at grade railroad crossing on Hansen Road adjacent to West 56th Street as required by Canadian P acific. T he improvements are associated with the Melody Lake A & B, Grandview A and Birchcrest C neighborhood roadway reconstruction project. See attached Request for Purchase. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Hansen Road Railroad Crossing Improvements Canadian Pacific Railroad Agreement Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100147 Department:Engineering Buyer:Aaron Ditzler Date: 06/15/2021 Requisition Description:Canadian Pacific Railroad Crossing at Hansen Road Vendor:CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY Cost:$56,104.17 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:SERVIC K - SERVICE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION: This project will replace the at grade railroad crossing on Hansen Road adjacent to West 56th Street as required by Canadian Pacific. The improvements are associated with the Melody Lake A & B, Grandview A and Birchcrest C neighborhood roadway reconstruction project. BUDGET IMPACT: This project will funded with special assessments from the Melody Lk Project. 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT: This project will replace deteriorated railroad crossing infrastructure to create a smoother crossing. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: NA Service Contract Page 1 of 8 Engineering – East Region 120 South Sixth Street Suite 700 Minneapolis, MN 55402 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is made and entered into by and between City of Edina, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation, a body politic and corporate under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the “ROAD AUTHORITY” and SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, doing business as CANADIAN PACIFIC, hereinafter referred to as the “COMPANY.” WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Hansen RD Dot #854251D as presently located in the City of Edina, Hennepin County, State of Minnesota, crosses at grade one track of the COMPANY at railroad mile post 18.53 on the Paynesville Subdivision, which crossing is constructed with 108’ of concrete and is protected by gates, lights and cantilevers.’; and WHEREAS, the ROAD AUTHORITY proposes to have the COMPANY replace the crossing surface at the location shown in “Exhibit A;” and WHEREAS, the crossing surface work herein proposed to be performed by the COMPANY shall be completed with the street closed to vehicular traffic; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth the terms and conditions for surface replacement of said crossing. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. The “Standard Provisions for Highway-Railroad Agreements” attached hereto as “Exhibit C” are hereby made a part of this Agreement. SECTION 2. The parties shall construct, or cause to be constructed, the following items of work: 2.1 WORK BY THE COMPANY. The COMPANY shall furnish, or cause to be furnished, all of the labor, materials and work equipment required to perform and complete the following work (the “COMPANY Work”): a.The removal of the existing grade crossing surface. b. The preparation of the track structure. c.The installation of concrete crossing material. d.The incidental work necessary to complete the items hereinabove specified. Page 2 of 8 The COMPANY Work is more fully detailed in the attached “Exhibits B.” The estimated total cost of the COMPANY Work to be performed by the COMPANY as indicated in the estimate of cost attached hereto and marked “Exhibit B” is $162,104.17. The ROAD AUTHORITY shall reimburse the COMPANY for all material costs, estimated at $56,104.17. The COMPANY warrants that it shall perform all of the COMPANY Work under this Agreement in a workmanlike and timely manner in accordance with all applicable standards for work of the type at issue. 2.2 WORK BY THE ROAD AUTHORITY. The ROAD AUTHORITY shall furnish or cause to be furnished, at its expense, all of the labor, material and work equipment required to perform and complete the following work (the “ROAD AUTHORITY WORK”): a.The paving of the roadway approaches up to the edge of the concrete crossing surface. b.Traffic control and detour signing. c.Incidental work necessary to complete the items hereinabove specified. 2.3 The COMPANY Work and the ROAD AUTHORITY Work shall be completed within 18 months of fully executing this agreement. SECTION 3. The ROAD AUTHORITY shall maintain jurisdiction for the roadway and will be responsible for maintaining the roadway and crossing approaches up to the ends of the track ties at its expense. The COMPANY shall operate and maintain its track, the crossing over its ties and the crossing warning devices in accordance with Federal or State law as it shall be from time to time in the future while it operates its line of railroad over such trackage and crossing, but this obligation to maintain said crossing and warning devices shall cease in the event the COMPANY abandons its railroad operations over said track in the future, in which event the ROAD AUTHORITY may, if it desires, remove the trackage and restore and maintain the crossing at its sole cost and expense. SECTION 4. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties hereto, their successors or assigns. Page 3 of 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed in duplicate counterparts, each of which shall be considered as an original, by their duly authorized officers, as of the dates below indicated. CITY OF EDINA a MINNESOTA Municipal corporation APPROVED By: Title: Signature:- Date: SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY d/b/a CANADIAN PACIFIC Recommended for Approval: By: Brian Osbourne Manager - Public Works Date: APPROVED By: Dan Sabatka Director – Projects & Public Works Date: Page 4 of 8 Exhibit A Page 5 of 8 Exhibit B 854251D MP 18.53 , MN&S Spur SUB -Hansen Road WORK NUMBER: OSSING LENGTH:108 LIN FT SSING RAIL WT.:115 LBS (115 or 136) INSTALL CROSSINGS MATERIAL QUANTITY UNIT DESCRIPTION UNIT COST TOTAL COST 001115005 108 FT CROSSING, CONCRETE,115*,OMNI,9FT 232.05$ 25,061.40$ 001115006 0 FT CROSSING, CONCRETE,136*,OMNI,9FT 226.94$ -$ 001278343 73 EA PAD,TIE,GRADE CROSSING,PPI,16 1/2"PANDRL 22.31$ 1,628.63$ 082405050 0 FT RAIL,115*8R,PREMIUM,80'BLNK 15.21$ -$ 082421784 0 FT RAIL,136*8R,PREMIUM,80'BLNK 16.75$ -$ 082405043 300 FT RAIL,115*8R,PREMIUM,CWR 20.87$ 6,261.00$ 082421776 0 FT RAIL,136*8R,PREMIUM,CWR 28.12$ -$ 084710034 0 EA TIE,PRE-PLATED,10'-0",136LB,1:40, US 130.82$ -$ 084100935 100 EA TIE,PRE-PLATED,10'-0",115LB,1:40 CANT 135.98$ 13,598.00$ 002111013 420 EA CLIP,RAIL,PANDROL,E2055 1.78$ 747.60$ 002706001 0 EA RAIL,COMP,136-NEW-115-NEW,UNIVERSAL 1,008.00$ -$ 002706126 0 EA RAIL,COMP,136-NEW-115-3/8",UNIVERSAL 1,261.00$ -$ 001410720 4 EA RAIL,TRANSITION,115*,14/32"701.76$ 2,807.04$ 001410712 0 EA RAIL,TRANSITION,136*,14/32"791.04$ -$ 002303224 16 EA JOINT BAR, 115*,H/R,ROLLED,1 1/16"BOLT,US 48.75$ 780.00$ 002303226 0 EA JOINT BAR,136/132*,H/R,ROLLED,USA 54.70$ -$ 001020561 32 EA BOLT,TRK,1 1/16"X6"2.63$ 84.16$ 001083601 32 EA WASHER,SPR,TRACK BOLT,1 1/16"0.62$ 19.84$ 799OTHER 250 FT 4" steel perforated drain pipe 10.00$ 2,500.00$ 002840256 50 LB SPIKE,TRACK,5/8"X6",BULK 0.46$ 23.00$ 007100628 190 TON BALLAST,GRADE 24 13.65$ 2,593.50$ AL TOTAL COST 56,104.17$ LABOR - INSTALL CROSSING Manhours Burdened Labor ($) Expenses ($)DESCRIPTION UNIT COST TOTAL COST 40 2,320.00$ 680.00$ Remove Existing Crossing Surface 75.00$ 3,000.00$ 120 6,960.00$ 2,040.00$ Build New Track Crossing 75.00$ 9,000.00$ 100 5,800.00$ 1,700.00$ Place and line track panels 75.00$ 7,500.00$ 80 4,640.00$ 1,360.00$ Place new concrete crossing surface 75.00$ 6,000.00$ 40 2,320.00$ 680.00$ Weld transition rails in to place 75.00$ 3,000.00$ OR TOTAL COST 28,500.00$ Equipment Use Crew Hours DESCRIPTION UNIT COST TOTAL COST 80 Utility Crew 125.00$ 10,000.00$ 40 Surfacing Crew 125.00$ 5,000.00$ 20 Welding Crew 125.00$ 2,500.00$ ENT TOTAL COST 17,500.00$ OTHER DESCRIPTION UNIT COST TOTAL COST ternal Equipment Rental, Contractors, etc.-60,000 OTHER TOTAL COST 60,000.00$ TOTAL COST OF REHABILITATION 162,104.17$ Page 6 of 8 Page 7 of 8 Exhibit C STANDARD PROVISIONS FOR HIGHWAY-RAILROAD AGREEMENTS (FEDERAL AID PROJECTS) 1. ALL COMPANY work shall be performed in accordance with the terms, stipulations and conditions contained in the US Department of Transportation, Federal-Aid Highway Program Manual Volume 1, Chapter 4, Section 3 and supplements to or revisions thereafter. 2. The COMPANY, for performance of its work, may bill the ROAD AUTHORITY monthly for the ROAD AUTHORITY’S share of the actual costs and expenses incurred. These progressive invoices may be rendered on the basis of the estimated percentage of the work completed. The ROAD AUTHORITY after verifying that the bill is reasonable and proper shall promptly reimburse the COMPANY. The COMPANY, upon the completion of its work, shall send the ROAD AUTHORITY a detailed final statement of actual expenses it incurred, including allowable additives. After the ROAD AUTHORITY’S representatives have checked the final statement and have agreed that the costs are reasonable and proper insofar as they are able to ascertain, the ROAD AUTHORITY shall reimburse the COMPANY in the amount, less previous payments, if any, equal to the amount billed. After the ROAD AUTHORITY representatives have audited the expenses incurred by the COMPANY and final inspection of the installation has been made, the COMPANY shall reimburse the ROAD AUTHORITY for any item (or items) of expense found by the ROAD AUTHORITY representatives to be ineligible for reimbursement. 3. It is understood that the project herein contemplated shall be subject to all appropriate Federal laws, rules, regulations, orders and approvals pertaining to all agreements in general. The use of said guidelines for reimbursement between the parties hereto shall not be deemed to require reimbursement of the ROAD AUTHORITY by the Federal Highway Administration as a condition precedent to the ROAD AUTHORITY’S obligation. 4. All work herein provided to be done by the ROAD AUTHORITY or its contractor or contractors on the right-of-way or upon, over, under or across the railroad tracks of the COMPANY shall be done in a manner satisfactory to the COMPANY and shall be performed as such time and in such manner as not to interfere unnecessarily with the movement of trains or traffic upon the tracks of the COMPANY. The ROAD AUTHORITY shall require its contractors or contractors to use all care and precaution necessary to avoid accident, damage or interference to the COMPANY’S tracks or the trains or traffic using its tracks, and to notify the COMPANY a sufficient time in advance whenever the contractor is about to perform work adjacent to the track to enable the COMPANY to arrange for the furnishing of flagging and such other protective services as might be necessary to ensure the safety of railroad operations. The COMPANY shall have the right to furnish all such flagging or protective service as in its judgment is necessary, and the ROAD AUTHORITY or its contractor or contractors shall reimburse the COMPANY for the cost thereof. Wherever safeguarding of trains or traffic or the COMPANY is mentioned in this agreement, it is intended to cover all users of the COMPANY’S track having permission for such use. Page 8 of 8 5. The ROAD AUTHORITY shall require its contractor or contractors, upon completion of the work, to remove all machinery, equipment, temporary buildings, false work, debris and rubbish from COMPANY right-of-way, to provide proper drainage away from COMPANY track, and to leave the tracks and right-of-way in a neat condition, satisfactory to the COMPANY’S Chief Engineer or his representative. 6. Any contract between the ROAD AUTHORITY and its contractor or subcontractor to perform the work herein provided to be done by the ROAD AUTHORITY shall require that the contractor or sub-contractor protect SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, and any other railroad occupying or using COMPANY right-of-way or lines of railroad with the permission of the COMPANY, against all loss and damage arising from the activities of the contractor or any of its subcontractors or agents, and shall further provide that the contractor shall furnish the COMPANY a Railroad Protective Liability Insurance policy providing for protection of the COMPANY, in accordance with the Federal-Aid Policy Guide, Title 23, Part 140, Subpart 1 and any supplements to or revisions unless otherwise noted. The limits of the policy shall be not less than $2,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, death, property damage and physical damage to property, with an aggregate limit of not less than $6,000,000 per policy period. The insurance policy shall be delivered to and approved by the COMPANY prior to entry upon or use of its property to commence work upon, over, under, across or adjacent to COMPANY tracks by the contractor. 7. Subsequent to the award of any contract, and before any work is started on this project, a conference shall be held between the representatives of the ROAD AUTHORITY, the COMPANY, and the interested contractor at a time and place designed by the ROAD AUTHORITY for the purpose of coordinating the work to be performed by the several parties and at such time a schedule of operation will be adopted. 8. The COMPANY will credit the ROAD AUTHORITY for the salvage value of all track, communication and signal line material used on a temporary basis during the construction of the project and accepted by the COMPANY for return to its stock. The ROAD AUTHORITY shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to inspect materials recovered by the COMPANY prior to disposal by sale of scrap. 9. When the roadway is to be closed to vehicular traffic while the railroad work is being performed, the ROAD AUTHORITY at its expense shall furnish, erect, maintain and remove the traffic control devices necessary to detour highway traffic after the COMPANY gives two weeks’ advance notice to the ROAD AUTHORITY’S engineer. When the COMPANY is to perform its work while maintaining highway traffic, the ROAD AUTHORITY shall furnish or cause to be furnished, at its expense, the signs, barricades and traffic control devices for erection by the COMPANY after two weeks’ advance notice is given to the ROAD AUTHORITY’S engineer. The COMPANY, at the expense of the ROAD AUTHORITY, shall erect, maintain, relocate and remove the signs, barricades, and other traffic control devices, including the furnishing of flagmen, as required to maintain highway traffic throughout the time the railroad work is being performed. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.E. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Chad A. Millner, P.E., Director of Engineering Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Grandview East Transportation Study Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for Grandview East Transportation Study with SEH for $49,800. INTRODUCTION: This project is part of the condition of approval for 4917 Eden Avenue Development Project. See attached Request for Purchase. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Grandview East Transportation Study Letter Proposal Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100154 Department:Engineering Buyer:Chad Millner Date: 07/06/2021 Requisition Description:Grandview East Transportation Study Vendor:SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPORATED Cost:$49,800.00 REPLACEMENT or NEW:NEW - NEW PURCHASE SOURCE:SERVIC K - SERVICE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION: The project entails a review of alternative TH 100 ramp configurations and roadway alignments in the Grandview East development area directly east of TH 100. This area currently includes a complex roadway network comprising of the northbound TH 100 on/off ramps, W 50th Street, Eden Avenue, Grange Road/ Willson Road, and Dale Drive. The study includes analysis of traffic operations, preliminary concept drawings, and preliminary cost estimates for each alternative roadway configuration. BUDGET IMPACT: This project will funded from the Engineering Department Transportation Professional Services. 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT: Unknown until completion and possible implementation of the recommendations from the study. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: NA Service Contract Engineers | Architects | Planners | Scientists Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 10400 Yellow Circle Drive, Suite 500, Minnetonka, MN 55343-9302 952.912.2600 | 800.734.6757 | 888.908.8166 fax | sehinc.com SEH is 100% employee-owned | Affirmative Action–Equal Opportunity Employer July 12, 2021 RE: City of Edina Grandview East Transportation Study SEH No. 161189 14.00 Mr. Chad Millner, PE Director of Engineering Engineering and Public Works Facility City of Edina 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, MN 55439 Dear Chad: Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH®) appreciates the opportunity to submit the attached proposal for engineering services relative to the referenced project. If accepted, this supplemental letter agreement describes how we will provide these services for a not-to-exceed fee of $49,800.00. This amount is detailed in the fee summary table below and includes our reimbursable expenses. We will bill the City monthly for reimbursable expenses on an hourly basis of labor. We will provide these services in accordance with our Agreement for Professional Engineering Services dated June 4, 2013, herein called the Agreement. The project entails a review of alternative TH 100 ramp configurations and roadway alignments in the Grandview East development area directly east of TH 100. This area currently includes a complex roadway network comprising of the northbound TH 100 on/off ramps, W 50th Street, Eden Avenue, Grange Road/Willson Road, and Dale Drive. The study includes analysis of traffic operations, preliminary concept drawings, and preliminary cost estimates for each alternative roadway configuration. Refer to the attached graphic. Our scope will include the following tasks: Safety Review o Obtain crash history (past five years) at all study intersections: 50th St and Grange Rd 50th St and Dale Dr 50th St and Eden Ave Eden Ave and City Hall driveway Eden Ave and Willson Rd/Grange Dr TH 100 Ramps with Grange Dr Trip Generation o Apply data provided in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition Rates to estimate trip generations for the following proposed development: 5100 Eden Ave Residential Development: 1.38 acres of 100 units per acre 5146 Eden Ave Residential Development: 3.3 acres of 50 units per acre o Trip generation information for the proposed Residential & Restaurant Development (Existing Perkins Site) will be obtained from the Wenck/Stantec TIS Mr. Chad Millner, PE July 12, 2021 Page 2 Traffic Operations Analysis o Analyze the AM and PM peak hours for 2024 and 2040 for the following scenarios with both the existing TH 100 ramp configuration and the proposed TH 100 ramp and frontage road configuration: Existing conditions (includes trip generation for proposed development) Eden Ave and Grange Rd (including stop control, mini roundabout, and dog bone roundabout) Grange Dr realignment to connect from Eden Ave to Dale Dr (includes signal/turn lane improvements and 2x1 roundabout) Spot improvements review of the following: Access restrictions at 50th St/Dale Rd and TH 100 ramp/Grange Dr Turn restrictions at 50th St/Eden Ave o Analysis of alternative TH 100 ramp reconfiguration: Fly-over (Half Single-Point-Urban Interchange) ramp to west side of TH 100 Summary Memo & Preliminary Concept Drawings o A final memo will be provided electronically, and will summarize the following discussions: Traffic safety and operations Future roadway/intersection improvement recommendation(s) Multimodal access Impact to public utilities and right-of-way High level concept drawings of each alternative (9 maximum) High level cost evaluation for major work items based on AACE International Cost Estimate Classification System. The project will be considered Class 4 (1%- 15% complete design) which provides a range of costs for each alternative in an accuracy range of -20% to +30%. Schedule Funding opportunities (to be provided by City staff) The following is a summary of the fee required to complete the above scope of work. Tasks Estimated Fee Safety analysis $1,500 Trip generation / organize traffic data & volumes $4,500 Traffic operations analysis $12,000 Develop concepts $12,500 Refine concepts and develop graphics $7,000 Develop cost estimates $5,300 Summary memorandum / recommendations $7,000 Total Supplemental Agreement Amount: $49,800.00 We will complete the scope above by July 26, 2021 which will allow for the presentation and discussion of the study by City staff at the August 6, 2021 City Council meeting. If approved, please prepare and process a final agreement for execution. Please contact me at 319.450.8732 if you have any questions or need additional information. Mr. Chad Millner, PE July 12, 2021 Page 3 Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. William Bauer, PE Toby Muse, PE Project Manager Client Service Manager (Lic. IA, MN, SD) (Lic. MN) Accepted on this ___day of________________, 2021 City of Edina, Minnesota By:_________________________________ Name ___________________________________ Title Approved by the City Council on __________________ ?úA@ Willson RoadHi ghway 100 Fr ont age Road50th Street West Arcadia AvenueEd en A ve nu eGRANDVIEW EAST STUDY AREA G ra n g e R o a d EDINACITY HALL PERKINS Dale DrI 0 200 400100Feet Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.F. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Derik Otten, Facility Manager Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Braemar Ice Arena West Rink Replacement Condenser Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for Braemar Ice Arena West Rink Replacement Condenser with Total Mechanical Systems, Inc. for $35,900. INTRODUCTION: The existing condenser servicing the west rink ice plant has deteriorated and it is causing ammonia to leak into the atmosphere. If left unchecked, the leak has the possibility to become larger and compromise the entire ice making system. P atching the leak is not possible. A replacement compressor was ordered July 7 as this situation was considered an emergency. See attached Request for Purchase. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Braemar Ice Arena West Rink Replacement Condenser Contract Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100155 Department:Engineering Buyer:Derik Otten Date: 07/07/2021 Requisition Description:Braemar Ice Arena West Rink Replacement Condenser Vendor:TOTAL MECHANICAL SYSTEMS INC Cost:$35,900.00 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:QUOTE/BD - QUOTE/BID DESCRIPTION: The existing condenser servicing west rink ice plant has deteriorated it is allowing ammonia to leak into the atmosphere. If left unchecked, the leak has the possibility to become larger and compromise the entire ice making system. Patching of the leak is not possible. A replacement compressor was ordered on 7.7.21 as this situation was considered an emergency. BUDGET IMPACT: The repair will be funded from the ice arena operating budget. 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT: Project will allow continued use of West Rink at Braemar Arena. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: NA. This is a repair to keep rink operating. APRIL 2018 A-1 IB CONTRACT NO. FC 21-16. THIS AGREEMENT made this 21st day of July, 2021, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) and Total Mechanical Services Inc. (“Contractor”). City and Contractor, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, 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. Instructions to Bidders. C. City of Edina General Contract Conditions. D. Addenda numbers E. Specifications prepared by NA. F. Plan sheets NA G. Performance Bond. H. Payment Bond. I. Responsible Contractor Verification of Compliance J. Contractor’s bid dated June 25th, 2021 K. Scope of Work All work associated but not limited to: Shutdown, removal, and disposal of existing condenser unit. Removal of existing unit from current location and delivery to site. All hoisting and rigging. Electrical connections Mechanical Connections Start up, testing and filling of system with ammonia. 30 day warranty on parts and labor Permits, inspections, taxes and fess associated with work. The Contract Documents are to be read and interpreted as a whole. The intent of the Contract Documents is to include all items necessary for the proper execution and completion of the Work and to require Contractor to provide the highest quality and greatest quantity consistent with the Contract Documents. If there are inconsistencies within or among part of the Contract Documents or between the Contract Documents and applicable standards, codes or ordinances, the Contractor shall provide the better quality or greater quantity of Work or comply with the more stringent requirements. 1.1 Before ordering any materials or doing any Work, the Contractor shall verify measurements at the Project site and shall be responsible for the correctness of such measurements. No extra charges or compensation APRIL 2018 A-2 IB will be allowed on account of differences between actual dimensions and the dimensions indicated on the Drawings. Any difference that may be found shall be submitted to the City for resolution before proceeding with the Work. 1.2 If a minor change in the Work is necessary due to actual field conditions, the Contractor shall submit detailed drawings of such departure to the City for approval before making the change. The City shall not be required to make any adjustment to either the Contract Sum or Contract Time because of any failure by the Contractor to comply with the requirements of this paragraph. Actual or alleged conflicts or inconsistencies between the Plans and Specifications or other Contract Documents shall be brought to the City’s attention in writing, prior to performing the affected Work. The City’s directions shall be followed by the Contractor. 2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR. The Contractor shall provide the goods, services, and perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY. The City agrees to pay, and the Contractor agrees to receive and accept payment in accordance with the Contractor’s bid not to exceed $35,900.00 4. PAYMENT PROCEDURES. A. Contractor shall submit Applications for Payment. Applications for Payment will be processed by City as provided in the General Conditions. B. Progress Payments; Retainage. City shall make 95% progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of Contractor’s Applications for Payment during performance of the Work. C. Payments to Subcontractor. (1) Prompt Payment to Subcontractors. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.25, Subd. 4a, the Contractor must pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Contractor’s receipt of payment from the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Contractor must pay interest of 1½ percent per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Contractor shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. (2) Form IC-134 required from general contractor. Minn. Stat. § 290.92 requires that the City of Edina obtain a Withholding Affidavit for Contractors, Form IC-134, before making final payments to Contractors. This form needs to be submitted by the Contractor to the Minnesota Department of Revenue for approval. The form is used to receive certification from the state that the vendor has complied with the requirement to withhold and remit state withholding taxes for employee salaries paid. D. Final Payment. Upon final completion of the Work, City shall pay the remainder of the Contract Price as recommended by City. 5. COMPLETION DATE. The Work must be completed and ready for final payment by TBD. 6. CONTRACTOR’S REPRESENTATIONS. A. Contractor has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents and other related data identified in the Contract Documents. APRIL 2018 A-3 IB B. Contractor has visited the Site and become familiar with and is satisfied as to the general, local, and Site conditions that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. C. Contractor is familiar with and is satisfied as to all federal, state, and local Laws and Regulations that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. D. Contractor has carefully studied all: (1) reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions at or contiguous to the Site and all drawings of physical conditions in or relating to existing surface or subsurface structures at or contiguous to the Site (except Underground Facilities) which have been identified in the General Conditions; and (2) reports and drawings of a Hazardous Environmental Condition, if any, at the Site. E. Contractor has obtained and carefully studied (or assumes responsibility for doing so) all additional or supplementary examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data concerning conditions (surface, subsurface, and underground facilities) at or contiguous to the Site which may affect cost, progress, or performance of the Work or which relate to any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction to be employed by Contractor, including any specific means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction expressly required by the Bidding Documents, and safety precautions and programs incident thereto. F. Contractor does not consider that any further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the performance of the Work at the Contract Price, within the Contract Times, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract Documents. G. Contractor is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by City and others at the Site that relates to the Work as indicated in the Contract Documents. H. Contractor has correlated the information known to Contractor, information and observations obtained from visits to the Site, reports and drawings identified in the Contract Documents, and all additional examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data with the Contract Documents. I. Contractor has given City written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that Contractor has discovered in the Contract Documents, and the written resolution thereof by City is acceptable to Contractor. J. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and conditions for performance and furnishing of the Work. K. Subcontracts: (1) Unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall, upon receipt of the executed Contract Documents, submit in writing to the City the names of the subcontractors proposed for the work. Subcontractors may not be changed except at the request or with the consent of the City. (2) The Contractor is responsible to the City for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's subcontractors, and of their direct and indirect employees, to the same extent as the Contractor is responsible for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's employees. (3) The Contract Documents shall not be construed as creating any contractual relation between the City and any subcontractor. (4) The Contractor shall bind every subcontractor by the terms of the Contract Documents. 7. WARRANTY. The Contractor guarantees that all new equipment warranties as specified within the bid shall be in full force and transferred to the City upon payment by the City. The Contractor shall be held responsible for any and all defects in workmanship, materials, and equipment which may develop in any part of the contracted service, and upon APRIL 2018 A-4 IB proper notification by the City shall immediately replace, without cost to the City, any such faulty part or parts and damage done by reason of the same in accordance with the bid specifications. 8. INDEMNITY. The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any claim made by third parties as a result of the services performed by it. In addition, the Contractor shall reimburse the City for any cost of reasonable attorney’s fees it may incur as a result of any such claims. 9. MISCELLANEOUS. A. Terms used in this Agreement have the meanings stated in the General Conditions. B. City and Contractor each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements, and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. C. Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or unenforceable under any Law or Regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon City and Contractor, who agree that the Contract Documents shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provisions. D. Data Practices/Records. (1) All data created, collected, received, maintained or disseminated for any purpose in the course of this Contract is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, any other applicable state statute, or any state rules adopted to implement the act, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. (2) All books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices to the Contractor and its subcontractors, if any, relative to this Contract are subject to examination by the City. E. Copyright/Patent. Contractor shall defend actions or claims charging infringement of any copyright or patent by reason of the use or adoption of any designs, drawings or specifications supplied by it, and it shall hold harmless the City from loss or damage resulting there from. If the equipment provided by the Contractor pursuant to this Agreement contains software, including that which the manufacturer may have embedded into the hardware as an integral part of the equipment, the Contractor shall pay all software licensing fees. The Contractor shall also pay for all software updating fees for a period of one year following cutover. The Contractor shall have no obligation to pay for such fees thereafter. Nothing in the software license or licensing agreement shall obligate the City to pay any additional fees as a condition for continuing to use the software. F. Assignment. Neither party may assign, sublet, or transfer any interest or obligation in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, and then only upon such terms and conditions as both parties may agree to and set forth in writing. G. Waiver. In the particular event that either party shall at any time or times waive any breach of this Agreement by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or any succeeding breach of this Agreement by either party, whether of the same or any other covenant, condition or obligation. H. Governing Law/Venue. The laws of the State of Minnesota govern the interpretation of this Agreement. In the event of litigation, the exclusive venue shall be in the District Court of the State of Minnesota for Hennepin County. I. Severability. If any provision, term or condition of this Agreement is found to be or becomes unenforceable or invalid, it shall not affect the remaining provisions, terms and conditions of this APRIL 2018 A-5 IB Agreement, unless such invalid or unenforceable provision, term or condition renders this Agreement impossible to perform. Such remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and shall continue to operate as the parties’ entire agreement. J. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties and is a final, complete and all inclusive statement of the terms thereof, and supersedes and terminates any prior agreement(s), understandings or written or verbal representations made between the parties with respect thereto. K. Permits and Licenses; Rights-of-Way and Easements. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees therefore, and give all notices necessary and incidental to the construction and completion of the Project. The City will obtain all necessary rights-of-way and easements. The Contractor shall not be entitled to any additional compensation for any construction delay resulting from the City’s not timely obtaining rights-of-way or easements. L. If the work is delayed or the sequencing of work is altered because of the action or inaction of the City, the Contractor shall be allowed a time extension to complete the work but shall not be entitled to any other compensation. M. Responsible Contractor. This contract may be terminated by the City at any time upon discovery by the City that the prime contractor or subcontractor has submitted a false statement under oath verifying compliance with any of the minimum criteria set forth in Minn Stat. § 16C.285, subd. 3. CITY OF EDINA CONTRACTOR BY: ____________________________ BY: ____________________________ City Manager Its AND ___________________________ Its APRIL 2018 D-1 IB Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.G. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Derik Otten, Facility Manager Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: 50th and France District Improvements Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for 50th and France District Improvements with Pember Construction for $108,111. INTRODUCTION: The 50th and France District Improvements include south ramp guardrail repairs, paver walkway replacement, and concrete apron replacement. See attached Request for Purchase. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: 50th and France District Improvements Contract Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100156 Department:Engineering Buyer:Derik Otten Date: 07/07/2021 Requisition Description:50th & France District Improvements Vendor:PEMBER COMPANIES INC Cost:$108,111.10 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:QUOTE/BD - QUOTE/BID DESCRIPTION: Repair and replacement of paver sidewalk along 50th street near Lunds, concrete driveway apron into Lunds, and a guardrail in the south parking ramp in the 50th and France District. BUDGET IMPACT: The funding is split approximately 70% assessed to business district and 30% from the storm sewer fund. 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT: Required maintenance within the district to meet the expectations of the users. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:NA 1 1/2015 CONTRACT NO. FC 21-05 2021 District Improvements THIS AGREEMENT made this 21st day of July, 2021, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”) and Pember Companies, N4449 469th Street, Menomonie, WI 54751 (“Contractor”). City and Contractor, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein, 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. Instructions to Bidders. C. City of Edina General Contract Conditions. E. Specifications prepared by Chad A. Millner, P.E. dated June 11, 2021 F. Plan sheets numbered 1 to 6. G. Performance Bond. H. Payment Bond. I. Responsible Contractor Verification of Compliance J. Contractor’s Bid dated June 30, 2021. Schedules A, B, & C The Contract Documents are to be read and interpreted as a whole. The intent of the Contract Documents is to include all items necessary for the proper execution and completion of the Work and to require Contractor to provide the highest quality and greatest quantity consistent with the Contract Documents. If there are inconsistencies within or among part of the Contract Documents or between the Contract Documents and applicable standards, codes or ordinances, the Contractor shall provide the better quality or greater quantity of Work or comply with the more stringent requirements. 1.1 Before ordering any materials or doing any Work, the Contractor shall verify measurements at the Project site and shall be responsible for the correctness of such measurements. No extra charges or compensation will be allowed on account of differences between actual dimensions and the dimensions indicated on the Drawings. Any difference that may be found shall be submitted to the City for resolution before proceeding with the Work. 1.2 If a minor change in the Work is necessary due to actual field conditions, the Contractor shall submit detailed drawings of such departure to the City for approval before making the change. The City shall not be required to make any adjustment to either the Contract Sum or Contract Time because of any failure by the Contractor to comply with the requirements of this paragraph. Actual or alleged conflicts or inconsistencies between the Plans and Specifications or other Contract Documents shall be brought to the City’s attention in writing, prior to performing the affected Work. The City’s directions shall be followed by the Contractor. 2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CONTRACTOR. The Contractor shall provide the goods, services, and perform the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY. The City agrees to pay and the Contractor agrees to receive and accept payment in accordance with the Contractor’s bid $108,111.10 2 1/2015 4. PAYMENT PROCEDURES. A. Contractor shall submit Applications for Payment. Applications for Payment will be processed by City as provided in the General Conditions. B. Progress Payments; Retainage. City shall make 95% progress payments on account of the Contract Price on the basis of Contractor’s Applications for Payment during performance of the Work. C. Payments to Subcontractor. (1) Prompt Payment to Subcontractors. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.25, Subd. 4a, the Contractor must pay any subcontractor within ten (10) days of the Contractor’s receipt of payment from the City for undisputed services provided by the subcontractor. The Contractor must pay interest of 1½ percent per month or any part of a month to the subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of $100.00 or more is $10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Contractor shall pay the actual penalty due to the subcontractor. (2) Form IC-134 required from general contractor. Minn. Stat. § 290.92 requires that the City of Edina obtain a Withholding Affidavit for Contractors, Form IC-134, before making final payments to Contractors. This form needs to be submitted by the Contractor to the Minnesota Department of Revenue for approval. The form is used to receive certification from the state that the vendor has complied with the requirement to withhold and remit state withholding taxes for employee salaries paid. D. Final Payment. Upon final completion of the Work, City shall pay the remainder of the Contract Price as recommended by City. 5. COMPLETION DATE. The Work must be completed and ready for final payment by September 02, 2021. 6. CONTRACTOR’S REPRESENTATIONS. A. Contractor has examined and carefully studied the Contract Documents and other related data identified in the Contract Documents. B. Contractor has visited the Site and become familiar with and is satisfied as to the general, local, and Site conditions that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. C. Contractor is familiar with and is satisfied as to all federal, state, and local Laws and Regulations that may affect cost, progress, and performance of the Work. D. Contractor has carefully studied all: (1) reports of explorations and tests of subsurface conditions at or contiguous to the Site and all drawings of physical conditions in or relating to existing surface or subsurface structures at or contiguous to the Site (except Underground Facilities) which have been identified in the General Conditions; and (2) reports and drawings of a Hazardous Environmental Condition, if any, at the Site. E. Contractor has obtained and carefully studied (or assumes responsibility for doing so) all additional or supplementary examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data concerning conditions (surface, subsurface, and underground facilities) at or contiguous to the Site which may affect cost, progress, or performance of the Work or which relate to any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction to be employed by Contractor, including any specific means, 3 1/2015 methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures of construction expressly required by the Bidding Documents, and safety precautions and programs incident thereto. F. Contractor does not consider that any further examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, or data are necessary for the performance of the Work at the Contract Price, within the Contract Times, and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of the Contract Documents. G. Contractor is aware of the general nature of work to be performed by City and others at the Site that relates to the Work as indicated in the Contract Documents. H. Contractor has correlated the information known to Contractor, information and observations obtained from visits to the Site, reports and drawings identified in the Contract Documents, and all additional examinations, investigations, explorations, tests, studies, and data with the Contract Documents. I. Contractor has given City written notice of all conflicts, errors, ambiguities, or discrepancies that Contractor has discovered in the Contract Documents, and the written resolution thereof by City is acceptable to Contractor. J. The Contract Documents are generally sufficient to indicate and convey understanding of all terms and conditions for performance and furnishing of the Work. K. Subcontracts: (1) Unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents, the Contractor shall, upon receipt of the executed Contract Documents, submit in writing to the City the names of the subcontractors proposed for the work. Subcontractors may not be changed except at the request or with the consent of the City. (2) The Contractor is responsible to the City for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's subcontractors, and of their direct and indirect employees, to the same extent as the Contractor is responsible for the acts and omissions of the Contractor's employees. (3) The Contract Documents shall not be construed as creating any contractual relation between the City and any subcontractor. (4) The Contractor shall bind every subcontractor by the terms of the Contract Documents. 7. WARRANTY. The Contractor guarantees that all new equipment warranties as specified within the bid shall be in full force and transferred to the City upon payment by the City. The Contractor shall be held responsible for any and all defects in workmanship, materials, and equipment which may develop in any part of the contracted service, and upon proper notification by the City shall immediately replace, without cost to the City, any such faulty part or parts and damage done by reason of the same in accordance with the bid specifications. 8. INDEMNITY. The Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any claim made by third parties as a result of the services performed by it. In addition, the Contractor shall reimburse the City for any cost of reasonable attorney’s fees it may incur as a result of any such claims. 9. MISCELLANEOUS. A. Terms used in this Agreement have the meanings stated in the General Conditions. B. City and Contractor each binds itself, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives to the other party hereto, its partners, successors, assigns and legal representatives in respect to all covenants, agreements, and obligations contained in the Contract Documents. C. Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or unenforceable under any Law or Regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon City and Contractor, who agree that the Contract Documents shall be reformed to replace such 4 1/2015 stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provisions. D. Data Practices/Records. (1) All data created, collected, received, maintained or disseminated for any purpose in the course of this Contract is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 13, any other applicable state statute, or any state rules adopted to implement the act, as well as federal regulations on data privacy. (2) All books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices to the Contractor and its subcontractors, if any, relative to this Contract are subject to examination by the City. E. Copyright/Patent. Contractor shall defend actions or claims charging infringement of any copyright or patent by reason of the use or adoption of any designs, drawings or specifications supplied by it, and it shall hold harmless the City from loss or damage resulting there from. If the equipment provided by the Contractor pursuant to this Agreement contains software, including that which the manufacturer may have embedded into the hardware as an integral part of the equipment, the Contractor shall pay all software licensing fees. The Contractor shall also pay for all software updating fees for a period of one year following cutover. The Contractor shall have no obligation to pay for such fees thereafter. Nothing in the software license or licensing agreement shall obligate the City to pay any additional fees as a condition for continuing to use the software. F. Assignment. Neither party may assign, sublet, or transfer any interest or obligation in this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party, and then only upon such terms and conditions as both parties may agree to and set forth in writing. G. Waiver. In the particular event that either party shall at any time or times waive any breach of this Agreement by the other, such waiver shall not constitute a waiver of any other or any succeeding breach of this Agreement by either party, whether of the same or any other covenant, condition or obligation. H. Governing Law/Venue. The laws of the State of Minnesota govern the interpretation of this Agreement. In the event of litigation, the exclusive venue shall be in the District Court of the State of Minnesota for Hennepin County. I. Severability. If any provision, term or condition of this Agreement is found to be or becomes unenforceable or invalid, it shall not affect the remaining provisions, terms and conditions of this Agreement, unless such invalid or unenforceable provision, term or condition renders this Agreement impossible to perform. Such remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and shall continue to operate as the parties’ entire agreement. J. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties and is a final, complete and all inclusive statement of the terms thereof, and supersedes and terminates any prior agreement(s), understandings or written or verbal representations made between the parties with respect thereto. K. Permits and Licenses; Rights-of-Way and Easements. The Contractor shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees therefore, and give all notices necessary and incidental to the construction and completion of the Project. The City will obtain all necessary rights-of-way and easements. The Contractor shall not be entitled to any additional compensation for any construction delay resulting from the City’s not timely obtaining rights-of-way or easements. L. If the work is delayed or the sequencing of work is altered because of the action or inaction of the City, the Contractor shall be allowed a time extension to complete the work but shall not be entitled to any other compensation. 5 1/2015 M. Responsible Contractor. This contract may be terminated by the City at any time upon discovery by the City that the prime contractor or subcontractor has submitted a false statement under oath verifying compliance with any of the minimum criteria set forth in Minn Stat. § 16C.285, subd. 3. CITY OF EDINA CONTRACTOR BY: ____________________________ BY: ____________________________ Its Mayor Its AND ___________________________ AND ___________________________ Its City Manager Its Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.H. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Aaron T. Ditzler, PE, Assistant City Engineer Item Activity: Subject:Approve Minnehaha Creek Utility Crossing License Agreement with the State of Minnesota Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Minnehaha Creek Utility Crossing License Agreement with the State of Minnesota. INTRODUCTION: As part of the Creek Knoll Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction improvements, a watermain is being installed under Minnehaha Creek to support fire flow and water quality, and add operational redundancy to the water system in case of a watermain break. Due to the improvements, the City is required to obtain a license for utility to cross public waters, which includes requirements for construction, maintenance and operations of the utility. ATTACHMENTS: Description Utility Crossing License Agreement 1 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT LICENSE NUMBER #UWAT012479 OF NATURAL RESOURCES COMPANY PROJECT NO. BA-21-1 LICENSE FOR UTILITY TO CROSS PUBLIC WATERS This license is issued by the State of Minnesota, acting by and through its commissioner of natural resources, and hereafter called the “State”, under authority and subject to Minnesota Statutes, section 84.415, and Minnesota Rules Chapter 6135 and other applicable law, to the Licensee as named and for the fee and term as specified below. Name and Address of Licensee: City of Edina 7450 Metro Boulevard Edina, Minnesota 55439 License Fee: Two Hundred Thirty Seven Dollars and no/100. . . . . . . . . ($237.00) Term (years): 50 Effective Date: June 15, 2021 Expiration Date: June 14, 2071 Purpose of License: Construction, maintenance and operation of a liquids pipeline under water under the covenants and agreements of the Licensee to use the following described waters: That part of the NE1/4 NW1/4 in Section 20, Township 28 North, Range 24 West in Hennepin County as shown on the attached application and map, all of which are made a part hereof by reference. This license is granted subject to the following provisions: 1. Use of premises. A. This license is subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, section 84.415 and Minnesota Rules Chapter 6135. All standards of Chapter 6135 are incorporated as terms and conditions of this license, except such variations as are identified and approved by the State in the license applications, plans and specifications which are attached and made part of the terms and conditions of this license. The Licensee is bound by the crossing location and installation method as detailed in the application and approved by the State. The Licensee shall not deviate from the terms and conditions of this license or the application as approved by the State unless it has first obtained written permission from the State. B. When the installation occurs more than six months after the issuance of the license, the Licensee shall contact the State 20 days prior to installation. C. No merchantable timber shall be cut, used, removed or destroyed without first paying the State the timber value in the sum stated above as determined by the State. Slash material on state water crossings must be disposed of within 30 days of clearing activities. D. For overhead crossings of state waters, lines shall have a minimum clearance of 25 feet above the water, unless otherwise approved by the State. E. When directed by the State as a condition of the license, flight diverters shall be placed on overhead utility lines. F. Any cable or conduit located at a shoreline shall be sufficiently buried so that it does not become exposed. G. When directed by the State as a condition of the license, underwater crossings shall be marked by permanent signs on the banks at the points where the line enters and leaves the public waters. H. To protect fish spawning activities, the State may prohibit work in the public water or within a specified distance of the public water during the spawning season. 2. State’s rights and reservations. The use of these waters by the Licensee in constructing or maintaining the lines for which this license is granted shall be subject to the use, sale, or leasing for mineral or other legal purposes. The Licensee will not cause any unnecessary hindrance to the activities of the State and shall allow access across the license area by the State when needed. 2 3. Erosion and Revegetation. A. Erosion control measures shall be adequately designed for site characteristics. They shall be installed prior to commencement of construction and maintained for as long as needed. All erosion control measures installed next to a water body shall run parallel to the contours. B. All disturbed areas shall be restored to original contours and elevations and stabilized as soon as possible following construction. Areas of subsidence and crowing shall be repaired. Topsoil shall be reserved on site and used to re-dress disturbed areas. C. All disturbed areas shall be revegetated using state approved seed mixes. All seed and plant materials shall be certified weed-free. Weed-free straw or hay shall be used for mulching and erosion control. Native species plants should be used, whenever possible, to revegetate disturbed areas. This revegetation should occur as early in the season as possible to permit adequate regrowth. D. The Licensee shall monitor revegetation at state water crossings until the site is stabilized and the vegetation is self-sustaining. Where severe or repeated damage is occurring or where measures have not been successful, preventative and corrective actions shall be taken by the Licensee, including construction of appropriate barriers, installation of warning signs, and other methods in consultation with the State. E. The Licensee shall routinely inspect for erosion that may develop during the term of the license. Areas of erosion shall be stabilized by the Licensee. F. If a disturbed area cannot be stabilized with vegetation before September 15 in the year that the utility was installed, the Licensee shall submit a written site stabilization plan to the State for approval. This plan shall describe erosion control, mulching, dormant seeding and monitoring. Seeding shall occur as soon as soil conditions are suitable. G. Excavated materials shall not be deposited or stored alongside public water in a manner where the materials can be redeposited into the public water by reasonably expected high water or storm run-off. 4. Herbicides and Pesticides. A. The Licensee must request and obtain written permission to apply herbicides or pesticides to state waters from the State prior to treatment. This request shall consist of (1) a map identifying proposed treatment areas and (2) a description of the proposed treatment plan, including target species, herbicide or pesticide name, rate of application, a description of application method, and beginning and end dates. All applications must be according to label regulations and as otherwise specified by the State. The Licensee shall not apply pesticides that are restricted for use on certified state forest land administered by the State. B. The Licensee must submit annual reports detailing herbicide or pesticide application on areas covered under the license. The report must include the dates, acres, location expressed as quarter-quarter section, township and range, herbicide or pesticide used, target species, and such other information as may be reasonably required by the State for the purpose of verifying herbicide or pesticide use. C. The Licensee shall post all places commonly used by the public for access along the utility corridors treated with herbicides or pesticides. 5. Invasive Species. A. The Licensee shall inspect all state water crossings for the presence of invasive species and noxious weeds prior to commencing clearing activities and take action to prevent their spread. For installation of the utility line, the State will identify on a map the known infested sites to be avoided. For maintenance and operation, the Licensee is responsible for obtaining updated information on known infested sites. B. If the State or the Licensee discover additional invasive species infestation areas on state water crossings during construction, the Licensee shall immediately take action to prevent spread from the newly discovered infested area and then consult with the State on a resolution. C. The Licensee shall prevent invasive species from entering into or spreading within state water crossing by cleaning equipment and clothing prior to arriving at the license area. The Licensee shall legally dispose of material cleaned from equipment and clothing at a location offsite and the materials must be secured prior to transport to avoid dispersal. D. Whenever possible, parking, staging areas and travel routes shall not be within known infested sites. Where there are multiple state water crossings and at least one contains invasive species, the Licensee shall to the extent practicable start work at the site with the fewest number of invasive plants, leaving the most heavily infested sites to last. The Licensee shall make every effort to schedule operations and site visits to avoid the spread of weed seed. 3 E. The Licensee shall continue to control invasive species on state water crossings for the terms of the license using methods approved by the State. 6. Crossing of State Trail. A. The location of any crossing of a state trail must be approved in advance by the State. The State may provide written instructions as to specific construction standards to be followed for the crossing of the state trail. B. Utility installation and maintenance activities shall be conducted in a manner so as to minimize disturbance of state trail use and to separate the public from work areas. The Licensee must provide signs to warn state trail users of construction hazards. C. The Licensee is responsible for repairing any damage to the state trail in a manner satisfactory to the State. D. For maintenance and operations, prior approval must be obtained from the State for the cutting or trimming of trees within the state trail right-of-way. E. The Licensee may not close the state trail right-of-way without the prior written approval of the State. 7. Maintenance, operations and repairs. A. The Licensee must keep the premises in a neat and orderly condition, and shall remove all refuse and debris that may accumulate thereon. B. After initial installation, no merchantable timber shall be cut, used, removed or destroyed by the Licensee without first contacting the State at least 60 days in advance to determine if a timber payment is needed. Slash material on state water crossings must be disposed of within 30 days of maintenance activities. C. Emergency repairs and replacements may be made without prior notification to the State by the Licensee according to conditions and standards prescribed by Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6135 and the method of installation identified in this license. The Licensee shall notify the State of this activity as soon as practicable. D. The Licensee shall employ appropriate erosion and sedimentation measures at the site during any emergency repairs. The State must approve plans for restoration of the site after the emergency repairs are conducted. E. Other than the herbicide or pesticide application reporting as provided in paragraph 4, the Licensee shall notify the State of the extent and method of any routine maintenance and the proposed schedule. The notification must be in writing and must be provided either annually or at least 20 days prior to commencing any routine maintenance work on state water crossings subject to this license, The Licensee shall include a specific description of the proposed maintenance activities including location, clearing methods, erosion and sedimentation control measures, removal of merchantable timber, revegetation plans, and plans for preventing the spread of invasive species. The Licensee may commence any routine maintenance work unless notified to the contrary by the State within 20 days after the State’s receipt of the maintenance plan. The State may require the Licensee to adjust its maintenance plans due to natural resource management concerns. 8. State inspection. The project hereunder shall at all times during and after construction is subject to inspection by the State and for that purpose the Licensee shall grant access to the premises at all reasonable times. 9. Compliance with laws. The Licensee shall comply with all federal, state and local laws and regulations, including municipal ordinances, affecting said lands or the area in which they are situated. 10. Taxes and assessments. The Licensee will pay when due all taxes and assessments levied against said waters or any improvements owned, used, or controlled by the Licensee, provided that the taxes or assessments are imposed due to this license. 11. Enforcement. No delay by the State in enforcing any of the conditions of this license shall operate as a waiver of any of its rights. 12. Liability. This license is permissive only. No liability shall be imposed upon or incurred by the State of Minnesota or any of its officers, agents, or employees, officially or personally, on account of the granting of the license or on account of any damage to any person or property resulting from any act or omission of the Licensee or any of its agents, employees, or contractors relating to any license matter. This license shall not be construed as estopping or limiting any legal claims or right of action of any person against the Licensee, its agents, employees, or contractors for any damage or injury resulting from any such act or omission, or as estopping or limiting any legal claim or right of action of the State against the Licensee, its agents, employees, or contractors, for violation of or failure to comply with the provisions of the license or applicable provisions of law. The Licensee shall indemnify and hold harmless 4 the State from all claims arising out of the Licensee's use of the above described lands whether such claims are asserted by civil action or otherwise. 13. Termination and cancellation. A. At the end of the license period and if both parties wish to renew, the renewal fee will be determined by the State. B. This license shall be cancelable upon reasonable notice by the State for violation of any of its terms, or if at any time its continuance will conflict with a public use of the land over or upon which it is granted, or for any other reason. Licensee shall ensure that Licensee's employees, agents and contractors have received and thoroughly understand all conditions of this license. C. Unless otherwise authorized by the State, upon the surrender, expiration or cancellation of this license, the Licensee shall remove from the above described lands all the utility lines and related structures owned by it. If Licensee does not remove such lines or related structures, all such lines or structures remaining shall become the property of the State, to be used or disposed of as the State elects. If the State requires the Licensee to remove utility lines and related structures and Licensee fails to do so, the Licensee agrees to pay the State for the costs of removing and disposing of such lines or structures. 14. Assignment or transfer. The Licensee shall not without the State's prior written consent: a) assign, convey or otherwise transfer this license or any interest under it; b) sublet the license corridor or any part thereof; or c) permit the use or occupancy of the license corridor or any part thereof by anyone other than the Licensee. This license shall extend to, and bind the successors, heirs, legal representatives and assigns of the Licensee, if any. The State may require a party who has requested to sublet, use or occupy the license corridor to obtain a separate license from the State prior to occupying or using the license corridor. 15. Reports. The Licensee must submit reports on herbicide and pesticide use as provided in paragraph 4 and maintenance and repair work as provided in paragraph 7. 16. Contacts. The contact for the State is the Regional Lands and Minerals Operations Supervisor, who is Joey Rokala at (218) 328-8923. Any questions about this license shall be directed to the Regional Lands and Minerals Operations Supervisor. The Regional Lands and Minerals Operations Supervisor may direct the Licensee to contact additional State staff for reviews and approvals. 17. Special provisions. This license is subject to the SPECIAL PROVISIONS attached hereto (if none, state none). None ACCEPTED AND ACKNOWLEDGED STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CITY OF EDINA Licensee(s) By By _________________________________________ Regional Lands and Minerals Operations Supervisor Title ____________________________________ Date ____________________________________ By ___________________________________ Title____________________________________ Date ____________________________________ Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.I. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Chad A. Millner, P.E., Director of Engineering Item Activity: Subject:Approve Encroachment Agreement with 5616 Parkwood Lane Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Encroachment Agreement with 5616 Parkwood Lane for a heated driveway system located in the right- of-way. INTRODUCTION: See attached agreement. ATTACHMENTS: Description Encroachment Agreement 216443v1 1 (reserved for recording information) ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT AGREEMENT made this ____ day of _____________, 2021, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation (“City”), and JOHN S. CROUCH and BONNIE W. CROUCH, spouses married to each other (“Owners”). 1. BACKGROUND. Owners are the fee owners of certain real property located in the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described as follows: Parcel ID No. 31-117-21-24-0066 Lot 1, Block 5, Parkwood Knolls 19th Addition (COT 770072) having a street address of 5616 Parkwood Lane, Edina, Minnesota 55436 (“Subject Property”). The City owns easements for drainage and utility purposes over portions of the Subject Property (“Easement Areas”). Owners desire to install a heated driveway on the Subject Property which will encroach on the City’s Easement Areas as depicted on the attached Exhibit “A”. 2. ENCROACHMENT AUTHORIZATION. The City hereby approves the encroachment in the Easement Areas on the Subject Property for the heated driveway subject to the conditions set forth in this Agreement. Further conditions of encroachment approval are: 216443v1 2 • The City shall have no responsibility to repair, replace or maintain the heated driveway located within the Easement Areas. • The heated driveway located on the Subject Property must not impact or increase water drainage on the abutting properties or cause any adverse drainage patterns or erosion to the abutting properties. • The Owners, their heirs, successors and assigns, are fully responsible and liable for any and all damage caused to the heated driveway because of it being installed in the Easement Areas. • The owners of the Subject Property will own and maintain the heated driveway. Further, Owners agree that the heated driveway shall be constructed and installed consistent with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. 3. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNITY. In consideration of being allowed to encroach in the Easement Areas, the Owners, for themselves, their heirs and assigns, hereby agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from any damage caused to the Subject Property, including the heated driveway in the Easement Areas, caused in whole or in part by the encroachment into the City's Easement Areas. 4. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time if it is reasonably necessary for the City to occupy the Easement Areas for drainage or utility purposes and the heated driveway is inconsistent with the City’ s use of the easements. Prior to termination, the City will give the then owner of the Subject Property thirty (30) days advance written notice, except that no notice period will be required in the case of an emergency condition as determined solely by the City and this Agreement may then be terminated immediately. The property owner shall remove that portion of the heated driveway to the extent it impacts the Easement Areas to the effective date of the termination of this Agreement. If the owner fails to do so, the City may remove the heated driveway to the extent it impacts the Easement Areas and charge the cost of removal back to the owner for reimbursement. 216443v1 3 5. RECORDING. This Agreement shall run with the land and shall be recorded against the title to the Subject Property. CITY OF EDINA By ___________________________________ (SEAL) James Hovland, Mayor And __________________________________ Scott Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of __________________, 2021, by James Hovland and by Scott Neal, respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Edina, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. ____________________________________ Notary Public 216443v1 4 PROPERTY OWNERS: _____________________________________ John S. Crouch _____________________________________ Bonnie W. Crouch STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF ____________ ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of __________________, 2021, by John S. Crouch and Bonnie W. Crouch, spouses married to each other. ____________________________________ Notary Public DRAFTED BY: CAMPBELL KNUTSON, Professional Association Grand Oak Office Center I 860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 216443v1 5 EXHIBIT “A” TO ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.J. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Nick Bauler, Traffic Safety Coordinator Item Activity: Subject:Approve Traffic Safety Report of May 21, 2021 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the Traffic Safety Report of May 21, 2021. INTRODUCTION: The Transportation Commission reviewed the report at their June 17 regular meeting; comments are included in the attached staff report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Traffic Safety Report of May 21, 2021 July 21, 2021 Mayor and City Council Nick Bauler, Traffic Safety Coordinator Traffic Safety Report of May 21, 2021 Information / Background: The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) review of traffic safety matters occurred on May 21. The Traffic Safety Coordinator, City Engineer, Streets Public Service Worker, Transportation Planner, Police Sergeant, Public Works Director and Assistant City Planner were in attendance for these meetings. On each of the items, persons involved have been contacted and the staff recommendation has been discussed with them. They were informed that if they disagree with the recommendation or have additional facts to present, they can submit correspondence to the Transportation Commission and/or to City Council prior to the July 21 regular meeting. Section A: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends action A1. Traffic calming requests for W 70th Street • A patrol officer noted many speed concerns between Antrim Road and Metro Boulevard. • Bike lanes, sidewalks and the NMC Regional Trail are present along W 70th Street. • Two eastbound and westbound speed limit signs are posted. • ADT and 85% speed in 2021 were 8,400 and 40.9 mph, respectively. • Residents have reported vehicles passing cued left-turning vehicles in bike lanes. • Requesting added speed limit signs, updated crosswalk markings and a radar speed display. • 4 crashes have been reported on W 70th Street since 2016. Staff recommends relocating the western-most speed limit sign further east to improve visibility. This relocation will occur as part of the citywide speed limit implementation project anticipated to begin Fall 2021. W 70th Street. Red circles = eastbound speed limit signs Blue diamonds = westbound speed limit signs STAFF REPORT Page 2 A2. Traffic calming request for W 72nd Street • Resident concerned with vehicle speeds and noise due to road quality. • Previously reviewed in August 2020 i. ADT: 1,865 ii. 85% speed: 33.8 mph iii. Recommended police enforcement and speed trailer iv. Anticipated street reconstruction in next 10 years • No speed limit sign is posted when entering from France Avenue. Staff recommends adding a 25-mph speed limit sign for westbound traffic from France Avenue. The sign will be installed as part of the citywide speed limit implementation project anticipated to begin Fall 2021. Section B: Items on which the Traffic Safety Committee recommends no action B1. Request for alternative temporary accessible parking signs for the Church of St. Stephen • Maintenance worker at church has difficulties utilizing heavy, temporary accessible parking signs on weekends adjacent to property on W 50th Street and Wooddale Avenue. • The temporary signs are generally posted on weekends only. • On-street parking on Wooddale Avenue is restricted 7-9 am and 4-6 pm on weekdays. • Requesting in-ground signposts to facilitate quick placement/removal of temporary accessible parking signs. Staff recommends continued use of the church’s temporary signage. Staff would consider installing permanent signage if desired by the church. B2. Request for entrance/exit restrictions at the Holiday gas station on Interlachen Boulevard • Resident who lives near intersection is complaining of traffic flow and horn honking. • Holiday has two entrance/exits on Interlachen Boulevard between Brookside and Vernon Avenues. • Interlachen Boulevard has three southbound lanes and one northbound. • ADT on Interlachen Boulevard 11,900. • Four accidents have been reported on this block in the last 10 years. • The Transportation Commission recommended consideration of alternative solutions aside from closing driveway access. Staff recommends no action as the driveways provide necessary and reasonable access for gas station operations. Church of St. Stephen Interlachen Boulevard, looking north from Vernon Avenue W 72nd Street STAFF REPORT Page 3 B3. Continued traffic calming requests on Maloney Avenue • Residents concerned with nearby closures/detours due to Southwest LRT project. • ADT and 85% speed in 2021 were 2,400 and 34.5 mph, respectively. • September 2019 data from speed trailer i. ADT: 1,620 (westbound only) ii. 85% speed: 31.4 mph • Maloney Avenue is 24.5’ wide (face to face of curb) with parking restricted on both sides. • White fog lines were installed in 2016 that narrowed the drive lanes to 11’. • The current speed limit is 30 mph; it is recommended to be reduced to 25 as part of the citywide speed limit implementation project. Staff continues to recommend police enforcement with no permanent changes. Section D: Other traffic safety items handled D1. An all-way stop was requested at W 59th Street and York Avenue. Residents have concerns with non- local traffic on York Avenue and requested stop controls to deter such traffic. ADT and 85% speeds are 160 and 23.9 mph, respectively. Stop controls are not warranted for this intersection. D2. A resident was concerned with non-local traffic on Chowen Avenue between W 58th and W 60th Streets. ADT and 85% speed are 187 and 29.8 mph, respectively. Volume and speed are reasonable for a local street; no action is needed. D3. Three residents requested stop controls at the intersection of W 55th Street and Oaklawn Avenue. In August 2020, City Council approved the recommendation of no action as no warrants were met. Staff continues with this recommendation as there is no expected traffic change in the area. D4. A resident building a new home on Oaklawn Avenue requested to relocate a disabled child sign in front of their home. The sign is unable to be moved due underground utilities, visibility and distance from the resident who requested the sign. D5. A commuter submitted a concern about a pothole on Highway 100. Their information was submitted to MnDOT’s pothole reporting website for action. D6. An all-way stop was requested at Oaklawn Avenue and W 56th Street to address concerns about speeding and safety of kids in the neighborhood. Oaklawn Avenue is currently stop-controlled; all-way stop control is not warranted for this intersection. D7. A resident on W 56th Street west of Highway 100 was concerned with increased traffic, speeds and noise due to nearby construction in the Melody Lake neighborhood. Speeds observed by radar detector were reasonable for this local street. An increase traffic and noise is common with a nearby street reconstruction project, but it is only a temporary condition. D8. A request was made for traffic signals to be installed at the intersection of Eden Avenue and Normandale Road/Arcadia Avenue to improve safety, especially for children. A roundabout is anticipated for construction at this intersection in 2022. Maloney Avenue STAFF REPORT Page 4 D9. A resident submitted two complaints about a nearby house contractor leaving mud and oil in the street on St. Johns Avenue. The Residential Redevelopment Coordinator was informed and contacted the contractor to address the issues. D10. Police enforcement was requested at an all-way stop at Gleason Road and Schey Drive. This request was referred to the EPD. D11. Two submissions were received regarding an open roadwork project on Interlachen Boulevard near Interlachen Bluff. Public Works repaired a watermain leak and fixed the roadway. D12. The speed trailer was requested to be deployed on eastbound Valley View Road west of Wooddale Avenue to address vehicle speeds. This request was referred to EPD. D13. A resident was concerned with vehicle speeds on Highwood Drive due to a road closure on Blake Road. The resident requested signage to inform drivers to lower their speed. This request was referred to EPD for possible increased police presence. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.K. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Brian E. Olson, Public Works Director Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Manhole Lining on W. 60th Street Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for manhole lining on W. 60th Street with Total Coating Solutions for $26,800. INTRODUCTION: This purchase is for lining of sanitary manholes in mill and overlay section of W. 60th Street. See attached Request for Purchase. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Manhole Lining on W. 60th Street Request for Purchase Requisition Number Environmental Impact - item specific: 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100146 Department:Public Works Buyer:Brian Olson Date: 06/15/2021 Requisition Description:Manhole lining on 60th St W Vendor:TOTAL COATING SOLUTIONS Cost:$26,800.00 REPLACEMENT or NEW:- PURCHASE SOURCE:QUOTE/BD - QUOTE/BID DESCRIPTION:Manhole lining services, improve infrastructure, M&O project BUDGET IMPACT: 59159105.6180 Vehicle - Make/Model/Year requested vehicle: Vehicle - Make/Model/Year current vehicle (if replacement): Vehicle - Does purchase meet Green Fleet Recommendations? - Vehicle - If does not meet Green Fleet Recommendations, justification: - MPG: Carbon Emissions: 2 Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.L. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Brian E. Olson, Public Works Director Item Activity: Subject:Approve Amended Service Line Warranty Program Agreement Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve amended Service Line Warranty Program agreement. INTRODUCTION: As discussed at the June 15 City Council meeting, staff worked with Utility Service Partners Private Label to provide the attached amendment to the original marketing agreement eliminating the royalty payment and passing that savings onto the customers of Edina. Staff recommends approval authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute the attached amendment. ATTACHMENTS: Description Proposed Amendment to the SLWA Marketing Agreement SLWA Original Agreement SLWA Draft 6.25.21 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO MARKETING LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE (“Amendment”), effective as of June 15, 2021 (“Amendment Effective Date”), to the MARKETING LICENSE AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”), dated December 14, 2016, by and between Utility Service Partners Private Label, Inc., d/b/a Service Line Warranties of America, (“SLWA”) and the City of Edina, Minnesota (“City”), is entered into by and between the Parties. All capitalized terms used in this Amendment not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement. WHEREAS, as of the Amendment Effective Date, City desires to forego receipt of the License Fee, and instead wishes to have Residential Property Owners receive a discount on the pricing of the Warranties; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises as set forth herein and for other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged, the Parties do hereby agree to amend the Agreement as follows: 1. Section 4 (Consideration) of the Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: “4. Consideration. As consideration for such license, SLWA shall provide Residential Property Owners of the City with a discounted price of Fifty-Cents ($0.50) per Warranty per month.” 2. Section II of Exhibit A to the Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced with the following: “II. Grant of License a. City logo on letterhead, advertising, billing, and marketing materials 3. The following shall be added to the end of Section VI (“Campaign Pricing”) of Exhibit A of the Agreement: “As of June 15, 2021, the following prices shall apply to all new Warranties sold in accordance with the terms of this Agreement and renewals of Warranties that were previously sold in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the details for the precise implementation of which shall be mutually agreed by the Parties: a. Sewer: $6.83 per month; $81.96 annually (subject to annual review) b. Water: $4.83 per month; $57.96 annually (subject to annual review) c. In-home plumbing: $6.08 per month; $72.96 annually (subject to annual review)” Except as otherwise modified or amended by this Amendment, all other provisions, terms and conditions of the Agreement remain unchanged and in full force and effect. (Remainder of page intentionally left blank; Signatures follow on next page) SLWA Draft 6.25.21 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have duly executed this Amendment as of the Amendment Effective Date. CITY OF EDINA By:____________________________ Name: Title: Mayor By:____________________________ Name: Title: City Manager UTILITY SERVICE PARTNERS PRIVATE LABEL, INC. By:____________________________ Name: Title: MARKETING LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, AND UTILITY SERVICE PARTNERS PRIVATE LABEL, INC. D/B/A SERVICE LINE WARRANTIES OF AMERICA This MARKETING LICENSE AGREEMENT ("Agreement") entered into as of [ D-ce )4 , 20141 ("Effective Date"), by and between the City of Edina, Minnesota ("City"), and Utility Service Partners Private Label, Inc. d/b/a Service Line Warranties of America ("SLWA"), herein collectively referred to singularly as "Party" and collectively as the "Parties". RECITALS: WHEREAS, sewer and water line laterals between the mainlines and the connection on residential private property are owned by individual residential property owners ("Residential Property Owner"); and WHEREAS, City desires to offer Residential Property Owners the opportunity, but not the obligation, to purchase a service line warranty and other similar products ("Warranty"); and WHEREAS, SLWA is the administrator of the National League of Cities Service Line Warranty Program and has agreed to provide the Warranty to Residential Property Owners subject to the terms and conditions contained herein; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and with the intent to be legally bound hereby, the Parties agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1. Purpose. City hereby grants to SLWA the right to offer the Warranty to Residential Property Owners subject to the terms and conditions herein. 2. Grant of License. City hereby grants to SLWA a non-exclusive license ("License") to use City's name and logo on letterhead, bills and marketing materials to be sent to Residential Property Owners from time to time, and to be used in advertising, all at SLWA's sole cost and expense and subject to City's prior review and approval, which will not be unreasonably conditioned, delayed, or withheld. City agrees that it will not extend a similar license to any competitor of SLWA during the term of this Agreement. 1 3. Term. The term of this Agreement ("Term") shall be for three (3) years from the Effective Date. The Agreement will automatically renew for additional one (1) year terms ("Renewal Term") unless one of the Parties gives the other written notice at least ninety (90) days prior to end of the Term or of a Renewal Term that the Party does not intend to renew this Agreement. In the event that SLWA is in material breach of this Agreement, the City may terminate this Agreement thirty (30) days after giving written notice to SLWA of such breach, if said breach is not cured during said thirty (30) day period. SLWA will be permitted to complete any marketing initiative initiated or planned prior to termination of this Agreement after which time, neither Party will have any further obligations to the other and this Agreement will terminate. During the Term, SLWA shall conduct seasonal campaigns each year in accordance with the schedules set forth in Exhibit A. The pricing for each such campaign shall be in accordance with Exhibit A attached hereto. 4. Consideration. As consideration for such license, SLWA will pay to City a License Fee of Fifty-Cents ($.50) for each month a Warranty shall be in force (and for which payment is received by SLWA) for a Residential Property Owner ("License Fee") during the term of this Agreement. The first payment shall be due by January 30th of the year following the conclusion of first year of the Term. Succeeding License Fee payments shall be made on an annual basis throughout the Term and any Renewal Term, due and payable on January 30th of the succeeding year. Each License Fee payment herein shall be paid within thirty (30) days after it becomes due. SLWA shall include with each License Fee payment to City a statement signed by an SLWA corporate officer certifying the calculation of the License Fee. City will have the right, at its sole expense, to conduct an audit, upon reasonable notice and during normal business hours, of SLWA's books and records pertaining to any fees due under this Agreement while this Agreement is in effect and for one (1) year after any termination of this Agreement. 5. Indemnification. SLWA hereby agrees to protect, indemnify, and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, employees and agents (collectively or individually, "Indemnitee") harmless from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, expenses, suits, actions, decrees, judgments, awards, attorneys' fees and court costs (individually or collectively, "Claim"), which an Indemnitee may suffer or which may be sought against or are recovered or obtainable from an Indemnitee, as a result of, or by reason of, or arising out of or in consequence of any act or omission, negligent or otherwise, of the SLWA or its officers, employees, contractors, subcontractors, agents or anyone who is directly or indirectly employed by, or is acting in concert with, the SLWA or its officers, its employees, contractors, subcontractors, or agents in the performance of this Agreement; provided that the applicable Indemnitee notifies SLWA of any such Claim within a time that does not prejudice the ability of SLWA to defend against such Claim. Any Indemnitee hereunder may participate in its, his, or her own defense, but will be responsible for all costs incurred, including reasonable attorneys' fees, in connection with such participation in such defense. 6. Notice. Any notice required to be given hereunder shall be deemed to have been given when notice is (i) received by the Party to whom it is directed by personal service, (ii) telephonically faxed to the telephone number below provided confirmation of transmission is 2 received thereof, or (iii) deposited as registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, with the United States Postal Service, addressed as follows: To: City: ATTN: Brian Olson City of Edina 7450 Metro Blvd. Edina, MN 55439 Phone: (952) 826-0311 To: SLWA: ATTN: Vice President, Business Development Utility Service Partners Private Label, Inc. 11 Grandview Circle, Suite 100 Canonsburg, PA 15317 Phone: (866) 974-4801 7. Modifications or Amendments/Entire Agreement. Any and all of the representations and obligations of the Parties are contained herein, and no modification, waiver or amendment of this Agreement or of any of its conditions or provisions shall be binding upon a party unless in writing signed by that Party. 8. Assignment. This Agreement and the License granted herein may not be assigned by SLWA without the prior written consent of the City, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. 9. Counterparts/Electronic Delivery. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, all such counterparts will constitute the same contract and the signature of any Party to any counterpart will be deemed a signature to, and may be appended to, any other counterpart. Executed copies hereof may be delivered by facsimile or e-mail and upon receipt will be deemed originals and binding upon the Parties hereto, regardless of whether originals are delivered thereafter. 10. Choice of Law/Attorney Fees. The governing law shall be the laws of the State of Minnesota. In the event that at any time during the Term or any Renewal Term either Party institutes any action or proceeding against the other relating to the provisions of this Agreement or any default hereunder, then the unsuccessful Party shall be responsible for the reasonable expenses of such action including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred therein by the successful Party. 11. Incorporation of Recitals and Exhibits. The above Recitals and Exhibit A attached hereto are incorporated by this reference and expressly made part of this Agreement. 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above. MARKETING LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDINA AND UTILITY SERVICE PARTNERS PRIVATE LABEL, INC. D/B/A SERVICE LINE WARRANTIES OF AMERICA JA.14tes ch_Akio1 HAqva Sum 14-6A.1-7 C ir? ANJA6E-R. UTILITY SERVICE PARTNERS PRIVATE LABEL, INC. (2. ci nnon CEO cm whale or Tory. kus0 I CED By: 4 Exhibit A NLC Service Line Warranty Program City of Edina, MN Term Sheet June 10, 2016 I. Term of agreement a. Initial term i. Three years guaranteed (total of 8 campaigns) II. Annual royalty — $0.50 per month per paid warranty contract a. City logo on letterhead, advertising, billing, and marketing materials b. Signature by City official III. Products offered a. External sewer line warranty b. External water line warranty c. In-home plumbing warranty IV. Scope of Coverage a. External sewer line warranty i. Scope is from the city main tap until line daylights inside home...of which includes the service line under the concrete floor. [Note: If homeowner responsibility is different than this language, please advise.] b. External water line warranty i. Scope is from the meter and/or curb box until it daylights inside home...of which includes the service line under the concrete floor. [Note: If homeowner responsibility is different than this language, please advise.] ii. Extended Coverage: Scope includes thawing of the frozen external water line. c. In-home plumbing warranty i. Scope covers residential in-home water supply lines and in-home sewer lines and all drain lines connected to the main sewer stack that are broken or leaking inside the home after the point of entry. Coverage includes broken or leaking water, sewer, or drain lines that may be embedded under the slab or basement floor. Coverage also includes repair of clogged toilets. V. Marketing Campaigns — three seasonal campaigns per year (Spring, Fall and Winter) a. 2016 Fall - Sewer b. 2017 Spring - Water c. 2017 Fall - Sewer d. 2018 Winter - In-home plumbing e. 2018 Spring - Water f. 2018 Fall Sewer g. 2019 Winter - In-home plumbing h. 2019 Spring - Water VI. Campaign Pricing 5 a. Sewer i. Year 1 - $7.75 per month; $88.00 annually ii. Year 2 - $7.75 per month; $88.00 annually (subject to annual review) iii. Year 3 - $7.75 per month; $88.00 annually (subject to annual review) b. Water i. Year 1 - $5.75 per month; $64.00 annually ii. Year 2 - $5.75 per month; $64.00 annually (subject to annual review) iii. Year 3 - $5.75 per month; $64.00 annually (subject to annual review) c. In-home plumbing i. Year 1 - $6.99 per month; $78.99 annually ii. Year 2 - $6.99 per month; $78.99 annually (subject to annual review) iii. Year 3 - $6.99 per month; $78.99 annually (subject to annual review) 6 Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.M. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Ryan Browning, I.T. Director Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Network Infrastructure Replacements Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for Network Infrastructure Replacements from LOGIS/CDWG for $89,839. INTRODUCTION: This purchase covers the hardware and installation of the replacement of the core network switches in Public Works and a portion of the wireless access points in use at City facilities. This equipment serves as the backbone for many fiber-connected remote sites in the City. The current equipment has reached the end of its useful life. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Network Infrastructure Replacements Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100165 Department:Information Technology Buyer:Ryan Browning Date: 07/15/2021 Requisition Description:Network Infrastructure Replacements Vendor:LOGIS Cost:$89,839.47 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:STATE K - STATE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION: This purchase covers the hardware and installation of the replacement of the core network switches in Public Works and a portion of the wireless access points in use at City facilities. This equipment serves as the backbone for many fiber-connected remote sites in the City. The current equipment has reached the end of its useful life. The new equipment offers much more processing power and additional features that will allow the Information Technology Department a powerful foundation on which to implement new services that will benefit the entire City. BUDGET IMPACT: This expenditure will be paid for with CIP equipment replacement funds. It is within budget and staff recommends we proceed with this purchase. Environmental Impact - item specific: 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT: These items provide the backbone of the City’s technology infrastructure. The reliability of these systems is critical to virtually all City services. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: It is expected that this network equipment will provide increased energy efficiency over our existing equipment. Vehicle - Make/Model/Year requested vehicle: Vehicle - Make/Model/Year current vehicle (if replacement): Vehicle - Does purchase meet Green Fleet Recommendations? - Vehicle - If does not meet Green Fleet Recommendations, justification: - MPG: Carbon Emissions: Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.N. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Chad Eischens, General Manager-Braemar Arena & Field Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Braemar Field Sports Dome Lighting Replacement Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for lighting for Braemar Field Sports Dome with Service Lighting for $108,458. INTRODUCTION: The current lighting inside the Braemar Field Sports Dome is eight years old and is the original lighting. The current system consists of metal halide lights and is inefficient by today's standards. In addition, the current bulbs and ballasts are no longer being manufactured which makes getting replacement parts difficult. The proposed lighting is LED, and will be more efficient with an estimated $6,000 in energy savings anticipated annually. T he lighting will also double the brightness (most lumens produced and lumens/watt) of the current system and will be more on an equal standard with outdoor athletic field lights. The system would also be pre- wired with our existing plug style system and cord length and the attachments and sway cables will be compatible with the existing dome structure connections. The lights will come with a 10 year warranty. The project would be completed during the dome installation in October. This project will be paid for by the Braemar Field Fund and also be supported by the Conservation and Sustainability (CAS) Fund. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Braemar Field Sports Dome Lighting Replacement Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100162 Department:P&R Braemar Arena Buyer:Chad Eischens Date: 07/14/2021 Requisition Description:Braemar Field/Dome LED Lights Vendor:SERVICE LIGHTING, INC. Cost:$108,458.00 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:QUOTE/BD - QUOTE/BID DESCRIPTION:LED Lights for Braemar Field/Dome BUDGET IMPACT: Field cash on hand Environmental Impact - item specific: 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:LED's will be significantly more efficient that current lights. Vehicle - Make/Model/Year requested vehicle: Vehicle - Make/Model/Year current vehicle (if replacement): Vehicle - Does purchase meet Green Fleet Recommendations? - Vehicle - If does not meet Green Fleet Recommendations, justification: - MPG: Carbon Emissions: Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.O. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-55: Rescinding Resolution No. 2009-19 Approval of a final site plan and variance for an Aloft Hotel that was never built Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-55 rescinding Resolution No. 2009-19 approval of a final site plan and variance for an Aloft Hotel that was never built. INTRODUCTION: The current property owner of the Pentagon Village Development is requesting that the 2009 approvals for an Aloft Hotel be rescinded. The Aloft Hotel was never built. T he site plan has expired and the property has since been rezoned for another development. Rescinding the old resolution will clear the title of this encumbrance. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution No. 2021-55: Rescinding Resolution No. 2009-19 Resolution to be Rescinded - Resolution No. 2009-19 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-55 RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-19 APPROVAL OF A FINAL SITE PLAN WITH PARKING STALL VARIANCE FOR PHASE ONE OF GATEWAY (OLD PENTEGAON PARK SOUTH) BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 In 2009, Wayzata Properties received final site plan and a parking stall variance to contruct a 150 room a-loft hotel (4941 77TH Street West). 1.02 The hotel was never built and the site plan approval has expired. The property has since been rezoned and redeveloped. 1.03 The current owner of the property has requested this resolution to be rescinded so as not be an encumbrance on the property. 1.04 The site is legally described as follows: Tracts A,B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and I, Registered Land Survey No. 1218, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The a-loft hotel was never built, and the site plan approval has expired. 2. The subject property (pentagon park south) has been rezoned for a new development. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the rescinding of Resolution No. 2009-19 subject to the findings above. Resolution No. 2021-55 Page 2 Adopted this 21st July 2021. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, 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 July 21, 2021 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2021. _________________________________ City Clerk Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.P. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-56: Rescinding Resolution No. 2014-29 Approval of a preliminary rezoning for Pentagon Park Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-56 rescinding Resolution No. 2014-29 approval of a preliminary rezoning for Pentagon Park. INTRODUCTION: In 2014, Hillcrest Development requested a Rezoning of Pentagon Park from MDD-6 to P UD, Planned Unit Development and an Overall Development Plan. The property never received Final Rezoning Approval, and the development was not pursued at that time. Staff mistakenly filed the resolution that approved the Preliminary Rezoning at Hennepin County on the property. Resolutions granting preliminary approval should not be filed; only resolutions that grant final approval should be filed. The current owner of the property has requested this resolution to be rescinded so as not be an encumbrance on the property. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution No. 2021-56: Rescinding Resolution No. 2014-29 Resolution to be Rescinded - Resolution No. 2014-29 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-56 RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2014-29 APPROVAL OF A PRELIMINARY REZONING FROM MDD-6 TO PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR PENTAGON PARK BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 In 2014, Hillcrest Development requested a Rezoning of Pentagon Park from MDD-6 to PUD, Planned Unit Development and an Overall Development Plan. 1.02 The property never received Final Rezoning Approval, and the development was not pursued at that time. 1.03 Resolution No. 2021-56 was mistakenly filed at Hennepin County on the property. Resolutions granting preliminary approval should not be filed; only resolutions that grant final approval should be filed. 1.04 The current owner of the property has requested this resolution to be rescinded so as not be an encumbrance on the property. 1.05 The site is legally described as follows: See attached legal descriptions. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The subject properties never received final rezoning approval. 2. The resolution granting preliminary approval was mistakenly filed at Hennepin County. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the rescinding of Resolution No. 2014-29 subject to the findings above. Resolution No. 2021-56 Page 2 Adopted this 21st July 2021. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, 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 July 21, 2021 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2021. _________________________________ City Clerk Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.Q. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-57: Authorizing Emergency Preparedness Grant Agreement Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-57 authorizing Emergency Preparedness Grant Agreement. INTRODUCTION: This resolution approves signing of the annual Public Health Emergency Preparedness grant agreement with the Minnesota Department of Health. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution No. 2021-57: Authorizing Public Health Emergency Preparedness Agreement Edina PHEP BP3 Grant Project Agreement RESOLUTION NO. 2021-57 AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF EDINA TO ENTER INTO A PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS GRANT PROJECT AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WHEREAS, the STATE, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 144.0742, is empowered to enter into a contractual agreement for the provision of statutorily prescribed public health services, and WHEREAS, the STATE and the City of Edina have entered into a master grant contract effective January 1, 2020, and WHEREAS, the STATE has entered into an agreement with the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to assist local health departments in demonstrating measurable and sustainable progress toward achieving public health preparedness capabilities and other activities that promote safer and more resilient communities, and implement and carry out the CDC's Public Health Preparedness Capabilities: National Standards for State and Local Planning, and WHEREAS, the City of Edina represents that it is duly qualified and willing to perform the services set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Edina City Council that the Mayor and the City Manager enter into Public Health Emergency Preparedness Grant Agreement Amendment with the Minnesota Department of Health to successfully complete administrative and programmatic duties contained within this grant agreement. Passed and adopted this 21st day of July 2021. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, 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 July 21, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 21st day of July, 2021. _________________________________ City Clerk Amendment # 2 for Grant Project Agreement SWIFT Contract # 161411 Between the Minnesota Department of Health and City of Edina CHB CHB Grant Project Agreement Amendment (03/2018) Page 1 of 4 Minnesota Department of Health Community Health Board Grant Project Agreement Amendment Grant Project Agreement Start Date: 7/1/2019 Current Project Amendment Amount $ 54,160 Original Grant Project Agreement Expiration Date: 6/30/2024 Original Grant Project Agreement Amount: $ 50,556 Current Grant Project Agreement Expiration Date: 6/30/2024 Previous Project Amendment(s) Total: $ 50,602 Requested Grant Project Agreement Expiration Date: Not Applicable Requested Total Grant Project Agreement Amount: $ 155,318 This Grant Project Agreement Amendment is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Health (hereinafter “State”) and City of Edina Community Health Board 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 (hereinafter “Grantee”). Recitals 1. The State has a grant project agreement with the Grantee identified as SWIFT Contract #161411| SWIFT PO # 3000066787 (“Original Grant Project Agreement”) to provide measurable and sustained progress in the implementation and execution of Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Capabilities: National Standards for State, Local, Tribal and Territorial Public Health. This preparedness program is authorized under the federal Public Health Service (PHS) Act of 1944, as amended (PHS Act) (42 USC §247d-(3) (b)). If applicable, contingent supplemental emergency response awards are authorized under 42 USC § 247b-(a) and (d)] subject to available funding and other requirements and limitations under 42 U.S.C. §243. 2. This amendment provides supplemental federal funding based on continuation funding from CDC for Budget Period 3 (BP3) grant duties, exercises, plans and other deliverables. Funding for this budget period requires the successful completion and acceptance of all duties and deliverables including AARIPs by the State prior to June 30, 2022. 3. The State and the Grantee are willing to amend the Original Grant Project Agreement as stated below. Grant Agreement Amendment Amended or deleted grant project agreement terms will be struck out, and the added grant project agreement terms will be underlined. REVISION 1. 4. “Consideration and Payment” is amended as follows: 4.1 Consideration. The STATE will pay for all services performed by the GRANTEE under this grant project agreement as follows: (a) Compensation. The GRANTEE will be paid on a reimbursement basis only. Each specific Budget Period award is available only for the specific Budget Period for which it is awarded. Funds remaining and not fully liquidated at the end of each Budget Period will be cancelled and will not DocuSign Envelope ID: 04464467-3136-43EC-83BB-B4615CAD2E20 Amendment # 2 for Grant Project Agreement SWIFT Contract # 161411 Between the Minnesota Department of Health and City of Edina CHB CHB Grant Project Agreement Amendment (03/2018) Page 2 of 4 be available to the GRANTEE in any subsequent Budget Period. GRANTEE shall maintain separate accounting records and source documentation for each award; funds may not be comingled. Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP) Awards Award Name Budget Period Award Amount Budget Period 1 PHEP Budget Period 1 July 1, 2019-June 30, 2020 $38,556 Budget Period 2 PHEP Budget Period 2 July 1, 2020-June 30, 2021 $ 38,602 Budget Period 3 PHEP Budget Period 3 July 1, 2021-June 30, 2022 $ 39,760 To Be Determined Budget Period 4 PHEP Budget Period 4 July 1, 2022-June 30, 2023 $ To Be Determined Budget Period 5 PHEP Budget Period 5 July 1, 2023-June 30, 2024 $ To Be Determined Cities Readiness Initiative (CRI) Awards Award Name Budget Period Award Amount Budget Period 1 CRI Budget Period 1 July 1, 2019-June 30, 2020 $12,000 Budget Period 2 CRI Budget Period 2 July 1, 2020-June 30, 2021 $ 12,000 Budget Period 3 CRI Budget Period 3 July 1, 2021-June 30, 2022 $ 14,400 To Be Determined Budget Period 4 CRI Budget Period 4 July 1, 2022-June 30, 2023 $ To Be Determined Budget Period 5 CRI Budget Period 5 July 1, 2023-June 30, 2024 $ To Be Determined (b) Total Obligation. The total obligation of the STATE for all compensation and reimbursements to the GRANTEE under this grant project agreement will not exceed $101,158.00 $155,318. 4.2 Terms of Payment. (a) Invoices. The State will promptly pay the GRANTEE after the GRANTEE presents an itemized invoice for the services actually performed and the State's Authorized Representative accepts the invoiced services. Invoices must be submitted in a timely fashion and according to the following schedule: Invoice Submission Schedule Invoice Due Invoice Activity Period Deadline for Receipt 1st Quarter July 1 -30 September October 31 2nd Quarter October 1- December 31 January 31 3rd Quarter January 1- March 31 April 30 4th Quarter/ BP Final Invoice April 1- June 30 July 31 DocuSign Envelope ID: 04464467-3136-43EC-83BB-B4615CAD2E20 Amendment # 2 for Grant Project Agreement SWIFT Contract # 161411 Between the Minnesota Department of Health and City of Edina CHB CHB Grant Project Agreement Amendment (03/2018) Page 3 of 4 The State reserves the right to deny payment of invoices not received within thirty (30) days of the invoice deadline. (b) Federal Funds. Payments under this grant project agreement will be made from federal funds obtained by the STATE through Title 47, 42 U.S.C. §247d-3b, CFDA number 93.069 , of Section 319C-1 of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act (47 USC § 247d-3a), including public law and all amendments. The Notice of Grant Award (NGA) number is pending. The GRANTEE is responsible for compliance with all federal requirements imposed on these funds and accepts full financial responsibility for any requirements imposed by the Grantee's failure to comply with federal requirements. If at any time federal funds become unavailable, this agreement shall be terminated immediately upon written notice of by the STATE to the GRANTEE. In the event of such a termination, GRANTEE is entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed. Except as amended herein, the terms and conditions of the Original Grant Project Agreement and all previous amendments remain in full force and effect. The Original Grant Project Agreement, and all previous amendments, are incorporated by reference into this amendment. [signatures on following page] DocuSign Envelope ID: 04464467-3136-43EC-83BB-B4615CAD2E20 Amendment # 2 for Grant Project Agreement SWIFT Contract # 161411 Between the Minnesota Department of Health and City of Edina CHB CHB Grant Project Agreement Amendment (03/2018) Page 4 of 4 APPROVED: 1. STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minn. Stat. §§ 16A.15 and 16C.05. Signed: Date: SWIFT Contract/PO No(s). 2. GRANTEE The Grantee certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed the grant project agreement amendment on behalf of the Grantee as required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or ordinances. By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: 3. MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH By: (with delegated authority) Title: Date: Distribution: • MDH – Original (fully executed) Grant Project Agreement Amendment • Grantee • State’s Authorized Representative DocuSign Envelope ID: 04464467-3136-43EC-83BB-B4615CAD2E20 7/6/2021 Mayor Minnesota Department of Health Grant Award Amendment Cover Sheet You have received a grant award from the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH). Information about the grant award, including funding details, are included below. Contact your MDH Grant Manager if you have questions about this cover sheet. DATE: July 1, 2021 ATTACHMENT: Public Health Emergency Preparedness (PHEP) Amendment CONTACT FOR MDH: Esther Ashley, Center for Emergency Preparedness & Response, 651/201‐5717 esther.ashley@state.mn.us Grantee SWIFT Information Grant Agreement Information Funding Information Name of MDH Grantee: City of Edina Community Health Board Grant Agreement/Project Agreement Number: 161411 Total Grant Funds (all funding sources): $828,257 Grantee SWIFT Vendor Number: 0000197683 SWIFT Vendor Location Code: 001 Period of Performance Start Date: July 1, 2019 Period of Performance End Date: June 30, 2024 Total State Grant Funds: $0.00 Total Federal Grant Funds: $828,257 Notice to Grantee about Federal Funds This amendment pertains to your sub‐award of federal financial assistance from MDH. Information about the award is being shared with you per 2 CFR 200.331. Please keep a copy of this cover sheet with the amendment. Grantee and Project Information Grantee Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) Name and Number DUNS Name: Edina, City of DUNS Number: 076493725 Grantee’s Approved Indirect Cost Rate for the Grant Not to exceed 10% of actual costs. Is The Award for Research and Development? ☐Yes ☒No Project Description Public Health Emergency Preparedness Federal Award Information Name of Federal Awarding Agency U S Department of Health and Human Services | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) CFDA Name and Number (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance) CFDA Name: Public Health Emergency Preparedness CFDA Number: 93.069 Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN)/ Grantor’s Pass-through Number NU90TP922026 Federal Award Date (Date MDH received federal grant) 5/28/2021 Total Amount of Federal Award Received by MDH $34,500,293 DocuSign Envelope ID: 04464467-3136-43EC-83BB-B4615CAD2E20 Certificate Of Completion Envelope Id: 04464467313643EC83BBB4615CAD2E20 Status: Sent Subject: Please DocuSign: Edina_PHEP BP3 (2021-2022) Grant Agreement Amendment #2 Source Envelope: Document Pages: 6 Signatures: 1 Envelope Originator: Certificate Pages: 2 Initials: 0 Kara Cornils AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled Time Zone: (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) 625 Robert St. N PO Box 64975 St. Paul, MN 55164 Kara.Cornils@state.mn.us IP Address: 156.98.136.27 Record Tracking Status: Original 6/30/2021 8:47:26 PM Holder: Kara Cornils Kara.Cornils@state.mn.us Location: DocuSign Security Appliance Status: Connected Pool: StateLocal Storage Appliance Status: Connected Pool: Department of Health Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp James Hovland jhovland@edinamn.gov Mayor Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None)Signature Adoption: Uploaded Signature Image Using IP Address: 174.219.4.116 Sent: 6/30/2021 8:54:08 PM Viewed: 7/6/2021 9:13:07 AM Signed: 7/6/2021 9:14:14 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Scott Neal sneal@edina.mn.gov Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 7/6/2021 9:14:16 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign MDH Encumbrance Officers Signing Group: MDH Encumbrance Officers Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign MDH FiM with Delegated Authority to Execute Grants/Contracts Signing Group: MDH FiM with Delegated Authority to Execute Grants/Contracts Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Jeff Brown jbrown@edinamn.gov Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 6/30/2021 8:54:07 PM Viewed: 7/7/2021 9:13:38 AM Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered via DocuSign Witness Events Signature Timestamp Notary Events Signature Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 6/30/2021 8:54:08 PM Payment Events Status Timestamps Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.R. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:MJ Lamon, Community Engagement Coordinator Item Activity: Subject:Arts & Culture Commission Appointment Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Appoint Kathy Amlaw to the Arts and Culture Commission with a term ending 3/1/23. INTRODUCTION: Lindsay DiLorenzo resigned from the Arts & Culture Commission effective June 21, 2021. As part of the 2021 annual onboarding session, Kathy Amlaw was selected as an alternate in the case of an unscheduled vacancy. Kathy has signified her interest in serving on the Arts & Culture Commission. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.S. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Kelly Curtin, Human Resources Director Item Activity: Subject:Approve 2021-2022 City Insurance Renewals Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve renewal of City's insurance coverage and payment for 2020-2021 policy. INTRODUCTION: Staff has worked with our insurance broker and League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) to analyze cost and options. Staff recommends renewal of the City's 2021-2022 insurance policies through LMCIT with the following options: 1) Workers' Compensation renewal with $50,000 deductible premium option (same coverage and deductible as last year); 2) P roperty/Liability Insurance with the $75,000 deductible option (same coverage and deductible as last year). See attached Staff Report and Renewal Premium Summary for 2021-2022. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: Approve 2021-2022 City Insurance Renewals Renewal Premium Summary July 21, 2021 Mayor and City Council Kelly Curtin, Human Resources Director Approve 2021-2022 City Insurance Renewals Information / Background: Edina is a member of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT). LMCIT is a cooperative joint-powers organization and member premiums contribute to a jointly owned fund. The money in the fund is then used to pay members’ claims, losses, and expenses. Because LMCIT's purpose is to meet cities’ coverage and risk management needs, and not to make a profit, income not needed for operations or reserves is returned to member cities in the form of a dividend. Edina became a member of LMCIT in 2014, and received the following annual dividends : Year Dividend Received 2015 $9,311 2016 $22,097 2017 $8,181 2018 $5,245 2019 $5,763 2020 $14,321 2021 Workers’ Compensation Renewal The 2021-2022 estimated total premium for workers’ compensation is $688,495 compared to last year’s premium of $664,142, an increase of $24,353. The increase is due in part to a significant increase in public safety PTSD cases, which account for a substantial portion of the League’s claims payments this past year. STAFF REPORT Page 2 However, the increase was mitigated somewhat due to the improvement in the City’s experience modification rating from 0.73 to 0.66. Deductible: For each claim submitted, the City pays the full medical costs of the claim up to the per occurrence deductible. Deductible Limits Current Deductible Limits: $50,000 medical costs per occurrence. Recommended Deductible Limits: No Change; $50,000 per occurrence. Since the change in statute which allowed for PTSD to be a compensable claim in 2013, there has been a surge in PTSD-related claims to the pool as a whole (not specifically Edina). Currently, PTSD claims account for over 30% of all workers’ compensation claims dollars paid by the League. As such, all members of the League have experienced a 4.5% rate increase on workers’ compensation overall, and police officer rates have increased 35%. 2020 Property/Casualty Renewal Aggregate Deductible: The maximum the City is required to pay in total claims for the policy year. Once the City has reached the aggregate deductible limit, the City would pay $1,000 per occurrence thereafter. To stay with the same coverages and deductibles, our total premiums would be $732,316, an increase over last year’s premium of $1,545. The increase is primarily attributed to the following: • The primary drivers of this year’s rate increase is the City’s deteriorating liability experience modification factor. • Employment and Land Use related claims are weighted much heavier than other Claim types. • Municipal Liability - The League kept base liability rates flat to all members of the League, but the City’s experience rating deteriorated by 20% this year due to several large claims now coming on the experience mod – exasperating the impact. • Auto – Now in the 2nd year of the League’s new formula that looks at three years’ worth of auto claim frequency and premium data, excluding the most recent year. Only those claims that have a total net loss of greater than $1,000 are used in the calculation for experience rating. The City’s experience this year benefitted from this rating change, as the decrease helped to offset the increased liability premiums. Covered Party: Effective Date: Deductible Premium $75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.$249,776. 75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.17,484. 75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.341,080. 75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.32,163. 75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.Included. ● Basic Economic Loss Benefits (PIP) all owned autos 75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.Included. 75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.36,826. 1,000.Included. NA.Included. NA.Included. 1.15 1.218 Aggregate Factor Modifier:1.570 Deductible Premium $75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.2,335. 75,000.13,787. $NA.2,943. $NA.14,387. 75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.2,250. $75,000 / 150,000 / 1,000.19,285. Not Covered. TOTAL:$732,316. $500,000/$1,500,000 ● Crime ● Petrofund ● Defense Cost Reimbursement Auto Experience Mod: Municipal Liability Experience Mod: ● Property ● Mobile Property ● Municipal Liability ● Automobile Liability ● UM/UIM $200,000 all owned autos ● Automobile Physical Damage RENEWAL PREMIUM SUMMARY Common Coverages Coverage June 18, 2021 Marsh & Mclennan Agency City of Edina 7/1/2021 DO NOT PAY UNTIL YOU RECEIVE INVOICES TORT LIMIT: ● Data Breach ● No Fault Sewer Back Up Limit:40,000. ● Airport Liability ● Equipment Breakdown ● Excess Liability Limit:1,000,000. ● Liquor Liability Limit:1,000,000. The modifiers are calculated with a formula which compares the city’s actual loss history with the amount of losses that would be expected for a city of that size if the city were a perfectly average LMCIT member. If the city’s losses and expenses are better than average the city receives a premium credit. If the city’s losses and expenses are worse than average, the city receives a premium debit. Optional Coverages Coverage ● Bond 1,000,000. PREMSUMXM(11/11) Approximate Premium $112,630. $168,945. $197,103. $211,182. $218,221. $10,345. $1,109. Sincerely, Underwriter Optional coverage(s) are not bound unless the covered party has requested that coverage be bound and LMCIT has sent a written confirmation. Optional coverage quotes are valid for 30 days after the date of this letter. ECMO Truck (Liability & APD+) Facultative Reinsurance Excess: $4M (Including Liquor) Excess: $5M (Including Liquor) Excess: $1M (Including Liquor) Excess: $2M (Including Liquor) Excess: $3M (Including Liquor) Optional Coverage Quotes Coverage Deductible PREMSUMXM(11/11) Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.T. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Kelly Curtin, Human Resources Director Item Activity: Subject:Liability Coverage Statutory Limits Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Motion refusing to waive municipal tort liability limits. INTRODUCTION: Cities that purchase municipal liability coverage from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) must decide each year whether they are willing to waive the monetary limits on tort liability that are offered to cities under Minnesota Statutes 466.04. If a city refuses to waive the liability limit, the maximum monetary damages a claimant can recover is generally no more than $500,000 on any claim to which the statutory tort limits apply. In addition, the total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence to which the statutory tort limits apply would be limited to $1,500,000. If a city decides to waive its liability limit, a single claimant could recover up to $2,000,000 for a single occurrence. The total all claimants would be able to recover for a single occurrence would also be limited to $2,000,000. If the City chose to waive the limits, it would need to pay additional premiums and would have greater exposure for future claims. Because the City of Edina purchases its municipal liability coverage from the LMCIT, the City Council must take action on this matter. Staff is not authorized under statute to make this decision. Only a City Council can decide to waive the city’s statutory tort limits. Staff recommends the Council refuse to waive the municipal tort liability limits, as we have in the past. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.U. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Scott H. Neal, City Manager Item Activity: Subject:Approve Out-of-State Travel for Mayor Hovland Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve out-of-state travel for Mayor Hovland for Aug. 30-Sept. 4, 2021 to attend the U.S. Conference of Mayors Annual Meeting and Climate Mayors Meeting in Austin, Texas. INTRODUCTION: Mayor Hovland requests approval from the City Council, per the City’s Elected Official Out-of-State Travel Policy, to attend the U.S. Conference of Mayors Annual Meeting in Austin, Texas, from Sept. 1-4. He will also be attending the Mayors Climate Meeting Aug. 31. The estimated cost is $3,800. The City Manager has confirmed that sufficient funds for this expense are included in the City's 2021 budget. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.V. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-58: Accepting Donations Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-58 accepting donations. INTRODUCTION: To comply with State Statute, all donations to the City must be accepted by resolution and approved by two- thirds majority of the Council. See attached resolution with list of donations. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution No. 2021-58: Accepting Donations RESOLUTION NO. 2021-58 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 grants and donations on behalf of its citizens. Parks & Recreation • Snead League $500 Memorial/Honor Garden • Craft Homes LLC $1,050 Tree donation for 5609 Beard Ave • Snead League $500 Additional Memorial Stone Art Center • Bide L. & Mary Nell Thomas $100 Memorial for Phyllis Peterson • Christos, Inc. $100 Memorial for Phyllis Peterson Dated: July 21, 2021 Attest: Sharon Allison, 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 July 21, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this _______ day of ___________________, 2021. City Clerk Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VII.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Scott H. Neal, City Manager Item Activity: Subject:Introduce Fire Chief Andrew Slama Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None. INTRODUCTION: City Manager Scott Neal will introduce Andrew Slama, Edina Fire Chief. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VII.B. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Scott H. Neal, City Manager Item Activity: Subject:Recognition of Edina High School State Championship Teams from 2020-2021 Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None. INTRODUCTION: Council invited coaches and captains from state championship teams from Edina High School to attend the meeting and be recognized. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VIII.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Activity: Subject:PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution No. 2021-54, Conditional Use Permit for Interlachen Country Club, 6200 Interlachen Boulevard Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Continue the Public Hearing to Monday July 26 at noon, and continue action to the August 4 City Council meeting. INTRODUCTION: On February 24, 2021 the Planning Commission made the following motions on the project, both of which failed to receive a majority approval: 1. Motion to recommend denial to the City Council of the Conditional Use P ermit based on the following findings: a) Does not meet the Conditional Use Permit based on the health, safety, and welfare. b) This project is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Goals to protect single family homes. c) The current Comprehensive Plan designation for the residential lots is Low Density Residential, which is not consistent with the rest of the golf course. Motion failed. Vote: 3 ayes, 3 nays 2. Motion to recommend approval to the City Council of the Conditional Use Permit as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Motion failed. Vote: 2 ayes, 4 nays. Interlachen Country Club is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to expand the boundaries of the Country Club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. There are two single-family homes, owned by the Country Club, that would continue as single-family homes that would serve as a buffer to the single-family homes to the west. A gate would be constructed at the end of Waterman Avenue, just past the single-family homes owned by the Country Club. The gate would be closed for access to the Club from Waterman for the purpose of employees, members, guests, and delivery trucks to use the main entrance off Interlachen Boulevard. The Country Club would be constructing the new cul-de-sac and roadway improvements at their expense. ATTACHMENTS: Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report and individual letters from concerned residents Resolution No. 2021-54 Staff Memos Applicant Narrative Proposed Plans Frimerman - Letter to City of Edina from Malkerson Gunn Martin Frimerman - Second letter to the City of Edina from Malkerson Gunn Martin Site Location Zoning Map Comprehensive Plan - Land Use Plan Examples of existing parking lots in the R-1 District adjacent to single family homes Staff Presentation Staff Presentation 2 Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 13 July 2021 Public Hearing Comments-InterlachenCountry Club CUP Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit for Interlachen Country Club to expand the boundaries of the Country Club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. VISITORS 219 CONTRIBUTORS 143 RESPONSES 154 4 Registered 1 Unverified 138 Anonymous 4 Registered 1 Unverified 149 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 27, 2021 15:27:09 pm Last Seen:May 27, 2021 15:27:09 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Connie Brockway Q2.Address 6301 Maloney Ave. Edina MN 55343 Q3.Comment Our property is directly adjacent to the south boundary of the proposed parking lot. In the past months, I have been reading about the city of Edina laudable commitment to providing lower to mid-range housing (StarTribune 4/18/21). I have attended meetings where the city council has voiced strong opposition to losing green space in our city and been so gratified by their stances. I hope the City Council continues to stand by their stated tenets because here comes ICC with plans to plow up acres of gorgeous lawn and garden, shrubs and 100 year old pine trees, space my neighbors and I value, yards in which our children play. All for no other reason than to make a SEASONALLY COVENIENT parking lot for “employees and overflow guests.” I want to reiterate that more clearly: ICC wants to insert a parking into the very heart of my neighborhood that will 1) FOREVER changing our neighborhood’s character 2) FOREVER trade treasured and increasingly rare green space in Edina for cement 3) FOREVER turn Waterman from a family neighborhood into an ICC adjunct 4) FOREVER depreciate our property values 5) FOREVER pollute our night skies with parking lot lights 6) Allow ICC to monitor our yards with security cameras 7) Put our families and our property at increased risk of crime by insering a parking lot into our midst (according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics 11% of crimes occur in parking lots) and especially a lot like this one, which is HIDDEN behind their tennis courts, out of view of ANY of their buildings 8) FOREVER destroy quality affordable housing currently occupying those lots And for what? So for a few months out of the year some people don’t have to walk an extra block. We live here twelve months out of the year. We look out our windows at that beautiful green space every single day from morning to night. How can ICC’s desire for more SEASONALLY CONVENIENT parking override our day in day out lives? It’s my opinion that ICC’s stated reason for creating this lot is nothing but a big lie. This isn’t about providing their caddies with closer parking. This is about expansion. ICC has told us its membership is currently capped. They assured us that the lot “will be designated for employees, caddies, and valet overflow” BUT “we are not planning to “ban” members from using the lot.” That’s a nice loophole. ICC only employs 100 caddies on a seasonal basis with maybe 20 work at a time? Why all the extra lots? Because their plan includes a new putting green and a driving range and the proposed lot includes a walkway providing direct access to the tennis court. When I asked why they needed access from the “employee lot” to the tennis courts, their response was “the connection to the tennis courts was designed for the safety of our staff; it creates a shorter path to the clubhouse via sidewalk so they do not need to walk on the street.” But there IS no street in this plan. The lot ends right at the before proposed the cul de sac. And it isn’t appreciably short. In fact, in some cases its longer This lot is for the convenience of their members to more easily access the tennis court, proposed driving range and putting green. I’ve been taking pictures every day of the gravel lot that IC built in place of the house they already bulldozed and spoken to caddies walking down Waterman. Right now, that little lot is being used by members. There’s no reason to think it won’t be in the future. ( I’d be happy to share the pictures with you) It’s tiny now and it generally holds around 15 cars. Can you imagine the headlights of 150 cars sweeping around as people drive in and out (because the tennis courts are lit at night and we know from sad experience – think blaring music—it is used), the noise, the constant light from the security poles, the presence of god-know-who knows who in our backyards at all hours of the night? Or just the intrusive presence of all strangers in our backyards? Additionally worrisome, once ICC plows up the terrain for this lot there is nothing to prevent them from doing whatever they want with it--- a winter hockey rink, tent parties, parking for their barbeque truck and portable “beer hal”, etc. And after everyone moves out of Waterman, what then? ICC bulldozes more houses and grows their membership. I am sorry for the desperation in my tone but I am desperate. Desperate to save what is gorgeous, cool, living green oasis enjoyed by an inclusive, diverse and unique neighborhood. I sincerely hope that the Edina City Council not allow ICC’s desire for a seasonal accommodation of some of their very privileged clientele to supersede the daily well-being and happiness of this wonderful neighborhood. Please do not grant ICC this CUP. Connie Brockway Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 27, 2021 15:46:14 pm Last Seen:May 27, 2021 15:46:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christine Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment I AM VERY UPSET FOR THE FAMILIES WHO MAKE UP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. OUR NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ALSO VOTERS! WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER PARKING LOT WITH FENCING, OBTRUSIVE LIGHTING, INVITING MORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CRIMES AND BREAKINS, REPLACING AFFORDABLE HOUSING WHICH IS HARD TO FIND IN EDINA NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE FIRST PLACE. THIS PARKING LOT WOULD BE PLACED OR PAVED REALLY, RIGHT SMACK DAB IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD! WHAT TYPE OF THINKING IS THAT? ENVIRONMENTAL AND EMOTIONAL IMPACTS ON THE FAMILIES, AND NATURE. ALONG WITH THE SCRAPING OF OUR BEAUTIFUL OASIS OF GREEN OPEN SPACE, CUTTING DOWN VARIETIES OF LEGACY TREES, DESTROYING HABITATS OF BIRDS AND OTHER CREATURES NESTING, MIGRATING, WHO ALSO CALL THIS PROPOSED PARKING/ PAVED LOT SPACE THEIR HOMES, WILL BE REMOVED AND DESTROYED. HOUSES BEING TORN DOWN, FAMILIES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD SUFFERING THE CONSEQUENCES, TO PUT IN A PAVED PARKING LOT WITH POSSIBLE OTHER USES? FOR A PRIVATE GOLF CLUB. THIS DOES NOT MAKE SENSE.... ONCE THEY ARE GONE THEY ARE GONE FOR GOOD! CHRISTINE LAMSON Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 28, 2021 10:27:17 am Last Seen:May 28, 2021 10:27:17 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Britta Sortland Ryan Q2.Address 513 John Street, Hopkins, MN 55343 Q3.Comment I am writing in regards to the Proposed Non-permeable Valet Parking Lot & Debris Storage proposed by Interlachen Country Club. In this letter, I will explain a bit of my background and my history in Edina and why I am opposed to the proposed plan. I humbly request that you read this with an open mind and look at the impact to the neighborhood, and consider the would-be beneficiaries of the parking lot, and ask, is it truly worth the cost? My husband, Eric, and I purchased our first home at 513 John Street in 2019 from Mary and John Jelnick. The Jelnick’s are an older couple, who raised their 4 children and lived in this home for 40 years. Before that, our home was purchased by a man who converted the building from a church from the 1930s, into the home it is today. We fell in love with the Interlachen neighborhood because of its unique homes, large lots, and park like feel. When we stumbled across 513, we purchased it knowing we had a lot of dollars and sweat equity to put in, but that it’d be worth it for us and for future homeowners because of the yard. When you look out our kitchen window, our three-season porch, family room, or master bedroom right now, we see a beautiful park with large gardens, old trees, and so much wildlife. Since we’ve moved in we’ve see wild turkeys, foxes, coyotes, minks, and have a family of deer that return every summer and make their way from our yard (and much to our neighbors’ dismay – his garden, endearingly nicknamed the local “Whole Foods”) to the pond which would become the proposed parking lot. What we’ve referred to as our homes’ best view would become a valet parking lot for the golf course. My first objection to the parking lot project is on account of the impact to the home values’ and saving affordable homes from being torn down. When we purchased our home in 2019, we loved the sounds on a summer night listening to the hustle and bustle of the club house. We also never expected that our backyard would turn into a parking lot. That is not what we signed up for. At this time, I believe the golf club owned one house North of Waterman Ave, but had not yet purchased the two remaining homes North of Waterman Ave that they now possess. Those homes are currently zoned as Single Dwelling Units and for the sake of our neighborhood, they should remained zoned as such. The houses in our neighborhood are considered more affordable for the area, but are well maintained and taken care of. One of Edina's goal is to save affordable houses from being torn down. There are TWO more affordable houses that would be torn down for seasonal use. My husband and I have also put a lot of TLC, dollar, and sweat equity into our home over the last few months with the goal of not tearing down, but improving the home and making it our own. We were never expecting this news from the golf course. For the reason of our home values and keeping more affordable housing available, I respectfully request you to not approve the proposed parking lot. My second objection to the parking lot project is on account of the wildlife. My husband and I are outdoor enthusiasts, backpacking, camping, fishing, and yearly trips to the boundary waters. Since moving in we’ve found an abundance of wildlife in part due to the large green space and ponds. Eric has gained a new hobby over the past two years and has become a self-proclaimed ornithologist – adding three bird baths, three bird homes, four bird feeders, and two hummingbird feeders since we’ve moved in. It would be a fair statement to say he’s become a bit obsessed with the birds! I would ask that some sort of wildlife study be done prior to voting on the parking lot project to see what type of impact it would have to the lesser seen residents. We've got wild turkeys, a family of 5 deer that come back every summer, herrings that fly to our pond, and numerous other creatures that call our backyards their home. My final and most fervent objection to the parking lot project is on account of the impact to the community feel. As I had mentioned above, the sole reason we bought our home was for the lot and the views it provides. My husband and I have been fortunate and have been in the process of remodeling our home over the last six months. When we got the news the golf club would like to turn our backyards into a parking lot, I just about cried. The effort, time, and money we have put in to making our house a home for years to come only to find out that how we had designed our remodel – windows all facing the park (would be parking lot) – just about did me in. We have seven kids that live in our culs-de-sac and often use the backyards as their playground, and it is wonderful, and it is how it should remain. As the song goes, the clubhouse is asking to “pave paradise and put up a parking lot.” I’m sure there will be many conversations in the coming months and mine is only one voice of many. Please be aware that I do plan on writing a similar letter to Interlachen Country Club asking them to reconsider the location and layout of their proposed plan. I hope that in reading this letter, you were able to get to know a small part of me and empathize with what this plan would mean for my family and our neighbors. I ask that you consider the proposed Non- permeable Valet Parking Lot & Debris Storage that would replace our beautiful paradise and ask, is it worth it? In appreciation, Britta Sortland Ryan Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 29, 2021 07:24:00 am Last Seen:May 29, 2021 07:24:00 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jay Halvorson Q2.Address 5049 Park Terrace Q3.Comment I oppose the destruction of badly needed single family homes to build a parking lot in a quiet neighborhood. This would set a couple of very bad precedents in our city. Respondent No:5 Login:AC Coleman Email:ayupaldr99@gmail.com Responded At:May 29, 2021 20:36:55 pm Last Seen:May 30, 2021 01:13:57 am IP Address:73.242.45.193 Q1.First and Last Name AC Coleman Q2.Address 6313 Waterman Ave Q3.Comment My letter is a plea to deny ICC's proposal for a "Valet Lot and Debis Storage" CUP. We've lived on Waterman Ave for 15 years. Purchasing here in Edina for the reasons everyone does, location, location. We knew that residing on Waterman put us in the Hopkins school district, a deterrent for most, open enrollment influenced the final decision. We were charmed by the neighborhood feeling and eventually has lead to very deep friendships throughout the surrounding blocks. Had I known that what we have lived through as ICC as a neighbor, we likely would not have purchased this home. After having two prominent Edina realtors recently tour and assess our home prior to our proposed renovations, we were brutally told it wasn't worth the deep investment for these reasons: 1- Traffic on Waterman Ave is too heavily incurred by commercial vehicles and increased volume of membership entering the rear entrance of ICC. 2- ICC's purchase of 4 homes closest to ICC and turning them into tenant properties. a- One single family home purposefully left to derelict so they may demolish it for a putting green/extended driving range. b- One single family home generating income for ICC is also proposed for demolition allowing for an additional 200 cars to be parked. c- One single family home leased to revolving tenants who consistently disrespect the neighbors properties. d- Directly next to my home is the "Caddy Shack" While we've had a good run of decent tenants, the red Budweiser tent hopefully won't become a permanent installation. After disclosing the perks of "going to miss my tee time/I'm late for pickle ball/drunk members who leave used condoms on my lawn" Speed frenzy everyday. We can only hope to break even with a sale of our home. The proposed "Valet Lot and Debris Storage" is only going to make this situation worse. We should be grateful that ICC has proposed a cul de sac and security gate at the end of Waterman Ave. Yet neither would increase the safety of our properties, and actually would attract more negative elements. A security gate with no fencing around the perimeter is useless. No one is going to guarantee that the commercial traffic will subside or the members ability to use the rear gate (with 200 more parking spaces/driving range/putting green/additional courts directly behind the gate) would continue to be restricted. We haven't even touched on the massive environmental destruction this "Valet Lot" will incur. The Watershed District has already rejected ICC's first proposal. There is drainage issues on both sides of Waterman Ave. The vicious impact to our neighbors woodland valley that supports a huge variety of wildlife, historical trees, children's play zones, multiple gardens and a pond will FOREVER be changed. Let's not forget the invasive lights, noise and cameras. No one believes the "We have no plans at this time" line that ICC has fed this neighborhood for years. Giving ICC this "Valet and Debris Lot" CUP will just open the door further for the building of a golf pavilion that has already been promised to the members. None of the members of ICC live on Waterman Ave. None of them have had to live with years of constant construction traffic on top of commercial and membership increased volume. It must be quite a privilege to not have to worry about a parking lot being built in their back yard. I urge any and all who are interested, concerned and appalled for our diminishing green spaces, quality middle income homes and continued privilege encroachment killing our quality of life. Please speak out, support this neighborhood and help us get the "Valet Lot and Debris Storage" proposal rejected. Enough is enough. Thank you AC Coleman Respondent No:6 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 31, 2021 15:07:54 pm Last Seen:May 31, 2021 15:07:54 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rachel Mairose Q2.Address 14419 Westridge Dr Q3.Comment My family spends a lot of time in the yards abutting Interlachen (my parents own on a house on Maloney). They bought this land and built a house because of the view. Wildlife. Woods. Birds. Serenity. Quiet. And now Interlachen wants to put a parking lot and flood lights in the space right next to their backyard. They are distraught. We are, too. Interlachen needs a variance to be able to do this, and we are urging you not to allow it. The whole neighborhood is up in arms about how their serene neighborhood - one they spent a pretty penny to live in - could be forever changed. Please consider not allowing this variance. Allow the community to have some say. They bought these homes because there would never be buildings, etc. allowed. Why are there rules if the powerful can simply change them? Thank you for hearing us out. Respondent No:7 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 31, 2021 18:11:13 pm Last Seen:May 31, 2021 18:11:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lorraine LaRoy Q2.Address 2701 Crescent Ridge Rd Q3.Comment I oppose Interlachen Country Club's plan to build a parking lot in a residential neighborhood. This requires tearing down homes and destroying green space and cutting down large trees and will negatively affect the residents of an otherwise quiet neighborhood year round for the benefit of a few country club members and or employees for a few months per year. Respondent No:8 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 01, 2021 05:51:23 am Last Seen:Jun 01, 2021 05:51:23 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland Hawver Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment This expansion of Interlachen Country Club into the residential property areas boundaried by John Street on northside and Waterman Avenue on the southside - will create many forms of pollution and destroy the character and quality of the residential neighborhoods which share these spaces. It will cause noise pollution as Waterman Avenue will become conduit for the large delivery trucks to the site, and diesel trucks will be backed up in cue waiting for the Interlachen access gate to be opened, this street is already in disrepair and the volume of heavy traffic will further exacerbate this issue. The parking lot itself will also add noise issues with the contiguous property owners. The families residing on Waterman with children are now at greater risk for traffic dangers. Crime reports filed with the city of Edina by Interlachen Country Club have all listed Waterman as the access point for non-member intruders into Interlachen parking lots. The proposed drainage system that Interlachen is planning to install from Waterman across this property will be deposited into a drainage basin/pond that borders several residential lots that border sensitive native bog areas. There has been no information on what testing (air and soil), if any, Interlachen plans on during peak seasons of flowage, the overflows will sit in this area - emitting vapors and become areas of mosquito breeding. The light pollution of high parking lot lighting will become issues with neighbors, just like the lighting now being utilized for the hockey rinks. The quality of life and the character of the neighboring communities will be irreparably harmed if this expansion is allowed. Respondent No:9 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 01, 2021 16:24:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 01, 2021 16:24:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Daniel From Q2.Address 508 John St Q3.Comment I live in the neighborhood immediate to the Club (John St.) and I appreciate the location and park like feel we have with our linked mature growth backyards in our neighborhood. I appreciate the mature trees and growth around the perimeter of the Club as it shields the neighborhood from their current noise and light pollution. This seems to also fit the needs of all the wildlife too as we enjoy seeing even large animals like deer often. I am commenting because this proposal isn’t thoughtful of the wider picture of the neighborhood and the goals of the City. It exacerbates the ongoing housing crisis by further reducing residential land and built home supply. It places a parking lot within a residential area disrupting deer trails, removes mature trees and vegetation, while also increasing noise and light pollution within a neighborhood. The city has already approved construction along Blake (our families thank you!) to improve safety of all pedestrians on a similar timeline to the Club's proposal. Additionally, for safety and security of the Club's employees and members they could've installed a gate at any time using the land they currently occupy within a neighborhood and for those who do choose to park at the church, the Club could be providing shuttle services. I think the Club can continue to be successful and good stewards of the 170 acres they currently occupy. Respondent No:10 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 01, 2021 18:15:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 01, 2021 18:15:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Susan Law Q2.Address 4790 Northern Road Mound Q3.Comment We lived in that neighborhood on Harrison Ave for a long time. I have never seen the Interlachen parking lot overfull. It's otherwise a completely residential neighborhood with limited green space. Last thing needed is a big stretch of asphalt. Parking lots are basically unattractive no matter what you do. Respondent No:11 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 10:28:27 am Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 10:28:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name James LaRoy Q2.Address 2701 Crescent Ridge Rd Q3.Comment I feel Interlachen Country Club’s plan to put a parking lot in a residential neighborhood and remove homes to do so is a terrible idea. Our neighborhood does not need more parking lots with lights and noise to interfere with our serenity which we worked hard to create by modifying and building homes in this great area.The Country club is being a terrible neighbor by promoting this idea. Respondent No:12 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 20:09:38 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 20:09:38 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lisa White Q2.Address 971 Nine Mile Cove Q3.Comment I believe the parcel that Interlachen is planning to use for parking is already vacant and being used for that purpose. The country club is going to pave it and light it so it is safe. They are not bulldozing homes. The plan is to put a gate in on Waterman Road that will be used for delivery’s not member traffic. The plan has been thoughtfully done to consider the neighborhood. Respondent No:13 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 20:25:45 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 20:25:45 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Keith Curtin Q2.Address 5525 Code Ave Q3.Comment I am 100% in support of the country club expansion. The Interlachen Country Club is a wonderful asset to Edina and an asset we should support. Interlachen is an attraction for guests to the city for golf course events, the expansion will provide additional storm water runoff filtration, and the Interlachen Country Club parking situation is in desperate need of being expanded. Respondent No:14 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 21:07:00 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 21:07:00 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christine Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment I’m a 3 year resident of this wonderful neighborhood of great neighbors, some who’ve lived here for 40+ years, or recently moved from other parts of the city, because of the natural beauty of our street. John street , and the park like settings we are blessed to have purchased on John street..and to watch the varieties of wildlife that live with us here, the open air space, open skies, the long views, our wonderful yards, cannot be and should not be taken up and covered in asphalt and parking stripes, intrusive lighting, many cars, headlights, car doors slamming, engines running, polluting, there has to be other options... for the privledged members of this private Country Club. Out of curiosity, how Many of our City Council members our City Planning members, have memberships or their family members have memberships to ICC? Please take a poll and share the results with the citizens who call this neighborhood home.. My home directly butts up to this ludicrous planned parking lot / debris storage area, and who knows what future plans for this space that may lie down the road.. A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED IN THE MIDDLE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD! This is a ludicrous plan, to serve a private member golf course, and a takeover of peoples home and yards, who call these neighborhoods their places of happiness, places of security.. not what you receive living with a parking lot and buildings, built remote within and central to our backyards with extreme intrusive lighting, noise and pollution crime,chemical runoff from hard surfaces into the watershed.. let alone the destruction of habitats for birds and animals share this space and who live among us. The brazen actions that ICC is ATTEMPTING (?), and seems pretty confident in their actions, is an assault to our neighborhood and the loving people who chose to put down roots here. Speaking of roots, ICC’s plans to destroy affordable housing and irreplaceable century old species of tree’s... tell me , what would you do if this were happening in your Edina neighborhood? Would you tell your children to “ go play in the parking lot?” Or would you rather they play in a park like setting on beautiful green grass, with rare century trees, and wildlife? Chrissy Lamson Respondent No:15 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 21:14:53 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 21:14:53 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Doug Haining Q2.Address 6433 Maloney Ave Q3.Comment I have a number of concerns with this project. 1. The club bought up several homes on Waterman avenue, and then allowed them to deteriorate into more or less uninhabitable structures. Then they tell the neighbors that they're doing them a favor by razing them. That's a pretty crummy modus operandi. 2. The club will be removing homes that could be rented out or sold to families. 3. The club will be removing mature trees to complete the project. There should be a way to do a project without deforestation, especially of mature trees. It shouldn't need to be said that 100+ year old trees should remain standing. 4. There is already a gravel-surface parking lot in the area where the proposed parking lot would go. The plan is to enlarge the lot and pave it. There are alternatives to bituminous pavement that allow water to filter through the surface, thereby greatly reducing runoff and controlling erosion. The "buffer area" is a nice idea but might be unnecessary if pavement alternatives are used. The MN Landscape Arboretum has these kinds of alternatives in use, and is a good resource to learn more about it. It seems quite short-sighted that the architects did not include these kinds of alternatives in the plan. ("Too expensive" is not a valid reason for an entity like Interlachen CC.) If the plan should be approved, it would be my hope that it would be revised to include such paving alternatives. 5. The neighbors in the immediate vicinity do not want the project to proceed. For these reasons I am against the project and recommend the Edina City Council disallow its approval. Respondent No:16 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 02, 2021 23:08:59 pm Last Seen:Jun 02, 2021 23:08:59 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Alissa Movern Q2.Address 5005 west 56th street Q3.Comment I am not a resident in this area, however it is unfair to rezone private family homes to then allow for a parking lot with increased traffic through a neighborhood. Also I question the need for more asphalt. Hopefully the plan is for something that is environmentally friendly. For a city that is trying to increase biking and alternative forms of transportation making more parking lots I don’t think is inline with current city initiatives. Respondent No:17 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 05:23:08 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 05:23:08 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Briana Rhodes Q2.Address 4925 Green Farms Circle Q3.Comment Seems a project like this does little to improve the ecosystem of this neighborhood. What the ICC project will do is greatly effect the quality of life for surrounding families; nature will be negatively impacted, the roads will be negatively impacted, and noise will be amplified. For what? I’m not saying that all construction projects are bad and we should not approve anything negatively affecting our environment; however, many parts of this project seem unnecessary and wasteful. Talking to my neighbors it is clear that the only ones ‘for’ this project are ICC members. They’d like to tell me that bulldozing houses, demolishing mature trees and decimating green space to make way for VIP parking, a putting green and new tee off space is not only necessary but validated by their dues. They deserve to do this, they “pay” to make these changes, who cares about “those homes” or “those people” in “that” area. Like they are doing everyone a favor. It makes me cringe. How many members does ICC have? Do they require twice the space to park VIP cars and golf carts? This project is superfluous and presumptuous; it is clear ICC already believes they have a green light. Myself? I would choose to not let this project pass for the above reasons and because I’d choose nature over some pompous, entitled ICC member’s ability to park their Ferrari any day. Respondent No:18 Login:elainecor53 Email:elainecor53@gmail.com Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 05:54:15 am Last Seen:May 22, 2021 21:38:12 pm IP Address:68.54.97.75 Q1.First and Last Name Elaine R Corcoran Q2.Address 7100 Metro Blvd . #423 Q3.Comment There is no need for this excess in today's world. To bull doze housing for a parking lot is absurd. Please do not vote for this project. Respondent No:19 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 06:16:28 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 06:16:28 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Charlotte Lefebvre Q2.Address 6412 Aspen Rd Q3.Comment No. No no no no. Please do not approve of this proposal. Respondent No:20 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:12:41 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:12:41 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rebecca Nye Q2.Address 6313 Peacedale Av S Edina MN Q3.Comment Your lack of concern for Edina residents who actually live here currently is appalling. Now with the expansion of the parking lot at Interlachen, it just amplifies your disregard of us and seeming worship of those who don’t live here or don’t live here yet. My young adult relatives are choosing to move to adjoining suburbs where they actually care about current citizens. Respondent No:21 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:16:51 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:16:51 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Karen Huffman Q2.Address 4724 Dunberry Lane Q3.Comment Just. No. Respondent No:22 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:39:24 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:39:24 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Roger Fitzgerald Q2.Address 416 Blake Rd S, Edina Q3.Comment I suggest that the club look at building either a 2-3 level parking garage on their existing grounds or an underground garage, using the top level for practice greens, garden, courts, etc. We want to keep our neighborhood homes. Respondent No:23 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:46:24 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:46:24 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary Boespflug Q2.Address 8918 Newton Avenue S Q3.Comment PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE do not allow this to move forward.......the wealthy have got to stop discounting the needs of those who have nothing. What happened to care of one another? especially those less fortunate. Allowing this to happen enables the separation of communities and the enabling of those who have to take from those who have not. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE hear the voices of the many who care. Respondent No:24 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 07:56:02 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 07:56:02 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Leffert Tigelaar Q2.Address 5816 Stuart Ave, 55436 Q3.Comment Is the public right away vacated in the area of the proposed cul de sac? The property boundary line suggests that is has been? Respondent No:25 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 09:03:32 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 09:03:32 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Suzanne Cluckey Q2.Address 7012 Bristol Blvd Q3.Comment They can't expand their current parking vertically and put a putting green on top? They have money to buy up houses at a premium (and turn them into eyesores and hazards) but cannot afford a more environmentally friendly solution to their parking needs? This lazy-minded, cheaply executed plan creates no value for the neighboring community, generates ill will from the country club's neighbors and, most critically, adds to environmental stress in an increasingly hard-scaped suburb with more pavement and chemically treated turf. This is the kind "we're entitled" project that makes ordinary people despise country clubs. Interlachen can and should do much better. Respondent No:26 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 09:49:56 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 09:49:56 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Emily Knight Q2.Address 6085 Lincoln Drive Q3.Comment Affordable housing is a critical need in this community. Luxury parking is not. Respondent No:27 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 10:18:57 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 10:18:57 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Todd Chambliss Q2.Address 5524 Malibu Drive Q3.Comment I think this is a great idea. This takes care of blighted property and add usable green space along with a garden and trees. This will also help with ease of access to employees and members for the clubhouse, courts and rinks as well. Respondent No:28 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 10:24:27 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 10:24:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Elizabeth Mayotte Q2.Address 265 Oakwood Road Hopkins MN 55343 Q3.Comment Interested in seeing how this will work out for the neighborhoods. I was a former member, so can look at it from both sides. Respondent No:29 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 10:27:11 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 10:27:11 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary Jo Sanderson Q2.Address 6519 Interlachen Blvd, edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment I am very supportive of the plan and respect how much Interlachen has done to improve the look of the neighborhood while being respectful of surrounding homes and preserving/replacing trees and vegetation disrupted by any additions. It looks lovely. Respondent No:30 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 11:03:07 am Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 11:03:07 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Karen Seay Q2.Address 6808 Dovre Drive, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment My reaction to the proposal by ICC is that it seems to fly in the face of any intention or desire by the City of Edina and Edina residents to preserve and protect affordable homes. Whether ICC already owns the homes and the property or not, this is a waste of resources and negatively affects the surrounding neighbors, who appear to be totally in opposition to the plan, not to mention the value of their properties and their everyday comfort in their homes. The proposal also appears to fly in the face of current reasonable environmental practice to create hard-surface parking lots where open and drainable land currently exists. The world is moving toward de-emphasizing use of existing remaining open urban and suburban land for the support and propagation of private automobiles, their use, and storage. This plan is moving in the opposite direction. My final point is that this plan almost laughably plays into the hands of ancient and, I truly hope, outmoded stereotypes about Edina, who lives here, who holds power and uses it to the detriment of anyone who isn’t a “privileged,” wealthy Edinan. This will be the source of jokes for years if and when this proposal is approved and ICC continues with its apparently already-undertaken expansion plans. I hate seeing our city and its people subjected to scorn and ridicule because of the expansion desires of a country club. I am frankly shocked that this proposal exists and embarrassed for the city that it does. Respondent No:31 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 13:02:21 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 13:02:21 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Blair Okey Q2.Address 5122 Richmond Drive Q3.Comment This is ridiculous. I oppose this actio Respondent No:32 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 13:46:18 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 13:46:18 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland Hawver Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment This project will destroy an established neighborhood of young families, long-time residents, and a forest of old trees, as well as some affordable housing units. Surely, EDINA must have a responsibility to steward its land, neighborhoods, forests and neighborhoods. Respondent No:33 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 13:58:59 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 13:58:59 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary McNamara Q2.Address 6221 Maloney Ave. Edina, MN 55343 Q3.Comment The plan is an intrusion into a settled, quiet residential neighborhood. It adversely affects homes, due to parking lot noise and lighting and the storm water plan directs the runoff into the backyards of homes on Maloney Ave. before it empties into the part of a pond which is located on my property. Respondent No:34 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 14:45:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 14:45:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Renata Farrell Q2.Address 5709 Hyland Ct. Dr., Bloomington Q3.Comment I have such fond memories of my granddaughter's large, elaborate wedding at Interlachen and the times I have been at other gatherings there. However, I am deeply saddened to think Interlachen would try to expand at the expense of people who need the housing that would be leveled. Respondent No:35 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 15:43:44 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 15:43:44 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sally A. Goff Q2.Address 31051 Wrencrest Drive, Wesley Chapel, FL 33553 Q3.Comment I know residents of this area & cannot believe that you would consider demolishing beautiful homes, trees, & land to ‘put in a parking lot’. Shame on you for such bully-like, greedy behavior. Must be a great deal of wealthy folks on the ‘board’ who are VP’s in the insurance field! That’s what seems to be running our country. These people have worked hard to get what they have. Unreal, you should attempt to take this land from them! Respondent No:36 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 03, 2021 19:48:58 pm Last Seen:Jun 03, 2021 19:48:58 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joy Miller-Damiani Q2.Address 502 Normandy Village, Nanuet NY 10954 Q3.Comment Please keep this beautiful neighborhood the way it is! Respondent No:37 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 04, 2021 02:13:59 am Last Seen:Jun 04, 2021 02:13:59 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kandy Duncan Q2.Address 11915 Jackson Road Q3.Comment How dare you! You are disgusting for wanting to destroy the homes on the street my Cousin lives! It's such a quiet beautiful little neighborhood. Build the parking lot where it would not cause destruction of people's lives! There is way too much of that going on today. Please have a heart!!! Respondent No:38 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 08, 2021 10:57:26 am Last Seen:Jun 08, 2021 10:57:26 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name ronald nelson Q2.Address 421 john st Q3.Comment I am pro to allow Interlachen CC to proceed with their proposal. Respondent No:39 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 08, 2021 11:12:34 am Last Seen:Jun 08, 2021 11:12:34 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Nelson Q2.Address 421 John St Q3.Comment I feel Interlachen's proposal would not cause any harm to the area and they should be allowed to proceed with their conditional use request. It will add to the quality of the area and I generally feel people should be allowed to do what they choose with their property. Respondent No:40 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 08, 2021 13:31:43 pm Last Seen:Jun 08, 2021 13:31:43 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mark Halvorson Q2.Address 416 Kresse Circle Q3.Comment Really? Is this what Edina needs, another impervious parking lot? In a watershed district? Isn’t Edina trying to promote single family home ownership? Does it make sense to remove affordable housing so the golf course can create a putting green and overflow parking? Just wondering? Respondent No:41 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 10, 2021 08:15:33 am Last Seen:Jun 10, 2021 08:15:33 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name David Brockway Q2.Address 6301 Maloney Avenue Q3.Comment I am opposed to Interlachen's plan to build a parking lot just to the south, and adjacent to our property. I hope the City of Edina does not grant a conditional use permit. Background: We bought this property 9 years ago for our retirement home because of the back yard, and surrounding properties. It was all green space, with abundant naturalized plantings, and all residences' backyards converging to create a parkland setting we all enjoyed. There was abundant wildlife, and this seemed an oasis for the Waterman and Maloney residents bordering it. I am an amateur ecologist, and this was an ideal situation. At the time we bought the property and build our house, Interlachen Club owned an adjacent lot with a house, but did not seem to use it. The adjacent neighbor told us that the club was not maintaining the house AKA "The Rat House". At that time it was zoned residential, and was not a concern of ours. Interlachen's activities could be heard, primarily from tennis courts and swimming pool area, but were usually not intrusive. #1 issue was the lights from their parking lot or tennis courts being left on at night. These are tall, high intensity lights, and shone directly into our bedroom, disrupting our sleep. Normally, in nighttime our backyard is completely dark. Interlachen's plan replaces two large backyards with a 100+ space parking lot that is in our direct line of sight as we sit in our living room and bedroom, esp in the winter when the leaves are down. They have unspecified lighting plans that may have lights shining in our windows at any time of day. This could seriously and permanently disrupt our, and our neighbors sleep, let alone our overall enjoyment of our home. Light pollution is also disruptive to wildlife. At the same time, a dark isolated parking lot seems risky. Lights controlled by motion detectors would be particularly disruptive. It also will increase the noise from Interlachen. Car doors slamming and people talking/yelling in the normal course of things, or special events. Visually, watching cars going in and out of a parking lot is unattractive. This is not on the edge of a busy road, this is in the middle of great Edina neighborhood. Runoff would be increased to the local pond, which is already overburdened with nutrients. I don't think the bioretention basin is adequate to handle runoff from both the parking lot and Waterman Ave. Increased nutrient burden to the wetland increases the risk of obnoxious/toxic algae growth. The parking lot will increase air temperature for the nearby homes. Perhaps they can build a 2 level lot on the current lots. Edina needs no more parking lots. I understand why Interlachen wants to do this. It would enhance their facility. But we and our neighbors would be paying the price. They are asking for a CUP to add value to their golf club(that most of us could not afford a membership to), by taking value away from our homes and neighborhood. They propose mitigation strategies, but the devil is in the details, right? If they can buy a house and then neglect it, why wouldn't they promise whatever to get the CUP, then do whatever they want? Please do not grant Interlachen CC a conditional use permit to put a parking lot in the midst of our neighborhood. Thank you! Respondent No:42 Login:Linda Thomas Email:lthomasmovies@yahoo.com Responded At:Jun 12, 2021 11:11:14 am Last Seen:Jun 11, 2021 16:47:53 pm IP Address:75.73.69.122 Q1.First and Last Name Linda Thomas Q2.Address 505 John St Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club has been creating a parking problem for itself for years. My husband and I were members at ICC for 26 years. They have increased the membership several times, especially by creating new classifications of members. 827 families is a huge number. They made that number, not us. They have added activities like hockey, pickle ball, cornhole, paddle tennis and a large exercise area. Most of those activities are on the west end of the property, where the new parking would be. The new lot would park 105 cars and be around 30,000 square feet of asphalt. Who in Edina or anywhere else would want a 105 space parking lot within 80 feet of their yard? At least 15 to 30 mature trees (20 to 40 ft) would have to be cut down. We have enjoyed the beauty of al the trees, wildlife and especially the birds for 45 years. All of that has gotten better than ever because several of our neighbors have landscaped their yards to draw more of the wildlife to the area and they have succeeded fantastically. Since I retired when the pandemic came, I have spent virtually 1-2 hours every nice morning on deck in peace and tranquility with all of nature's sounds while enjoying my coffee and breakfast on the deck. I do some reading, writing, texting and just relaxing. It's a perfect spot to start and end your day. We use our deck as our cabin in summer. We are out on it every possible day and night cooking, grilling, entertaining, eating, reading, or just relaxing for hours on end. Also, our family room looks out to the east. We are in that room all the time in colder weather. We already suffer from light and noise pollution from Interlachen year round. Bringing it at least 150 feet closer will only make it worse. We have never complained about the noise from all the various activities but losing the peace, the view and tranquility on our deck and from the back of our house would be a huge loss for us and our neighbors. The ICC General Manager, who's only been there for 4 1/2 years, mentioned the safety of their employees early in the meeting. In 45 years, I don't recall hearing about an accident occurring on Blake Road involving any ICC employee. I have not heard about people being worried about that before. They took out parking when they enlarged the pool area, added the large steps down from the pro shop, enlarged the tennis court area and made the parking horizontal instead of vertical and put in landscaped concrete dividers. They, also, made a landscaped walkway from the east side to the tennis court area. Joel Livingood, Interlachen's General Manager, told the membership that no parking places were lost when they redid and landscaped the main parking lot but I can say that is simply not true. Our entire neighborhood is upset about this proposed development. I feel like we are being bullied by the bigger and more powerful to do what they want. Interlachen has purchased 6 R-1 lots with affordable houses on them (3 have already been torn down) in a residential neighborhood to put in a 30,000 sq foot 105 space commercial parking lot. I did not know they had done that until just before our first meeting at ICC. Please do the right thing and deny them their proposed conditional use permit. I suggest that anyone involved in deciding the conditional use permit, please read Edina's Code of Ordinances Sec. 36-1 Findings Sec 36-2 Objectives subsection 1, 3, 5, 9. It should be easy to see this proposal goes against all of those. Respectfully, Linda Thomas Respondent No:43 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 12, 2021 17:24:11 pm Last Seen:Jun 12, 2021 17:24:11 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Adam Engebretson Q2.Address 235 Holly Rd, Hopkins Q3.Comment I support Interlachen County Club's proposal to expand the boundaries of their club, including adding parking and practice facilities. ICC has been in their current location for more than 100 years and have limited options to expand. This is a common sense solution that allows ICC to grow but is balanced with the needs of the surrounding neighborhood. Respondent No:44 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 13, 2021 17:19:20 pm Last Seen:Jun 13, 2021 17:19:20 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Cathie Hayward Q2.Address 7013 Edenvale Blvd., Eden Prairie, MN 55346 Q3.Comment On behalf of my my friends who live in this neighborhood, I am aghast at the plans to destroy middle class homes and values to put in a parking lot for a Country Club! I certainly hope this will be reconsidered and rescinded. Respondent No:45 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 13, 2021 17:44:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 13, 2021 17:44:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Alissa Qaranivalu Q2.Address 209 W Market street Panora Ia 50216 Q3.Comment Concerned about the impact a parking lot and rezoning would have on this neighborhood. We have friends who live there and absolutly appreciate the nature and quietness. I would imagine homeowners would also be concerned about taking away their quiet street and losing valuable housing. Please consider the best interest of this neighborhood by voting against a rezone. Respondent No:46 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 13, 2021 20:02:25 pm Last Seen:Jun 13, 2021 20:02:25 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Deb Bonner Q2.Address 923 NW 110th Q3.Comment Please do not ruin a beautiful neighborhood, tearing down houses and killing beautiful trees to build a parking lot. I don’t see how you can completely uproot people. Respondent No:47 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 14, 2021 19:57:43 pm Last Seen:Jun 14, 2021 19:57:43 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Caryl Morgan Q2.Address 5808 South Dr Q3.Comment Interlachen has always gone above and beyond to be respectful neighbors. It looks like this is a very reasonable request and will be nicely done. I approve. Respondent No:48 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 08:29:01 am Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 08:29:01 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Chrissy Hyland Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment To Whom it many concern in Edina city Council and planning and Development of Edina Building a parking lot along with any type of storage unit for what future purposes we don’t know, whether it be disclosed or not, or will be in the future is an absolute insult, absolutely selfish project and would be a travesty to our beautiful neighborhoods on John Street and Waterman Avenue. Our residents, our people, and our wildlife, including many types of birds, who nest and migrate through our watershed location, here on John, Waterman, and Maloney St. Our neighborhood is created from good families, good people, who’ve moved here from other places because of this magical park like setting, which is rare to find in Edina or any other cities or suburbs. The families who have children feel safe that their kids have a safe place to play, believe me having a parking lot in their backyard is not to be considered safe by any shape of form! The impact to the families and the environment is truly unacceptable! ICC, go find another location on your 170 acres if you feel you need more parking and a storage facility that may store “who knows what,” unsitely items that you don’t want your members to see, but it’s okay to place them in our neighbors view..for the elite members of your private club. When I talk about “Views”, we don’t consider the view of an elevated parking lot with obtrusive security lighting, chain link fences, raised headlights from cars, large SUV’s, golf carts, trucks , flashing into our windows and our backyards. Would you and your families consider this acceptable in your backyard, let alone in the middle of their neighborhoods? I’m also curious as to the number of City government members, who may belong to ICC or their family members who belong to ICC. If that can be disclosed publicly to our neighborhood? Don’t take away our neighborhood with your parking lot ! Chrissy Hyland Lamson John Street Respondent No:49 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:02 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:02 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Casey Schoen Q2.Address 6228 Parkwood Rd, Edina Q3.Comment I am a long time Edina resident and member at ICC. I think the plan proposed by ICC has been very thoughtful and results in an overall safer environment for ICC members and their children, for ICC staff and for our neighbors located on Waterman Avenue (through the installation of at gate restricting traffic flow on Waterman). I think ICC has been a good member of the community going to extensive efforts to listen to concerns through a variety of forums and address them in the best possible way. Respondent No:50 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:50 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:20:50 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joanna Roth Q2.Address 5207 Doncaster way edina Q3.Comment I am very supportive of this expansion to help ease traffic on waterman. Important to ensure adequate trees are kept but believe this will help elevate the street and keep parking at the club Respondent No:51 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Brian Roth Q2.Address 5207 Doncaster Way Q3.Comment I am in 100% full support for this project. It is needed from a parking POV and Interlachen has been good neighbors and a big draw to Edina in general. Respondent No:52 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:45 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:21:45 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Apoorva Shah Q2.Address 5924 Interlachen boulevard Q3.Comment We support this project. It will be great for the community. Respondent No:53 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:23:21 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:23:21 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mike DeVoe Q2.Address 5900 Long Brake Trail, Edina Q3.Comment This is a well thought out plan incorporating neighbors' input. It will help fill a need for club members, as well as enhance safety for the neighborhood, club employees and, perhaps most importantly, children in the club parking lot. Respondent No:54 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Daniel Cragg Q2.Address 4917 Arden Ave Q3.Comment I completely support Interlachen's application. The opposition to this improvement is yet another example of NIMBYism run amok. Interlachen went above and beyond to address neighborhood concerns by purchasing two properties to act as a buffer and in the aesthetic design. Given all the concessions that Interlachen has made to neighborhood concerns, it would be hard to see a denial of this application as anything but arbitrary and capricious. Respondent No:55 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:35 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:24:35 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Octavio Portu Q2.Address 4705 Annaway Drive, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment I support the permit for Interlachen Country Club to expand the boundaries of the country club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. The project will add traffic safety to the Waterman Avenue area, as well as provide much needed parking to eliminate parking congestions in adjacent streets. Respondent No:56 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Todd Doroff Q2.Address 6304 Brookview Ave Edina, MN 55424 Q3.Comment I encourage support for Interlachen's Conditional Use Permit application. The proposal will accomplish the goals of improving safety for neighbors as well as increasing parking for members, guests and employees. Interlachen has provided a number of opportunities for input and to share information with impacted neighbors. The designed plan considered concerns from neighbors, was thoughtfully planned out and improves the aesthetics and functionality of the area. It is a win- win for all parties. Respondent No:57 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:15 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:15 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Emily Doherty Q2.Address 5004 Skyline Dr Q3.Comment During the summer months, we routinely have to arrive early to swim lessons, golf, etc., so that we can find a parking spot and not worry about schlepping our stuff and young kids a long distance or deal with valeting. I worry about the caddies and employees that have to park at the the church--Interlachen Blvd and Blake Rd are very busy and I often see distracted drivers looking at their phones and driving over the speed limit. The staff have to walk a half a mile to get to work, with part of that stretch on Blake Rd. My experience at ICC is that the leadership team is incredibly thoughtful in their style -- always trying to find ways to make things better, safer, and more efficient, and they always keep our neighbors in mind when making decisions. Respondent No:58 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:57 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:25:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Laura Heinmiller Q2.Address 5300 Dundee rd Edina,MN Q3.Comment We are fully supportive of the parking/expansion plan being proposed by Interlachen Country Club. We feel it would create a safer environment for both the club and the surrounding neighborhood while having minimal impact on the surrounding neighborhood. We enthusiastically endorse this plan!!! Respondent No:59 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:19 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:19 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Becca Stockdale Q2.Address 6208 Coteau Trl. Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Q3.Comment I wanted to comment on my support for the project Interlachen Country Club proposes. The club needs more parking to support membership and also to make it more safe for staff so they don't have to cross a busy road when forced to use overflow parking. Interlachen is a good neighbor. They have listened to the surrounding neighbors and have tried to find the best compromise for both parties. Respondent No:60 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:44 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:27:44 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ryan Spanheimer Q2.Address 5908 Kellogg Ave Edina MN 55424 Q3.Comment I'm writing to submit my strong approval for Interlachen's CUP. The proposed plan takes into consideration all of the surrounding properties and goes out of its way to accommodate these neighboring properties to the cost of Interlachen. The additional parking is necessary to the continues success of Interlachen and the plan as proposed facilitates increased safety for the neighboring properties by diverting traffic in a safe and efficient manner. I cannot imagine a more thorough and considerate plan than that proposed by Interlachen. Concerns raised by neighboring properties are based on misinformation and not fact. This should be considered an easy CUP approval. Respondent No:61 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:33:24 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:33:24 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lindsay and Wally Cisewski Q2.Address 4924 Ridge Road, Edina 55436 Q3.Comment We support the Interlachen expansion of the parking area on Waterman. We live a few streets over, and are very familiar with this area. There is a need for additional parking, and a current shortage at Interlachen. The project will improve safety for the employees who currently have to cross the very busy Blake Road from the current overflow parking situation across the street. Interlachen is a good neighbor, and has listened to residents concerns, proposed a beautiful aesthetically pleasing project, and purchased buffer areas as well. Respondent No:62 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:34:31 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:34:31 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joe Carroll Q2.Address 5932 Tamarac Ave, Edina Q3.Comment Hi, as both a resident of Edina and a member of Interlachen, I wanted to share how helpful this expansion will be. In the summer, parking at Interlachen is always very tight / at capacity and I think the new proposed parking lot would help nearby residents by streamlining traffic and ensuring more safety for the surrounding neighborhood by focusing all traffic through the main entrance on Interlachen Blvd. Additionally, knowing how thoughtful the Interlachen team is, I'm sure they have considered each of the neighbors concerns and found creative ways to address them, as I have seen them do each and every day. As a resident of the city, I know change can be challenging, but I think we also need to recognize the value that Interlachen brings to the city of Edina, and how it helps keep our city one of the most desired in the Twin Cities area. Thank you for your consideration Respondent No:63 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:36:07 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:36:07 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kate Winninger-Smith Q2.Address 5224 W 51st Street Edina, 55436 Q3.Comment I am sharing my comments, not only as a member but also as a proud Edina resident who believes these changes will create a more beautiful as well as a very efficient improvement to the area. ICC needs more parking. - Right now the lot is over flowing and would result in parking on Interlachen Blvd. which would be an eyesore for residents and non-members. - Employees are put in precarious positions to repeatedly cross blake road. Why put them in this position is ICC is prepared to take on the cost and their land to create a safe parking area for employees? Just Saturday I was driving south on Blake road, on my way back from Target Knollwood and the car in front of me failed to see the young caddie crossing the street - it was very scary to watch and the car had to quickly veer out of the way to ensure not hitting the teen. - The plan is beautiful and would absolutely increase land value for neighbors. Right now there is nothing slowing the flow of traffic, which the fences will do and will make the neighborhood a safer place. Having the fences in place and the new plan will also lessen the foot traffic as it will become a less easily accessible entry way for members vs the absolutely open street entry way that is currently there. This proposed plan is a win-win for the community and surrounding home owners. Thank you Respondent No:64 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:37:48 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:37:48 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sara McLenighan Q2.Address 5513 Highland Road Edina 55436 Q3.Comment Definitely support this. It is much needed and will be far safer for all! Yes we support the parking lot expansion for Interlachen Country Club. Respondent No:65 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:38 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:38 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rick Reuter Q2.Address Elmwood Place Q3.Comment I am in support of this new plan. It's thoughtful and will bring value to the club but also the adjacent neighborhood. Respondent No:66 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:45 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:38:45 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name James Gain Q2.Address 5905 Wooddale Ave Q3.Comment This is a well known and premier golf course in the United States and around the world. Making these changes is not only good for Edina, but great for the future of professional golf in Minnesota! Let’s make it happen! Respondent No:67 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:39:58 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:39:58 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Charles Geer Q2.Address 5812 Northwood Dr, Edina (over 50 years an Edina resident) Q3.Comment From the standpoint of those homeowners living on Waterman Ave I would think that the project provides considerable benefit and no detriment: much decreased traffic, greatly improved groundwater control, upgraded plantings and shielding from Interlachen properties. Respondent No:68 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:41:08 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:41:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name William Doherty Q2.Address 5004 Skyline Drive, Edina, MN Q3.Comment Please let my comments serve as support for the conditional use permit for Interlachen Country Club. The club needs additional parking to support its members, is looking to improve safety (and reduce traffic on Waterman Ave), and looks to continue to be a wonderful part of our community and neighborhood. Respondent No:69 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:46:44 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:46:44 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Cody Skarning Q2.Address 6124 Virginia ave s Edina, my 55424 Q3.Comment Good afternoon. I am writing in support of the proposed plans to address space limitations at Interlachen Country Club. The steps that the Interlachen team has taken to acknowledge the neighbors concerns while also looking to address significant space limitations on the existing property, are significant. They have solicited, through a number of forums, feedback from the community to help identify these potential concerns. Based on feedback, they purchased additional land to provide a buffer from those who may be affected by the change. Ultimately, the updates will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and the need for overflow parking that currently occur across Blake Road. This alone helps address current safety concerns. I hope the city of Edina understands the efforts that were taken to address the concerns presented and allows the proposed plan to move forward. Thank you for your consideration. Respondent No:70 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tim Smith Q2.Address 4521 Claremore Court Q3.Comment 1. We need additional parking; we are consistently short parking spots 2. We want to improve safety 3. ICC has been very collaborative with the surrounding neighbors Respondent No:71 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:06 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:52:06 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jon/Linda Radabaugh Q2.Address 5100 France Ave S Q3.Comment This parking area will be well designed, well landscaped and make the Waterman area safer and have less traffic. Respondent No:72 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:56:26 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:56:26 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joe McCusker Q2.Address 5995 Lincoln Dr, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment Please approve the request for additional parking space and the enhancements Interlachen is proposing. The club is trying to accommodate the growth in popularity of the club to Edina residents and now needs more space. The design is thoughtful and tries to add safety as well as meet the needs of the neighbors of the club. Respondent No:73 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 12:58:07 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 12:58:07 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Rob Cain Q2.Address 4617 Golf Terrace, Edina Q3.Comment I am strongly supportive of the planned and very necessary improvements. The primary factors for my support include the safety of my children moving across the ICC campus with regular cut through traffic, the safety of our ICC staff and team members through improved and lighted parking and walkways, and the beautification and enhanced usability of the west exit. The project represents a significant enhancement to this corner of our city and our community space. Respondent No:74 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:00:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:00:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tim and Mary Kuehl Q2.Address 5708 Continental Drive Q3.Comment We live in the Parkwood Knolls area of Edina and support ICC receiving a permit to allow their project to happen. Respondent No:75 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:01:49 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:01:49 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Steve Hamm Q2.Address 5404 Larada Ln Edina 55436 Q3.Comment Interlachen has been a great neighbor. This plan will greatly reduce the traffic on Waterman St which i feel would be very important to the residents. The plan will be finished as proposed-- as Interlachen does what they say they will do. Respondent No:76 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:07:46 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:07:46 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christina Kennedy Q2.Address 6224 Interlachen Blvd. Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment Our house backs up to the Interlachen Country's Club driving range. We consider the Club to be a very good neighbor. I support their parking proposal. I do NOT think it's safe for the Club's employees to have to cross Blake Ave. right near a dangerous curve. Respondent No:77 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:11:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:11:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name George Carroll Q2.Address ICC Q3.Comment As a former COO general manager of Interlachen this was discussed with the city engineer years ago with their input and ok This will add greatly to the safety of the neighborhood and Interlachen employees thank you again George Carroll Respondent No:78 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:27:26 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:27:26 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jane Pirtle Q2.Address 6420 Willow Wood rd Q3.Comment I support this permit. ICC does not have enough parking for it's members and guests. Respondent No:79 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:13 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ashley Anderson Q2.Address 5804 Mait Lane Edina MN 55436 Q3.Comment Voicing support to expand parking lot Respondent No:80 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:34:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name JOHN GONSIOR Q2.Address 5812 Hidden Ln Q3.Comment I am in full support of this project that will be a benefit to the neighborhood and related home values Respondent No:81 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:36:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:36:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lindsay Hill Q2.Address 5200 Kelsey Terrace Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club has always been a good neighbor. Its past has included significant changes with clubhouse development, golf course development, and other large construction projects. The club has always been forthright and understanding of its role in the neighborhood before, during, and after these projects. The current proposal will enhance safety around the club's West entrance (particularly for residents, club employees, and children), reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue, beautify existing club property, and enhance the existing buffer areas between the club and the neighborhood. The club has taken a thoughtful approach to the enhancements to improve and minimize the club's impact on the neighborhood. As a leading private club in the country, Interlachen Country Club is an asset to Edina and a good steward of the behaviors of a good neighbor. Respondent No:82 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:48:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:48:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ryan Green Q2.Address 4904 East Sunnyslope Road Q3.Comment Thank you to the Planning Commission, ICC neighbors, and the teams that have worked tirelessly to create this plan. This comment is submitted in support of the proposed Conditional Use Permit. The current lot cannot accommodate the need for parking at the club and this will resolve that need. With that, neighborhood residents will see less traffic on Waterman as well as a refreshed asthetic and buffer separating the properties. Equally (if not more) important, employee safety will be markedly improved as there will no longer be a need for employees to park on the other side of Blake Rd only to cross the street on their way to and from the course. Thank you, to all involved, for your consideration! Regards, -Ryan Green Respondent No:83 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 13:57:26 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 13:57:26 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jason Vogt Q2.Address 6212 parkwood road Q3.Comment I support the project. Additional parking is sorely needed to improve safety. ICC has given thoughtful consideration for years and finally presented a responsible plan. Respondent No:84 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:27:13 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:27:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Conor Green Q2.Address 5524 Oaklawn Ave Edina Q3.Comment Hi, my family is an ICC member and 10-year Edina residents and we support this plan. I believe the club is working hard to incorporate community feedback and I honestly believe that closing off the Waterman entrance with a gate will benefit both the club and the neighborhood. ICC has seen a lot of increased activity over the past 18 months and the current parking situation is not sustainable. Many of the employees have been part of organization for years and treat the club and the neighborhood with a lot of respect. I hope they get a chance to park closer in a better, safer situation for them. Thank you Respondent No:85 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:35:36 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:35:36 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lilly Francis Q2.Address 1930 Oak Street Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Q3.Comment Throughout the summer months we are consistently short of parking spots in our current parking lots. There is increased traffic in the parking lots and on the surrounding streets due to the lack of spots. The traffic creates danger for members and employees trying to make their way to the club from a further parking location. As an employee, it is frustrating not having parking spots available as searching for an open spot usually results in my being late to clock in. Overflow parking is most definitely needed at Interlachen and the club has communicated many times with surrounding residents about their concerns. By creating extra parking safe Interlachen would be adding increased safety for their members and employees. Respondent No:86 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:37 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:37 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jigna Mahapatra Q2.Address 4200 Brookside Ave Q3.Comment The proposed project focuses on safety and I fully support safety of the neighborhood and safety of the employees to be able to park closer and not have to cross a busy street. Respondent No:87 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:56 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:45:56 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Erin vanSlingerlandt Q2.Address 5801 South Dr, Edina 55436 Q3.Comment As both an Edina resident and ICC member, I fully support the conditional use permit for additional parking and expanded practice area. The plan is thorough and well thought out, taking into account the concerns of those residents near the club. There is a definite need for more parking especially during the summer months. Safety is also a concern with employees now needing to cross Blake Road to use the overflow parking lot at the Lutheran church. In my years as a member, I have always known the ICC management and members to be good, respectful neighbors to those who live nearby. I do not expect their behavior to be any different under this conditional use permit. Thanks for your consideration. Respondent No:88 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:48:10 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:48:10 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Steven Scott Q2.Address 5724 Zenith Ave S. Edina, MN 55410 Q3.Comment I would like to note my full support for this project. Interlachen desperately needs additional parking. The current lack of parking creates an unsafe environment for employees who have to park off-site and walk to the club, crossing busy streets. The neighboring homes owned by the club provide an amble buffer to current residents in the area and the renderings show the aesthetics will be excellent. Respondent No:89 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jamiel Akhtar Q2.Address 5115 Halifax Ave Q3.Comment I am fully in support of the Interlachen Country Club improvements. The club has been consistently short of parking spots. ICC has been a good neighbor and I believe that the proposed plan is good the club and very fair to the neighborhood, especially considering that the club purchased the two closest properties to serve as a buffer. Respondent No:90 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:50 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 14:50:50 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Veronica Johnson Q2.Address 5841 Saint Johns Ave Q3.Comment Interlachen employs many in the community. Parking there is an issue - I believe we need to support the institutions especially when they are proposing a solution that improves the aesthetic and safety of Waterman Ave. Respondent No:91 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:13 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Michael Gorman Q2.Address 5100 Mirror Lakes Drive Q3.Comment I would like to voice my support for the proposed conditional use permit. For the sake of transparency I will note that I am a member of Interlachen. i also live nearby, and am on the related streets (interlachen blvd, waterman, etc.) on a daily basis. There are always a host of factors which need to be considered in making a decision like this. As an Edina resident, I want all of my neighbors to enjoy their property just like I want to enjoy my own. I think this project meets that standard given the design's intent to put garden/green buffers between the parking lot and the properties. Interlachen is not proposing a change to the basic nature or use of the property - all of the additions are typical country club elements. There is a parking element that is important. The overflow cars will end up somewhere else that is less desirable than having them just stay on the ICC property. From a neighborhood perspective, I would rather have people park at their destination vs. park blocks away and walk through the neighborhood. Thanks for your consideration of the project. Respondent No:92 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:53 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:25:53 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jerome J Simons Q2.Address 5225 Grandview Squa, Unit 303 Q3.Comment We fully support this project. We have resided in Edina for over 40 years and have been members of Interlachen through this time. The project will add safety to the property . It will reduce non member traffic on Waterman thru Interlachen to Interlachen Boulevard. Thanks Respondent No:93 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:28:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:28:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Amanda Allen Q2.Address 5600 Interlachen Cir Q3.Comment I would like to voice my support of the Interlachen CC plan. Additional parking is needed for the membership and team members. During the summer and special events there are not enough spaces for the staff and members. A less crowded parking lot would improve both experience and safety for members, staff and guests. The closure of Waterman Ave will reduce traffic and improve both safety and livability for residents of the street. Interlachen CC had always been a good neighbor for the area and addressed the watershed and esthetic issues for the project. Respondent No:94 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 15:51:40 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 15:51:40 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Richard Best Q2.Address 3209 Galleria, Unit 902, Edina, MN, 55435 Q3.Comment Interlachen is a good neighbor and responsive to issues as they arise. Parking is needed primarily in the summer months and would get minimal usage other times if the year. I feel this development would also enhance safety. I urge the council to improve this request! Respondent No:95 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 16:02:42 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 16:02:42 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Wayne and Kathie Volland Q2.Address 5000 Oak Bend Lane Q3.Comment This makes all the sense in the world. It will be safer for the neighbors by having a controlled access to ICC. Speed will be reduced and it will limit the "pass through" traffic. Respondent No:96 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 16:22:09 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 16:22:09 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Shelby Aksteter Q2.Address 5817 Xerxes Avenue South, St. Louis park, mn Q3.Comment I am a fellow employee at Interlachen, and would like to show my support for an additional parking area. During our summer months, our parking lot is usually filled by 9AM every day. There are times where members and staff can't find parking, and have to park at the Shepard's church, or curbside, which can make our parking lot crammed and unsafe, and walking to and from work dangerous as well. I would like to think we are very good neighbors considering how close we all live, and with how busy we are. We aren't loud or disruptive at all. I don't see how adding this additional parking area would effect anyone negatively, and would cause less chaos at the club, and overall more safety and security. Respondent No:97 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 17:13:52 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 17:13:52 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Michael Dubes Q2.Address 10683 sonoma ridge Eden prairie Mm Q3.Comment Very big improvement for,the neighborhood Respondent No:98 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 17:14:14 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 17:14:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Carrie Carroll Q2.Address 6125 Scotia Dr Q3.Comment Dear Edina City Planning Commission: I am in support of the request by Interlachen Country Club for a conditional use permit for improved and expanded parking for the safety of members and employees. Interlachen has been a good neighbor and listened to nearby residents' concerns, considered them when developing the proposed plan, purchased two additional properties as a buffer to the improvements and gone above and beyond to improve the area's aesthetics. The plan will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for valued employees to cross Blake Road to get to their jobs at ICC. As a citizen of Edina and member of Interlachen, I feel strongly this is a good plan for Interlachen members and employees and for the neighbors of Interlachen. Respondent No:99 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 17:47:05 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 17:47:05 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sandra Davis Q2.Address 6405 Harold woods lane Q3.Comment We love this plan for multiple reasons. It actually reduces the traffic for the residents of Waterman Ave and keeps Interlachen employees from adding to issues in parking way offsite. This plan has also been developed through listening to neighbors concerns. Listening sessions have been used to modify and adapt the plan. I believe this plan is good for Edina, good for nearby residents, good for club employees and ultimately makes Interlachen a better community member. Sandra And Lynn Davis. 6405 Harold Woods Lane Respondent No:100 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 18:39:08 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 18:39:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Nathan Rajalingam Q2.Address 4314 Branson Street Q3.Comment An Edina resident and ICC member, the changes will improve safety; the proposed project will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for our employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at neighboring church. Respondent No:101 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 19:38:28 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 19:38:28 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kyle Rolfing Q2.Address 5816 Northwood Drive Q3.Comment I support this to reduce traffic for residents near ICC and to improve safety/security. Respondent No:102 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 20:12:17 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 20:12:17 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Josh Nimmons Q2.Address 6217 Belmore Ln, Edina Q3.Comment I live two blocks north of this project and I believe the proposed changes will improve the safety of the area. Closing Waterman Ave. to through-traffic will greatly reduce the number of cars and trucks on that residential street. Also, I have seen caddies and other employees crossing Blake Rd. to get to the current overflow parking in the church lot. There is a severe curve in Blake just south of Waterman that reduces visibility and there are no sidewalks in the area. The situation is even worse at night because there is just one streetlight on Waterman. The potential for an unfortunate accident is certainly there with the current setup and would be eliminated by the proposed changes. Respondent No:103 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 20:21:30 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 20:21:30 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Andrew Zinkel Q2.Address 5517 Oaklawn Ave Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club's plan for this expansion improves safety, reducing traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminating the need for employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church. Respondent No:104 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 21:44:37 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 21:44:37 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joe Hensley Q2.Address 5100 W 58th St Q3.Comment Interlachen Country Club has always raised the bar for quality and real estate improvements in Edina since the inception of the club. The club has considered the aesthetics, neighborhood impact, and net improvements extensively and this proposal more than exceeds expectations. This project will be a marked improvement to the current neighborhood, specifically improving the safety and security of the current residents while continuing to improve the value of the real estate surrounding ICC. As an Edina citizen and taxpayer, I recommend the board support and approve this development proposal for the good and growth of the greater Edina community. Respondent No:105 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 15, 2021 21:45:24 pm Last Seen:Jun 15, 2021 21:45:24 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tracy Pekarek Q2.Address 6604 Biscayne Blvd, Edina Q3.Comment I believe that the construction of a new parking lot adjacent to the tennis courts at Interlachen Country Club will not only provide much needed additional parking for members, but will also improve public safety by reducing traffic flow along Waterman Avenue. In addition I believe the club has worked hard to create a visually appealing buffer between the parking lot and range areas and the residences on Waterman Avenue. Respondent No:106 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 05:37:48 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 05:37:48 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Nickolas Stukas Q2.Address 6653 Parkwood Road, Edina MN Q3.Comment This project should reduce traffic flow through Waterman Ave and reduce need for use of overflow parking for ICC team members. Think it should be a net positive for both the neighborhood and users/employees of ICC. Respondent No:107 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 06:13:23 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 06:13:23 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Craig E Bentdahl Q2.Address 5101 Mirror Lakes Dr Q3.Comment I'm in favor of ICC's proposal. The additional parking is greatly needed, and it will improve safety on Waterman Avenue by reducing traffic. Respondent No:108 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 07:26:04 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 07:26:04 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lynn Sabre Q2.Address 6501 Harold Woods Ln Q3.Comment We are constantly short on parking for members and guest and it causes many safety concerns. Respondent No:109 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 07:37:11 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 07:37:11 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Bridget Hayden Q2.Address 5101 Ridge Rd., Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment As a parent of two young children, parking near the facilities is needed for safety. The currently available parking is often full making it a challenge to bring the kids to their activities. The proposed additional parking would be a great help. Thank you for your consideration. Respondent No:110 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 09:12:10 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 09:12:10 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joanna Phillips Q2.Address 4424 W 44th St, Edina 55424 Q3.Comment I am in support of the expansion of Interlachen Country Club. I think it will provide nominal interference into the surrounding neighborhood while increasing visual appeal and functionality to said surrounding areas. Respondent No:111 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 09:19:43 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 09:19:43 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Dixon Diebold Q2.Address 5524 Glengarry Parkway, Edina, MN Q3.Comment Interlachen is a valued member of the community. This golf course makes the neighbor's property MORE valuable. This will have minimal to no negative impact on the neighborhood and will be a dramatic improvement to the vacant lot that is there now. Please approve this application. Respondent No:112 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 10:17:06 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 10:17:06 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jodi Capistrant and David Albright Q2.Address 6205 Spruce Road Edina MN Q3.Comment 6/15/2021 RE: Support for approval of the CUP application submitted by Interlachen Country Club Dear City of Edina Planning Commission and City Council Members, Thank you for considering our comments related to the Interlachen Country Club (ICC) Conditional Use Permit (CUP) application to expand the boundaries of the ICC property to the west through the addition of a new parking lot and an expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. Our family was fortunate enough to move to the City of Edina in 2019 after a multi-year search for the “right property”. The Twin Cities has so much to offer in terms of amenities and we seemingly debated all of them up until the moment we had an opportunity to live adjacent to the first green of ICC. Interlachen Country Club is a storied asset to the entire Twin Cities and, more specifically to Edina, MN. When we toured the property where we live now, 6205 Spruce Road, we were immediately thrilled at the prospect of living in a thriving community, joining ICC, and bearing witness to the enjoyment it brings to members and their guests. Given the changes we wanted to make to our new property, we were in touch with our neighbors including the team at ICC to share our ideas and seek their feedback and approvals. Joel Livingood and the ICC team asked if we would be open to additional changes that they believed would both enhance our property and the ICC property. Their suggestions, which we collectively implemented, just made good sense. Our experience has been that ICC management has been reliably open-minded and that they consistently act as good faith neighbors. It is unfortunate that we have read factually incorrect information that may be perpetuating bad feelings towards what we believe is a common sense approach to maintaining and improving the ICC property, supporting the safety of their staff, members and guests (many who are Edina residents), as well as acting as a good neighbor. As members who live to the northwest of the ICC property, we drive south on Blake Road to access the club. We see staff trying to cross Blake Road which can be a bit dicey given the amount of traffic and the curve where Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard connect. And, while we acknowledge that ICC has urged us to use the main entrance off Interlachen Boulevard rather than Waterman Avenue, we are at times guilty of taking this short cut to enter and exit the club property. Upon reflection, we are likely detracting from the experience of those that live on Waterman Avenue and adding to the traffic-related safety concerns of those residents and the staff walking from the leased parking spaces at Shephard of the Hills Lutheran Church. We respect the fact that ICC is proposing to install a gate to regulate traffic on Waterman Avenue with the other proposed property enhancements. The additional parking spaces being proposed are truly needed and will ensure that ICC remains as a functional property (i.e., not dependent upon off-site parking) and provides an even safer environment for those at the club (staff, members, guests) as well as ICC neighbors. The various other concessions and considerations that ICC has made (e.g., purchasing ‘buffer’ properties’, adding plants and trees to enhance environmental stewardship and aesthetics, lighting modifications) again support the notion of ICC as a good neighbor who is attempting to make investments that advance the club’s objectives in consideration of the nearby residents and their preferences. Thank you again for your consideration of our comments and for your service to the City of Edina. Best, Jodi Capistrant & David Albright Respondent No:113 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 10:42:21 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 10:42:21 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland-Hawver 509 John street. Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment TO: Mayor Hovland, and City Council Members – Staunton, Pierce, Jackson and Anderson DATE: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 RE: Interlachen Proposed Valet Parking and Debris Storage Lot I am writing to introduce myself as the sister of a 3+ year resident of Edina (Christine hyland-lamson) and to open a dialogue on the Interlachen Country Club’s application for a valet parking lot, and debris storage lot in jrt neighborhood. She moved there in spring of 2018. They chose it for the park-like setting, wildlife and open spaces as they started their retirement. They were excited to get to know their lovely neighbors and settle in the community. However, as fate would have it, her husband contracted cancer and they spent the last two years in home-hospice, in the serenity of their home on John Street, where they shared and made memories until his passing. Edina has realized with the planning demands placed on its residential areas that far too many proposed development projects are designed at a scale that is frankly incompatible with our existing neighborhoods. The Interlachen Valen and Debris storage project, is such a project. This construction, is basically an expansion of the country club into a beautiful established residential area, where they are planning to build a large paved parking lot, with additional drainage structures to deal with run off issues that result from their nonpermeable surfaces into a pond that promises to dissipate all runoffs within 24 hours.The lighting required for these structures will constitute light pollution. Noise pollution will be increased via the traffic incursion into this residential neighborhood, as they plan to direct all their delivery trucks through a residential road where trucks will wait in cue for Interlachen’s gate to permit access. The exhaust from these vehicles will affect the residents on this street and the safety of children playing. Noise pollution from speakers that Interlachen already mounts on light poles to broadcast music as well during operational hours will expand to these areas. Mosquito breeding areas will increase as their holding pond for additional run off and collection will provide larger area for mosquito breeding. The residential property that Interlachen has acquired for these purposes also reduces the amount of affordable housing in Edina. These actions, go against the zoning findings, objectives, code of ordinances that the City of Edina has passed and committed itself to. Code 1970;Code 1992, 850.01 I quote “ Through the enactment of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the council intends to implement this statement of philosophy so as to provide for the orderly and planned development and redevelopment of lands and waters in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to preserve and enhance the high quality residential character of the city and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare.” Sec. 36-2 Objectives (1) Maintain, protect and enhance single-family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use. (3) Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the Single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses. “ “Code of Ordinances (5) Provide an enjoyable living environment by preserving existing topography, vegetation, streams, water bodies and other natural land and water forms. (9) Establish requirements for parking and loading to minimize impacts on public streets and surrounding properties. (11) Preserve buildings, lands, areas and districts which possess historical or architectural significance. (12) Protect surface water and groundwater supplies, minimize the possibility of periodic flooding resulting in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards and related adverse effects.” I consider Edina to be her last home, the home where she shared her husband’s last chapter and where, she too wants to grow old. I am concerned for her, about the destruction and removal of heritage trees, vistas, greenspaces for wildlife/birds and the removal of affordable housing. Also, the permanent altering of the chemistry and character of this beautiful neighborhood. Aren’t there better uses for these homes and trees (white pines, red pines) than a parking lot? Surely Edina has a stewardship responsibility with its land and neighborhoods that must be part of these decisions? The proposed take over of Waterman Avenue by the country club for this parking lot is truly alarming. Interlachen has communicated that only delivery trucks will use this access point and that it will be gate- controlled, leaving semi-trucks, diesel exhausted vehicles waiting in cue for entry on a residential street. Police reports to date, indicate that there have been 39 police reports on incidents at the club in its existing parking lots and have posed that perpetrators utilized Waterman as their approach and departure points to Interlachen property. Respectfully submitted and looking forward to your stewardship and response, Patricia Hyland Hawver – sister of Christine Hyland-Lamson 509 John Street 612 384 4124 Respondent No:114 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 11:49:09 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 11:49:09 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kari Lessard Q2.Address 6921 Moccasin Valley Road Q3.Comment This proposal seems fair and responsible. Interlachen has purchased single-family homes as buffer to homes on waterman avenue, and providing these parking spaces will allow the safe entry and exit of employees and personnel without needing to cross Blake road. I fully support this proposal. Respondent No:115 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 11:55:27 am Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 11:55:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Scott Bowlby Q2.Address 5119 Wooddale Glen Q3.Comment The proposed improvement by Interlachen is a wonderful design and it has been well thought out from all parties. In my opinion, it is a major upgrade from the current arrangement. Further, it will make future issues such as traffic & congestion much easier to deal with and lastly, it is a definitive upgrade from an esthetics perspective. Respondent No:116 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 14:43:15 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 14:43:15 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Candace Williams Q2.Address 6108 Westridge Blvd, Edina 55436 Q3.Comment We need additional parking; we are consistently short parking spots for our members, guests, and employees during the summer months. We want to improve safety; the proposed project will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for our employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church. We have been good neighbors; we listened to nearby residents' concerns, considered them when developing the proposed plan, purchased two additional properties as a buffer to the improvements, and went above and beyond to improve the area's aesthetics. Respondent No:117 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 14:45:08 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 14:45:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Millie Kosiek Q2.Address 1235 Yale Place, Minneapolis, Mn 55403 Q3.Comment Please support Interlachen Country Club’s request for a Conditional Use Permit. Respondent No:118 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 15:52:57 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 15:52:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joshua O'Neill Q2.Address 3717 West Fuller Street Q3.Comment I am in full support of the requested parking expansion plans submitted by Interlachen Country Club ("ICC") and under consideration by the City. Additional safe parking is in high demand, particularly in the Summer months. I believe that the membership at IIC is full and with that and the post COVID urge to get out of the house and people able to work remotely the traffic and daily attendance on average is likely to increase. Members, staff and guests need safe parking alternatives which this plans achieves. It will also reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and allow for employees to park on the premises rather than walking from the overflow parking West of ICC off of Blake Road. ICC has a history of being a very cooperative, collaborative, transparent partner in the community and has gone above and beyond any aesthetic requirements pursuant City Code and has invested in two single family homes, which will remain in place, to help create a buffer with neighbors. This additional parking will add to the aesthetics of the neighborhood, keep traffic contained to the ICC property and provide safe adjacent access to facilities for members, staff and guests. Please approve this request. Respondent No:119 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 17:12:33 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 17:12:33 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tim Kosiek Q2.Address 1235 Yale Place #803 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Q3.Comment I support the project Respondent No:120 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 21:30:39 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 21:30:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Debra Frimerman Q2.Address 6229 Maloney Ave, Edina, MN 55343 Q3.Comment Dear Commissioners: Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback on the Interlachen Country Club expansion proposal. The proposed parking lot would be interior to our neighborhood and directly adjacent to my home. This proposal is for an unnecessary expansion of a private country club into a neighborhood contrary to Edina’s Comprehensive Plan and to the detriment of the neighborhood. Our family recently moved to Edina. We purchased what we want to be our forever home down the road from our daughter’s school. Before moving to our home, we reviewed the Edina Comprehensive Plan as part of our decision. The two residential lots that are proposed to be cleared and turned into a large parking lot are designated as low-density residential. Not Public/Semi-Public like the golf course (and its tennis courts, parking lot, club house, and other facilities). No parking lots are contemplated in low-density residential areas. This requested expansion of the country club into our neighborhood and building of a parking lot are contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. Parking lots require buffers. The country club’s drawings include trees as buffer but most of those trees are on my property. Those trees are where my daughter plays and her swing set hangs. If there is a parking lot, our backyard would no longer be safe place for my child to play. We should be able to use our entire property – and not have it be a buffer to the country club's expansion. The country club claims the main reason for the parking lot is for limited use by employees to avoid parking at Shepherd of the Hill church, where they have been parking for years, because there are no sidewalks or crosswalks on Blake Road. The City of Edina is already taking steps to address these concerns with the development of Blake Road scheduled for next summer. The planned Blake Road improvements will benefit the whole neighborhood and will address the country club’s safety concerns. In addition, the Commission recently approved the Shepherd of the Hill’s request for improvements to its parking lot. Approving the country club’s CUP would unnecessarily add additional parking for limited part-time use when there is already ample parking in the area. It is an inefficient use of land that would damage the environment. While the country club purports to be concerned about safety and crime – it says nothing about how building a parking lot interior to our neighborhood drastically decreases the safety of residents. Parking lots are magnets for crime – in fact, they are one of the most common places for crime to occur. The Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that 10% of all crime occurs in parking lots. Kidnappings and assaults are common – for example, a recent study reported 36% of kidnappings were in public places such as parking lots – and in another study one of the top locations for human trafficking abductions was parking lots. Having a concealed parking lot in our backyard where children play is frightening. It is not on a main road or otherwise visible to deter crime. If we had known that it was even a remote possibility that something so unsafe would be in our backyard, we never would have moved here. Please deny the country club’s request. Granting the request will hurt our neighborhood and make our children less safe. It will also undermine the comprehensive planning process. Thank you for your time and consideration. Debra Frimerman Respondent No:121 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 21:36:16 pm Last Seen:Jun 16, 2021 21:36:16 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Robert Frimerman Q2.Address 6229 Maloney Ave, Edina, MN 55343 Q3.Comment Dear Edina Planning Commission, I humbly ask the Interlachen Country Club’s C.U.P. application be denied. The request is in contradiction to the comprehensive plan and is opposed by the community collectively. We ask to keep the homes in our neighborhood as homes and not the expansion of the country club. Our family and neighborhoods rely on the comprehensive plan to make decisions that guide the safety and soundness of community. Our home is adjacent to the proposed parking lot. In talking with Joel, country club manager, he explained to me that my home would be the “buffer” they needed from the parking lot, and he wondered why I would need the back of my property. I explained that my 6-year- old and our family use the area he needed for a “buffer” for her swing set. Any project in a residential area that must have a “buffer” is clearly the wrong project for the area. The country club cites safety as the reason to not use the church’s parking lot on Blake Road. I want to thank the City Planners and Commissioners, as you have addressed those concerns for us collectively with the project this year and next to install sidewalks on Blake Road. Joel has also expressed that they agreed to pay for the cul-de-sac to get the project approved. He raised this on multiple occasions. The country club should be able to address the traffic concerns they created without endangering the health and safety of our neighborhood. Simply put, they need to direct their members and employees to use their main entrance and not use Waterman. This should not require a quid-pro-quo to resolve the problems they created. This unfortunate situation by the Country Club has granted me a great opportunity to meet many of my neighbors. A large group of us have been in contact with +80 neighbors. Some have been here for multi-generations, some recent empty nesters and many are just starting out with young families. This last Easter we were invited to our neighborhood’s outdoor annual Easter Egg Hunt, where +30 children and families met to celebrate the holiday. All while practicing social distancing guidance outside, we had the great opportunity to see how many young families are within our neighborhood. We have a vibrant neighborhood here and something that drew us to this area of Edina. I ask that you allow our neighborhood to develop and not allow the country club to continue to take homes and convert them to their expansion and needless development. We ask the City Planning Commission hold to the Comprehensive Plan and not approve the C.U.P. Thank you. Robert Frimerman Respondent No:122 Login:Frank R Thomas Email:nipthomas@yahoo.com Responded At:Jun 16, 2021 21:43:22 pm Last Seen:Jun 22, 2021 22:41:19 pm IP Address:75.72.44.29 Q1.First and Last Name Frank Thomas Q2.Address 505 John St Q3.Comment My name is Frank Thomas. I have been a resident of Edina for 64 Years. My spouse and I have lived at 505 John St for 46 years. It is the only house we have ever owned. The Conditional Use permit Interlachen has requested should be denied based on the code of Ordinances Edina drafted to control the future development and redevelopment of Edina and placed on Edina's Website. Once read, it is easy to understand why this Conditional Use permit should be denied to place a 35,00 sq foot 105 space commercial asphalt parking lot 80 feet from backyards of single family dwellings in a quiet residential neighborhood. Article 1 Section 36-1 Objective: To implement this statement of philosophy with the following objectives. Section 36-2 Objectives 1)Maintain , protect and enhance single=family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use. 3) Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses (a huge parking lot for a private club seems to be disqualified by this section). 5) Provide an enjoyable living environment by preserving existing topography, vegetation, streams, water bodies and other land and water forms. 9) Establish requirements for parking and loading to minimize impacts on public streets and surrounding properties. If the above is not enough to deny the Conditional Use Permit here are some other reasons to deny it. I would like to meet any Interlachen member, any Edina resident, any Edina Planning Commission member, any Edina Council member, and any Edina Employee who would like this 35,000 sq foot 105 space Commercial Asphalt parking lot put 80 feet from their back yard lot line. The homeowners who have million dollars or more homes on Interlachen''s 1st, 4th, 5th, 14th, and 15th fairways might have some strong feelings, if it was put 80 feet off their backyard, Our neighborhood should not suffer harm for Interlachens poor, long term plan for additional parking. Interlachen has enlarged all their facilities by 30% or more in last 25 years: the clubhouse, the pro shop, the pool, the pool bathhouse, the tennis courts, the tennis club house, the golf practice area, and the maintenance facility. They also enlarged the membership by 16%, and they certainly have added employees as they have enlarged. Interlachen has less parking now, then they had in the 1970's. As they enlarged all the facilities, they had to take out parking places. A perfect example of this, when Interlachen relandscaped and remodeled their main parking lot. They removed 40 spaces (210 to 170) which is 19%. Interlachen has over 170 acres. They have passed on other opportunities to add parking. They could have added a very nice parking lot to the east side of entrance off Interlachen Boulevard. They used to use this area for parking, for temporary parking but instead of using this perfect place for parking lot they expanded the driving range East and moved entrance road East. The perfect time to have added parking would have been to incorporate in when they built their 24,000 ft new maintenance and storage facility but instead they were more interested in adding another new large golf practice area and sold a lot for $750,000. Our deck and backyard is our cabin and, in the summer, we live on it. We have lived here for 46 years. We already have plenty of noise and light pollution from Interlachen and as they have enlarged the facilities and outdoor events it has grown in the last few years. Their hockey rink lights shine directly into our family room and the clubhouse is lit up like a Christmas tree. Several of our neighbors have spent thousands landscaping their back yards away from grass and toward encouraging and attracting wildlife. It has worked fantastically. We now see more wildlife and birds than ever before in our 46 years. This proposed large parking lot will change that. Interlachen will remove at least 15 to 20 mature trees (20-40 ft) and lots of other vegetation and have to bring in tons of fill to bring the West lot up to the level of the East lot. Whatever vegetation, trees, and shrubbery Interlachen puts in will not look like the nature view we have now. It will be rows of shrubs standing in line like soldiers.The trees will not be mature (20-40 ft) in my lifetime. It will change for the worse backyards and wildlife that our neighborhood enjoys now. How can Edina Planners, Edina Planning Commission, or Edina Council allow Interlachen to remove houses and use for R-1 to put in a 35,000 sq ft 105 space Commercial parking lot on those R-1 lots. Anyone who pays attention knows there is a shortage of affordable housing and affordable lots in Edina. Edina is willing to spend a lot of money for affordable housing. We received an offer this spring from the City of Edina to buy for cash our house if we were were thinking of selling. Edina wanted to buy our house so they could guarantee it would stay affordable housing in Edina. My last comment would be about the neighborhood meeting Interlachen had with the neighborhood. It was very unprofessional and unorganized for the neighborhood people who attended. Interlachen and the architects at the meeting had no measurements of the project when asked. We learned very little of specific details and no measurements. It was so short that not everyone there got to ask a question, We were limited to one question each and half they could not give a specific answer. An Interlachen employee cut the meeting off at 1 hour and 10 minutes even when many still had questions to ask. After the meeting my wife or myself did not speak to anyone who was there that was satisfied or thought it was a good meeting. Respectfully, Frank Thomas Respondent No:123 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 04:44:27 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 04:44:27 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kari Oxford Q2.Address 4915 Bywood St West, Edina, MN. 55436 Q3.Comment I support the conditional use permit at ICC and ask you vote yes to support it too. Respondent No:124 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 05:07:52 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 05:07:52 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Robert and Patty Schopp Q2.Address 6308 Waterman Avenue Q3.Comment We purchased our home in October 1999 from Patty's parents who owned the home from 1963-1999. During the 58 years of living on Waterman Avenue, our relationship with the Interlachen Country Club has been of mutual respect. Through the years we have had good communication from ICC as to events and happenings that would impact our neighborhood. We have considered them good neighbors and respectful of our properties. We were notified of the "Proposed" Conditional Use Permit plan and attended the Monday, April 26 meeting along with several of our neighbors. Several questions and issues were raised at that time and many concerns were shared. We continue to have following concerns regarding this "Proposed" Plan: Loss of woodland and wildlife habitat Loss of nice homes Changes in the aesthetics (trees vs. concrete) Constant nighttime lighting in the backyard and gate area that would be in front of our home Change in easement ownership in our front yard Gate would cause delivery vehicles to stop, wait and go creating more noise & pollution directly in front of our home. (Robert is an asthmatic) We would suggest a phase approach. The vacant lot currently being used for over flow parking could be paved and used as employee parking initially to determine whether additional space is needed. These "proposed" changes could be accomplished gradually, taking in consideration the many concerns we have expressed. We want to continue our good relationship with ICC and work in partnership to accomplish a plan that works for all. Thank you for your consideration. Robert and Patty Schopp Respondent No:125 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 06:19:52 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 06:19:52 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kyle Jorgensen Q2.Address 5404 Interlachen Blvd Q3.Comment I support this project. It is good for the club, the neighborhood and the city. We are luck to have a world class facility like this in our city’s borders. They need to be allowed to execute on their plans. Some points: We need additional parking; we are consistently short parking spots for our members, guests, and employees during the summer months. We want to improve safety; the proposed project will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue and eliminate the need for our employees to cross Blake Road from overflow parking at Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church. We have been good neighbors; we listened to nearby residents' concerns, considered them when developing the proposed plan, purchased two additional properties as a buffer to the improvements, and went above and beyond to improve the area's aesthetics. Thank you. Respondent No:126 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 07:40:39 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 07:40:39 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kathy Hendricks Q2.Address 2885 Knox Ave S Minneapolis, MN 55408 Q3.Comment The plan to put a parking lot into a beautiful, serene, green space should not move forward. The impact on the neighborhood and the environment is immeasurable, not to mention the significant impact on the quality of life of the neighbors. Please respect the environment and the neighborhood and do not approve this CUP. Thank you. Respondent No:127 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:08:51 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:08:51 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Trevor Hawver Q2.Address 509 John St. Edina. Q3.Comment This is a great project to ruin a neighborhood. The road treatments will increase water pollution in the nearby wetlands, the extra light pollution will diminish quality of life for adjacent residents and the extra noise pollution will disturb the neighborhood having an effect on sleep and serenity. The extra road traffic during construction and after will create extra wear and tear on the road and extra nuisance for the houses that are.on the access road. Will the members of Interlachen on the board abstain themselves from voting on this project? There's a conflict of interest there I wish they would address. Respondent No:128 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:28:08 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:28:08 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Gregg and Barb Dovolis Q2.Address 6805 Dakota Trail - Edina, MN 55439 Q3.Comment We strongly urge the planning commission to approve the proposed changes. Respondent No:129 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:51:55 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:51:55 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lori Tate Q2.Address 4612 w 56th st Edina Q3.Comment Please do not put a parking lot and storage next to residential property. This is an eyesore and should be illegal!!! Respondent No:130 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 08:59:32 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 08:59:32 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Linda seel Q2.Address 4350 Wooddale ave Q3.Comment Why would you consider damaging a quiet, beautifully landscaped neighborhood cutting down fabulous trees, interrupting nature at its finest, and replacing this beauty with another slab of concrete only to encourage loud traffic, unsightly views for very few individual’s easy access to the country club. Please, please we have destroyed enough of nature’s glory for the benefit of so called progress. Respondent No:131 Login:Will Hyland Email:wbhawver@gmail.com Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 10:16:14 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 10:16:14 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Will Hyland Q2.Address 509 John St. Q3.Comment Hi - As someone who lives in the neighborhood to the west, I have significant concerns about this project. Specifically about light pollution that will be increased in my neighborhood from lights for the parking lot, as well as environmental pollution for the storm water basin that will be implemented in #9 in the diagram above. What steps are being taken to mitigate impacts to the houses to the West of this proposed project? Are members of the city council members of Interlachen? If so, will they be excusing themselves from voting on this project? If there are members, there is a direct conflict of interest here that must be addressed as this project would not provide a benefit to Edina itself and just Interlachen. Thanks, Will Respondent No:132 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 11:21:14 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 11:21:14 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Patricia Hyland Hawver – sister of Christine Hyland-Lamson Q2.Address 509 John Street Q3.Comment Hello City Council Member Kevin Staunton: I am writing to introduce myself as the sister of a 3+ year resident of Edina (Christine hyland-lamson) and to open a dialogue on the Interlachen Country Club’s application for a valet parking lot, and debris storage lot in jrt neighborhood. She moved there in spring of 2018 with her spouse. They chose it for the park-like setting, wild life and open spaces as they started their retirement. They were excited to get to know their lovely neighbors and settle in the community. However, as fate would have it, her husband contracted cancer and they spent the last two years in home-hospice, in the serenity of their home on John Street, where they shared and made memories until his passing. During your campaign for office you stated “ Far too many proposed development projects are designed at a scale that is frankly incompatible with our existing neighborhoods.” The Interlachen Proposed Valet Parking and Debris Storage Lot, is such project. This construction, is basically expansion of the country club into a beautiful established residential area, where they are planning to build a large paved parking lot, with additional drainage structures to deal with run off issues that result from their non permeable surfaces into a pond that promises to dissipate all runoffs within 24 hours.The lighting required for these structures will constitute light pollution. Noise pollution will be increased via the traffic incursion into this residential neighborhood, as they plan to direct all their delivery trucks through a residential road where trucks will wait in cue for Interlachen’s gate to permit access. The exhaust from these vehicles will affect the residents on this street and the safety of children playing. Noise pollution from speakers that Interlachen already mounts on light poles to broadcast music as well during operational hours will expand to these areas. Mosquito breeding areas will increase as their holding pond for additional run off and collection will provide larger area for mosquito breeding. The residential property that Interlachen has acquired for these purposes also reduces the amount of affordable housing in Edina. These actions, go against the zoning findings, objectives, code of ordinances that the City of Edina has passed and committed itself to. Code 1970;Code 1992, 850.01 I quote “ Through the enactment of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the council intends to implement this statement of philosophy so as to provide for the orderly and planned development and redevelopment of lands and waters in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to maintain an attractive living and working environment in the city, to preserve and enhance the high quality residential character of the city and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare.” Sec. 36-2 Objectives (1) Maintain, protect and enhance single-family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use. (3) Control the use, development and expansion of certain nonresidential uses in the Single Dwelling Unit District in order to reduce or eliminate undesirable impacts of such nonresidential uses. “ “Code of Ordinances (5) Provide an enjoyable living environment by preserving existing topography, vegetation, streams, water bodies and other natural land and water forms. (9) Establish requirements for parking and loading to minimize impacts on public streets and surrounding properties. (11) Preserve buildings, lands, areas and districts which possess historical or architectural significance. (12) Protect surface water and groundwater supplies, minimize the possibility of periodic flooding resulting in loss of life and property, health and safety hazards and related adverse effects.” I consider Edina to be her last home, the home where she shared her husband’s last chapter and where, she too wants to grow old. I am concerned for her, about the destruction and removal of heritage trees, vistas, greenspaces for wildlife/birds and the removal of affordable housing. Also, the permanent altering of the chemistry and character of this beautiful neighborhood. Aren’t there better uses for these homes and trees (white pines, red pines) than a parking lot? Surely Edina has a stewardship responsibility with its land and neighborhoods that must be part of these decisions? The proposed take over of Waterman Avenue by the country club for this parking lot is truly alarming. Interlachen has communicated that only delivery trucks will use this access point and that it will be gate- controlled, leaving semi-trucks, diesel exhausted vehicles waiting in cue for entry on a residential street. Police reports to date, indicate that there have been 39 police reports on incidents at the club in its existing parking lots and have posed that perpetrators utilized Waterman as their approach and departure points to Interlachen property. Respectfully submitted and looking forward to your stewardship and response. -Submitted by City Staff. Testimony received June 16, 2021 12:31 PM Respondent No:133 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 11:22:41 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 11:22:41 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ron Nelson Q2.Address 421 John St. Q3.Comment I am totally fine with the proposal. I live right around the corner from Interlachen Country Club. They’ve been a good neighbor. I think people should be allowed what they choose with their property. I don’t see this doing any harm to the area at all. Thank you. -Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received June 14, 2021 2:50 PM Respondent No:134 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 17, 2021 11:23:42 am Last Seen:Jun 17, 2021 11:23:42 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Cathleen Cachat Q2.Address N/A Q3.Comment I’m an Edina resident over at Interlachen Country Club. I just wanted to give my input regarding the proposed parking at Interlachen Country Club. They desperately need the parking. It’s getting very dangerous to drive in that parking lot because so many cars have to park on the edge and there are golf carts driving through. I have also seen how many cars drive on Waterman Street through the residential street. People cut through there and it has got to be an inconvenience. With the additional parking and the gate, it will just make a really clear line for where the property begins and ends. Everything that Interlachen does is with such grace and has so much taste. I feel very strongly that they will do whatever it takes to accommodate the neighbor’s concerns. It will be done beautifully. I just wanted to express and give my input. Thank you. -Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail received June 15, 2021 2:23 PM Respondent No:135 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 18, 2021 12:56:44 pm Last Seen:Jun 18, 2021 12:56:44 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Charles Watts Q2.Address 133 Oakwood Rd., Hopkins, MN 55343 Q3.Comment Although I am a resident of Hopkins, I am a member of ICC and live in very close proximity to the club. From a neighbor perspective, ICC has always done an excellent job of neighbor relations and has gone above and beyond in many respects with regards to maintain those relationships. The Waterman street project will solve a series of issues that effect both the club and neighbors and serve to enhance the current situation. Respondent No:136 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 18, 2021 14:39:42 pm Last Seen:Jun 18, 2021 14:39:42 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jonathan Rogers Q2.Address 4405 Country Club Road Q3.Comment This comment is in support of the ICC proposed expansion. This is a well-reasoned, thoughtful plan to support an existing use with needed parking space and redesigned facilities. The project improves safety in a number of ways. First, the proposed project will reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue. Second, currently the club must use off-site parking for employees across Blake road. This creates significant safety concerns from fast moving and distracted traffic- the proposed resign addresses these needs through significant investment in existing land holdings. Many of the comments from Maloney avenue residents center on changed circumstances, or loss of open space. A careful examination of the plans reflects that the open space boundaries are unchanged. Rather, with the inclusion of the new putting green, the Maloney neighborhood’s access is not to a new parking lot, but the inclusion of a manicured putting green within longstanding ICC property. Property owned by the club well before 2020. The paved parking space, neatly ringed with an evergreen hedge with height and maintenance standards detailed by the conditions arguably improve the existing screening provided today. The proposed rain garden and filtration basin similarly benefit the ecosystem allegedly being damaged. The argument made by the neighbors in opposition to the project that the proposed lot is not accessory to the club house bears no merit. An accessory use is typically defined as a use customarily incidental and supported by the principal use. Here, the CUP lot's exclusive purpose is to provide accessibility to the primary use the clubhouse and the golf course. The club has been a good neighbor, listened to concerns revised the plan according and remained committed to exceptional site design and investment. Please support the staff recommendation and approve this project. Respondent No:137 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 19, 2021 06:15:08 am Last Seen:Jun 19, 2021 06:15:08 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Stephanie Simon Q2.Address 5808 Hidden Lane Q3.Comment The parking lot revisions and amenities being proposed by Interlachen Country Club are very well conceived, I recommend approval. Respondent No:138 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 20, 2021 17:19:27 pm Last Seen:Jun 20, 2021 17:19:27 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Peter Barott Q2.Address 6416 Maloney Ave, Edina, MN Q3.Comment Please require Interlachen to keep the proposed Waterman gate locked except in the case of an emergency. It is not fair for delivery trucks and other autos to routed through a residential street. Respondent No:139 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 06:33:15 am Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 06:33:15 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ted Carlson Q2.Address 5516 Knoll Drive Q3.Comment The Interlachen improvements allow the club to improve upon a dirt parking lot and manage water quality and filtration. The club has created, at significant cost, solutions to mitigate the impact on the nearby residents. The club owns buffer properties. The club is providing screening, a garden, and rain garden. The club has been around for 100+ years, or longer than any of the neighbors have been alive, so it's not like the club and/or the use of club land is something new. This solution is an improvement. The neighborhood allergy to change is based upon emotion, not fact, and these changes should be embraced by the neighbors. Respondent No:140 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 07:16:10 am Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 07:16:10 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name David Sampair Q2.Address 5629 Woodcrest Dr Q3.Comment The club needs additional parking...and much of this new parking is for the staff. Right now, the staff has to park blocks away. This, along with the closing of Waterman as thoroughfare, will lessen the traffic in the nearby neighborhood. Respondent No:141 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 08:03:36 am Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 08:03:36 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ryan Hartung Q2.Address 5115 Arden Avenue Q3.Comment Our family are members at ICC and support the project. This will provide space for much needed parking, particularly in the summer months. It will improve safety and security for employees/members/guests. It also improves water filtration/management. The club has been around for 100+ years & use of the property has not changed much during that time. This project has been put forward thoughtfully and with respect toward neighbor input. Respondent No:142 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 12:23:47 pm Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 12:23:47 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Pete Kostroski Q2.Address 20 Circle W, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment I think this a great project that will help on a number of fronts. 1. It will improve the security and access to the club (for both employees and members) which in turn will help the neighbors of the site as well. 2. Additional parking is needed on site and the club has purchased additional lots in order to create a buffer for these improvements to minimize the impact on the neighbors. 3. The ascetics of the improvements are a huge upgrade from the current state which the neighbors will also benefit from. 4. Finally, the club has been around for 100 years and is a great asset for the community. Part of the clubs success is being thoughtful with the neighbors who surround Interlachen and this project is another example of Interlachen going above and beyond to create a high level of screening and security for the area. Respondent No:143 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 12:49:19 pm Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 12:49:19 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Erik Heltne Q2.Address 5320 Kellogg Ave Q3.Comment I am in favor of this project as it will help with Security in the neighborhood and at the club. Interlachen will do a nice job of providing a buffer between the neighborhood and course. In addition, there will be added water filtration and native storm water which will benefit both the club and neighborhood. The club has been around for a long time and the residence are well aware they were buying next to a premier club that is continuously growing. Respondent No:144 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 12:57:36 pm Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 12:57:36 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Liza Etienne-Koenig Q2.Address 157 Holly Road, Hopkins, MN Q3.Comment I was calling to voice my concerns with having this expansion. We already have a lot of traffic in our neighborhood from the golf course and people speeding by. This just adds more traffic and more fuel to the fire. We have a wonderful and amazing pedestrian neighborhood that we just moved into this year and love Interlachen. Thank you very much. - Transcribed by City Staff. Voicemail was received on June 17, 2021 7:19 PM Respondent No:145 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 16:44:04 pm Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 16:44:04 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Toby McKenna Q2.Address 6241 Knoll Drive Q3.Comment I fully support the club’s proposed project to the west of the property. As a local resident and club member I think it does a great job of improving the local community for the long run. Respondent No:146 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 21, 2021 17:43:31 pm Last Seen:Jun 21, 2021 17:43:31 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Laura Lindquist-Dulin Q2.Address 6313 Maloney Avenue Edina MN 55343 Q3.Comment I oppose this proposal. Putting a parking lot interior to a neighborhood reduces the safety of my family by adding additional noise, light, air pollution and traffic. My 4 year old and 7 year old children enjoy playing in their neighbor's back yards; turning their natural playground into a parking lot makes it unsafe for them and diminishes their quality of life. Respondent No:147 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2021 07:29:01 am Last Seen:Jun 22, 2021 07:29:01 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Nicole Ollhoff Q2.Address 305 Grove Place Q3.Comment Interlachen CC has been a jewel of the Edina community for more than 100 years. I fully support the site changes proposed, as they would be an improvement to the neighborhood. I believe Interlachen has proposed a thoughtful upgrade to their property that will have positive effects on the neighborhood value, and that will also continue to elevate the attractiveness of Interlachen as a community asset in Edina. Respondent No:148 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2021 09:40:24 am Last Seen:Jun 22, 2021 09:40:24 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ravi Ramalingam Q2.Address 301 John street Q3.Comment I live in this neighborhood and feel that this project is just fine. In fact, I think it would add to the area, because the club would take excellent care of the area. Respondent No:149 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2021 09:45:26 am Last Seen:Jun 22, 2021 09:45:26 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Suzanne Gorski Q2.Address 305 John Street Edina 55343 Q3.Comment I fully support the site changes proposed, as they would be an improvement to the neighborhood. Interlachen has proposed a thoughtful upgrade to their property that will have positive effects on the neighborhood value, and that will also continue to elevate the attractiveness of Interlachen as a community asset in Edina. Respondent No:150 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 22, 2021 18:35:08 pm Last Seen:Jun 22, 2021 18:35:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kristin Stoner Q2.Address 5808 Fairfax Ave Q3.Comment I support the proposed improvements to improve parking and safety for ICC staff and members. ICC has gone above and beyond to listen to the neighborhood’s concerns and improve the area’s aesthetics. Respondent No:151 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jul 07, 2021 13:51:47 pm Last Seen:Jul 07, 2021 13:51:47 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary Buska Q2.Address 6208 Fox Meadow Lane Q3.Comment I am very supportive of the permit to expand the boundaries of Interlachen Country Club to create additional parking. This is a very thoughtful solution to a long running problem for the neighborhood and the Club’s employees. Thank you for the opportunity to share my input. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail received 7/6/21 at 5:43 pm) Respondent No:152 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jul 11, 2021 09:36:54 am Last Seen:Jul 11, 2021 09:36:54 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Octavio Portu Q2.Address 4705 Annaway Drive, Edina, MN 55436 Q3.Comment As a resident of Edina, I fully support the request by Edina's Interlachen Country Club for a Conditional Use Permit to expand the boundaries of the Country Club, and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. The project does not create any negative effect to the adjacent properties. Respondent No:153 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jul 13, 2021 16:49:32 pm Last Seen:Jul 13, 2021 16:49:32 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Britta Sortland Ryan Q2.Address 513 John Street Q3.Comment I've submitted a full letter to Cary Teague in opposition to the Conditional Use Permit for official record and ask that be referenced. Below are several excerpts from my letter: "I am writing in regard to the proposed Non-Permeable Valet Parking Lot and Debris Storage Conditional Use Permit requested by Interlachen Country Club and to state my opposition to the Conditional Use Permit. I request that this letter to be a part of the official record. My opposition is based on the fact that the Conditional Use Permit requirements are not satisfied by the applicant, both in regards to the effect on the publics’ health, safety, and welfare as well, inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, the application’s conflict with Edina’s Climate Action Plan, and flooding concerns. The applicant’s proposal does not meet items (3) or (6) of the requirements for a conditional use permit. My first concern is based on safety and welfare. Below are several photos taken of the would-be parking lot from my bedroom window. The other photos are taken from the edge of the parking lot towards my bedroom window... at night, there is a clear shot into my bedroom window. It is one thing to have your home exposed to your neighbors. It is entirely another to have it exposed to unknown members of the club, employees, or loiterers that may be in that parking lot - without any security. This is a safety risk and a concern as homeowners to not know who may be looking into our bedroom window. My second reason for opposition is that the applicant’s proposal is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan approved 8-18-20. I’ve taken a small portion of the plan and added a box in blue to the lots in question. Those lots may be R-1, but there is more than one designation for R-1. In this map, it clearly shows that the homes that would be demolished for the parking lot are meant to be Low Density Residential. The clubhouse and golf course’s property is marked in blue which is designated for public/semi public. If Interlachen wants to build on these properties, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended to change the designation from R-1 Low Density Residential to R-1 Public/Semi Public. It should be noted that the parking lot would not meet goals 2, 3 or 4 of the Land Use Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. My next concern is that the proposed plan is counteractive to Edina’s Climate Action Plan as well flooding concerns. The applicant’s proposal does not have a Climate Action Plan. The applicant is not trying to leverage any alternative forms of transportation, such as public transportation, biking, the light rail, golf carts, or other creative and environmentally sustainable solutions. In fact, this parking lot would turn currently green space into a heat island so it can be of use for four months of the year. If the city plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2025 and 80% by 2050, adding a parking lot would be counterproductive, counterintuitive, and soon, obsolete. Any safety concerns the club has should be mitigated by the resurfacing of the Shepard of the Valley parking lot, as well as the sidewalk the city previously approved for employees to walk from the parking lot to the club. My second concern from an environmental standpoint is water... We know that our back yard used to be a pond and that drain tile was added in the last 10 years beneath the ground to drain into the pond at the end of Maloney Ave. The Filtration Basin Interlachen is proposing is at 922.75 feet, but the edge of my backyard, nearest the would-be parking lot is lower than that elevation at 916.3 feet. If Interlachen adds nonpermeable paving, petroleum products and runoff will be flow into my yard, and eventually into the pond. How is the current water from my yard to drain into the pond? Water does not flow uphill. I humbly plead to the city council members to not approve this Conditional Use Permit. It creates safety concerns for my family, it does not meet the Comprehensive Plan based on safety, the different R-1 designations, or Land Use Goals, it does not align with Edina’s Climate Action Plan, and it creates huge concerns for runoff and water." Respondent No:154 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jul 13, 2021 20:51:08 pm Last Seen:Jul 13, 2021 20:51:08 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Molly Anderson Q2.Address 2703 Girard Ave S Minneapolis Q3.Comment This proposed change would be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhoods. I am close friends with a young couple who somewhat recently purchased a property nearby the golf course. They’ve been renovating the house as an investment for their future, planning to stay in the area long term. They frequently host get togethers at their house because they have an awesome deck and view. We spend a lot of time outside at their house playing lawn games, grilling out, and having wine nights and book club on the deck. This proposed plan would be an cement eyesore for them and all the neighbors. To City of Edina Council members: I am writing to express my hope that ICC’s CUP request to put a parking lot in the middle of our neighborhood be denied. First, I believe it is inappropriate and should not be permitted based on the issue of neighborhood security (parking lots are known to be convenient as a base to commit crimes in a neighborhood. It brings strangers into our private backyards, as opposed to our more public front yards. Interlachen’s response to this is to have adequate lighting and surveillance, but that also entails having a warehouse like presence in our backyards, without any proof it will do more than being able to record crime, not prevent it. Second, the project is not, in any way, compatible with Edina’s Comprehensive Plan, especially in regards to housing, environmental and sustainability issues. The project calls for the destruction of modest single family homes(in a residential zone!), the cutting of many mature trees, and replacing green space with impermeable surfaces (which includes contaminated runoff, heat island effect, and loss of wildlife habitat). And expanding parking encourages wasteful driving practices(i.e. one person per vehicle, car vs mass transit or cycling). Very counterproductive in the light of CO2 driven climate change. Thirdly, ICC states the parking lot is needed only seasonally, for overflow valet parking, and for staff parking. Currently, those parking needs are met for staff by parking at the Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church, just over one block away. On most days, there are between 5 and 15 cars there. For ICC to request a CUP to build a parking lot with over 100 spaces interior to a neighborhood, for so little potential use, seems unlikely. Therefore I have to suppose they have other plans, but they deny this to be the case. My worry is that if ICC is granted the CUP, they are basically being given carte blanche to do whatever they want with this project, or with the other homes they currently own, or may own in the future. This would be an ugly precedent. ICC is doing very well. And that is great. But they do not need this parking lot to keep their membership rolls full, when it is only additional convenience. And when it seems to go against everything that the Edina City government is trying to achieve with the Comprehensive Plan. Please deny the requested CUP. Thank you for your consideration, David Brockway 6301 Maloney Ave Edina MN Dear City Planner and Council Members, I am asking that this letter be included in the public record as documentation of my whole- hearted opposition to granting Interlachen Country Club’s (ICC) a Conditional Use Permit to make a “valet and overflow parking lot” which I respectfully ask the Edina City council to deny. ICC is asking not only our neighborhood, but the city of Edina to sacrifice forever increasingly rare green space, tree canopy, environment, autonomy, our neighborhood’s organic character. As important the CUP would endanger our neighbors safety and privacy to create a boutique parking lot that benefits only a limited number of people at a private club for a few months out of the year. Under Edina’s city code ordinances, this parking lot, which I would argue is completely unnecessary, shouldn’t even be considered. It demonstrably has “an undue impact on public health, safety (and/or) welfare” and it is not “consistent with the comprehensive plan.” Crime happens in parking lots. By ICC’s own count they have had 39 incidents in their current lot since 2016. That number will only increase with the creation of a new parking lot, especially one which will be hidden behind the tennis courts and completely invisible from any of Interlachen buildings. With no eyes whatsoever on the lot it will be an open invitation to nefarious goings-on. The “Waterman gate,” which ICC touts as a crime stopper, would only be on Waterman. As we know, criminals don’t keep business hours. There is nothing to prevent criminals from slipping in off Interlachen Ave. and into this new parking lot and engage in activities hidden from everyone. Our neighborhood didn’t have one break-in, car or otherwise, in the past year (I didn’t ask for earlier years from the Edina police statistician but have now and will share his information when he gets back to me) and we are desperate to keep it that way. My 6 yr. old grandson plays with the neighbor’s child in the backyard bordering ICC’s proposed lot. Last week I went down to check on them. Right there, sitting in the area where there used to be a home and friendly neighborhood “eyes” watching over the neighborhood, strangers sat smoking just yards away from where these small children were playing. Attached is a picture I took of them and another of different strangers in the same situation. Needless to say, my grandson is no longer allowed to play unsupervised in our very own yard because ICC bought and purposefully let a lovely home fall into such a dilapidated state they “needed” to bulldoze it. How much worse will it be when it’s a parking lot? How much more accessible will our homes and children be with a hidden parking lot is inserted into our backyards? Whatever remedies ICC opts for *might* be effective (security lighting, motion sensors, cameras) reeks of Big Brother. No one wants to be monitored and surveilled in their own backyards by Interlachen Country Club. Nor should they be. Ever. Additionally, this plan has “undue adverse effects on (our) welfare.” I am a gardener, a bird watcher, an environmentalist. We bought this property specifically because of the rare parklike area created by all of our neighbors’ long backyards blending one into another. This green space, this naturally occurring park, is a premiere example of suburban biodiversity and is at risk of being destroyed by ICC who wants to increase its parking spaces by 124, from 258 to 382. That’s a 50% increase for an area which ICC states in its literature it has “no intention to utilize the parking lot for anything other than caddie, employee, and overflow parking during the Club’s busiest times of year” a lot they intend to use “primarily from May though September.” ICC will be increasing the non-permeable area in the land involved by nearly an acre. The parking lot alone will add 9700 square feet of asphalt to Edina’s landscape. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed has not approved this plan. With good reason. The runoff from this new parking lot and the additional run-off from the proposal’s new diversion of water from Waterman Ave. would overrun the system, not only potentially flooding backyards and the overflow pond, but adding a plethora of new contaminates to our groundwater including petroleum products from the lot, salt from the snow removal and sodium chloride from any de-icing applications. ICC makes a point of how this diversion will benefit Mirror Lake. But it comes at a grave cost to my neighborhood. ICC’s plan removes 26 mature trees from the area where the lot is proposed. Some of these will be replaced with 10 foot saplings but that will do nothing to mitigate the heat sink this thing will become and will have no appreciable affect for over a decade. I have a video of me walking from behind my house with a thermometer that instantly measures the surface temperature. On this day the ambient air temp was 98. At the top of my yard, where there is a mature tree canopy, the temp was 86. Down below, on the lawn ICC proposes to turn into asphalt, the temp is 97. On the grass next to the gravel lot that ICC wants to tar, it is 103, and on the gravel lot itself its 120. I will happily send this to anyone who wants to see it. It’s all in one take so I cannot be accused of cherry picking so it is long at 5 minutes. Privacy certainly is a matter of welfare. And our privacy will be invaded every time a car uses that new lot. Below is a picture of a truck parked very close to the proposed northern edge of the proposed parking lot. I have used Photoshop to extrapolate what this will look like in the real world, our world, if ICC’s parking lot is approved not via the doctored drone images with the wide-angle lens ICC that uses in their literature that so misleads by presenting the cars as little, innocuous toys. Please note, the truck in this picture is angled down. The headlights from the cars/trucks using the lots will be on level ground flaring directly into my living room and bedroom. ICC’s proposed parking lot runs contrary to all the values and principles outlined at length in Edina’s Comprehensive Plan, chiefly those dedicated to sustainability and the environment. Our environment, our weather, our biodiversity is being destroyed by a thousand little cuts. ICC doesn’t need to make another one. Shepherd of the Hills Church has been granted a CUP for a new, beautiful parking lot with all the amenities necessary to ensure its safety—lighting, monitoring etc. It is also a parking lot that will receive scant use six days out of seven. ICC already has an established relationship with the Church. Using the SOTH lot adds a ¾ of a block walk for anyone using it over the proposed lot. I have asked the Edina Police statistician for any pedestrian vehicle traffic accidents in the last ten years and am awaiting the answer which, again, I will share with you as soon as its forthcoming. A boutique parking lot like this, nothing more than a seasonal convenience for a limited amount of people at a private club, essentially incentivizes the one car/one driver problems that contributes to greenhouse gases, higher carbon footprint and traffic problems in Edina and, as such, runs contrary to Edina’s CP. This lot is not the answer to a problem, but the creation of a problem that already needs fixing. If ICC is granted this CUP, and the Comprehensive Plan works and the future it envisions is realized—that lot will be obsolete in 10 years. We aren’t day tripper in this neighborhood, visiting while we play tennis, or hit golf balls. We live here day in, day out, 24/7. This is our home and we value and treasure the green areas surrounding us. Please, do not approve ICC’s request for a CUP. It’s simply wrong. Sincerely, Connie Brockway 6301 Maloney Ave Dear Members of Edina’s City Council: I am writing in regard to the proposed Non-Permeable Valet Parking Lot and Debris Storage Conditional Use Permit requested by Interlachen Country Club and to state my opposition to the Conditional Use Permit. I request that this letter to be a part of the official record. My opposition is based on the fact that the Conditional Use Permit requirements are not satisfied by the applicant, both in regards to the effect on the publics’ health, safety, and welfare as well, inconsistency with the comprehensive plan, the application’s conflict with Edina’s Climate Action Plan, and flooding concerns. In the city of Edina’s code of ordinances, chapter 36, Article V under Conditional Use Permits it states “…The council shall not grant a conditional use permit, unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located, as imposed by this chapter 6. Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The applicant’s proposal does not meet items (3) or (6) of the requirements for a conditional use permit. My first concern is based on safety and welfare. Below are several photos taken of the would-be parking lot from my bedroom window. There is a yellow box at the edge of the parking lot. The other photos are taken from the edge of the parking lot towards my bedroom window. In the photo taken at night, there is a clear shot into my bedroom window. It is one thing to have your home exposed to your neighbors. It is entirely another to have it exposed to unknown members of the club, employees, or loiterers that may be in that parking lot - without any security. This is a safety risk and a concern as homeowners to not know who may be looking into our bedroom window. Figure 1: Would be parking lot boarder shown in yellow. Photo is taken from the owner’s bedroom of the home. Figure 2: Photo is taken from the edge of the would-be parking lot into the owner’s home and bedroom suite without any zoom. In the center between the two windowpanes, stands my husband. Figure 3: Zoomed in photo from bedroom window, illustrating the proximity of the would-be parking lot - directly creating safety concerns. My second reason for opposition is that the applicant’s proposal is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan approved 8-18-20. I’ve taken a small portion of the plan and added a box in blue to the lots in question. Those lots may be R-1, but there is more than one designation for R-1. In this map, it clearly shows that the homes that would be demolished for the parking lot are meant to be Low Density Residential. The clubhouse and golf course’s property is marked in blue which is designated for public/semi public. If Interlachen wants to build on these properties, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended to change the designation from R-1 Low Density Residential to R-1 Public/Semi Public. It should be noted that the parking lot would not meet goals 2, 3 or 4 of the Land Use Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Goal 2: Support livability and high quality of life for all city residents by balancing goals and priorities for development, especially as the community changes over time. - The proposed plan would change the quality of life for the residents in the neighborhood and does not prioritize their wellbeing over that of the private club members and employees. Goal 3: Grow and develop sustainably to protect the natural environment, promote energy efficiency, conserve natural resources, and minimize the impacts of building on the environment. - The proposed plan does not meet goal 3. Goal 4: Create and maintain housing options that serve a diverse range of ages, household types, and economic situations. - The proposed plan would demolish several of the more affordable homes in the Interlachen Neighborhood of Edina Figure 4: Partial Figure 3.12: Future Land Use diagram from Edina Comprehensive Plan 3. Land Use and Community Design Chapter – Approved 08-18-20 – See Exhibit A for full diagram My next concern is that the proposed plan is counteractive to Edina’s Climate Action Plan as well flooding concerns. The applicant’s proposal does not have a Climate Action Plan. The applicant is not trying to leverage any alternative forms of transportation, such as public transportation, biking, the light rail, golf carts, or other creative and environmentally sustainable solutions. In fact, this parking lot would turn currently green space into a heat island so it can be of use for four months of the year. If the city plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2025 and 80% by 2050, adding a parking lot would be counterproductive, counterintuitive, and soon, obsolete. Any safety concerns the club has should be mitigated by the resurfacing of the Shepard of the Valley parking lot, as well as the sidewalk the city previously approved for employees to walk from the parking lot to the club. My second concern from an environmental standpoint is water. The two below photos were taken May 22, 2019 after one day of rain, shortly after my husband and I moved into our home. We know that our back yard used to be a pond and that drain tile was added in the last 10 years beneath the ground to drain into the pond at the end of Maloney Ave. The Filtration Basin Interlachen is proposing is at 922.75 feet, but the edge of my backyard, nearest the would-be parking lot is lower than that elevation at 916.3 feet. If Interlachen adds nonpermeable paving, petroleum products and runoff will be flow into my yard, and eventually into the pond. How is the current water from my yard to drain into the pond? Water does not flow uphill. Figure 5: Flooding from May 20, 2019 I humbly plead to the city council members to not approve this Conditional Use Permit. It creates safety concerns for my family, it does not meet the Comprehensive Plan based on safety, the different R-1 designations, or Land Use Goals, it does not align with Edina’s Climate Action Plan, and it creates huge concerns for runoff and water. Respectfully, Britta Sortland Ryan 513 John Street Figure 6: Flooding from May 20, 2019 Edina Comprehensive Plan 3. Land Use and Community Design Chapter – Approved 08-18-20 3-26 Figure 3.12: Future Land Use Robert Frimerman (6229 Maloney Ave, Edina) Date: July 14th, 2021 RE: Interlachen Country Club C.U.P. Application To: Edina City Council and Mayor Hovland, I write to you as a resident of Edina and homeowner that lives adjacent to the proposed Interlachen Country Club C.U.P Application. I ask this letter to be included in the official record with the I.C.C. C.U.P Application. This application will have undue adverse impact on the public health, safety and the welfare of our community and is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. For these reasons, and examples cited below, we ask you not grant this C.U.P in accordance with Edina Code of Ordinances, Chapter 36. Zoning, Article V, §36-305. 10% of violence committed by strangers takes place in parking lots, per the U.S. Federal Bureau of Justice Statistics. By placing a parking lot interior to an existing single dwelling family home neighborhood, the applicant is creating a health and safety issue. As the country club has stated, there is already a crime situation within the property, reporting 39 incidents in the application. The applicant also claims to put low lights, potential only motion lights, and have it restricted from view by the neighborhood and members, further creating a place where crime will increase. In 2018, the applicant sought a variance from a parking setback impact impacting the Watershed, via variance request B-18-21. In the August 28th 2018 Edina Staff Report from the Planning Commission, it states clearly that the reason their variance request would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood is that “the parking row expansion is internal to the golf course site”. The excerpt enclosed is from the actual Staff Report. By the city and the applications own admission, a parking lot that is not internal to the golf course would alter the essential character of the neighborhood and negatively impact the neighborhood. In addition, we already have a parking lot that is used sporadically today (@ Shepard of the Hill, one block from the golf course) and the Country Club currently uses that for over-flow needs. There is no need for additional parking in the neighborhood and the Country Club should look to develop a climate action plan and realistically assess alternate transportation options for their staff. When asked directly from the City Planners, Joel stated they do not have an environmental / climate plan and have not assessed alternate transportation options. If done, it would be clear they would realize a parking lot interior to a neighborhood would have adverse public health, safety and welfare impacts to the residents of our neighborhood. The applicant has not done any due diligence to the negative impacts their proposal would have on the community. Robert Frimerman (6229 Maloney Ave, Edina) A parking lot will increase 24-hour light and noise pollution interior to a single family dwelling residential neighborhood. This will have direct adverse public health and welfare impacts. The conversion of R1 low density (yellow) and R1 public / semi-public (light blue) is not consistent with the comprehensive plan. From the images from the Comprehensive Plan, it is clear this CUP would conflict with the plan. A non-permeable parking lot will have material impact to the public health of our neighborhood and family. Per the Watershed District, they have not approved this applicant’s plan, after multiple submissions. We reside in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed and water management is of the utmost importance for us and the residences in our neighborhood. Re-directing the water from Waterman interior to a neighborhood and then attempting to ‘capture’ it with a small basin and pump it to an already polluted pond is the wrong way to handle water. We need permeable surfaces, like the front and back yards of the homes currently there to manage water in our neighborhood. This application will create an unsafe and public health impact for our neighborhood. The applicant has scheduled their hearing to ensure the council is visiting the neighborhood in the peak of foliage. This supports their narrative of a “buffer” to the residences. The bulk of our yearly season does not have a rich and full green foliage that buffers the country club. I provide Red square indicates the lots the country club would be converting in contradiction to the Comprehensive Plan. Robert Frimerman (6229 Maloney Ave, Edina) here images that show we see very clear the lots around us in the fall, winter and spring months. They happen to also be the months the club as stated the parking lot will not be used. I want to raise something we learned during the planning commission meeting. Under direct questioning from the Planning Commission on June 23rd, 2021, Vice-Chair Kate Agnew asked, “Couldn’t the gate be installed regardless of the parking lot?” Country club manager, Joel Livingood, replied that “This is not something we would fund or approval without the parking lot”. The country club made a clear and articulable distinction that the traffic issue and the parking lot are not connected in their need but that they see them as a package agreement with the City. It is clear the Country Club is looking for a quid pro quo from the City to solve the traffic issue they created with them funding the City’s expenses on Waterman in exchange for a non- permeable parking lot interior to a neighborhood. This has raised considerable concern with our neighborhood, and we ask the council to examine the correlation to the need to bundle the parking lot to the country club funding a cul-de-sac where city expenses would be paid for by the applicant. For the reasons above, and among others we will share in the hearing, I ask the City Council to not grant this C.U.P. Thank you. Parking Lot Parking Lot Parking Lot Parking Lot Deer Bambi Deer Deer 1 | Page Lamson Residence Against Application July 2021 To: Members of the City Council Re: Interlachen Country Club Conditional Use Permit Application – Parking Lot From: Christine Hyland-Lamson (509 John Street, Edina, Minnesota) For: To be added to the public record Date: July 14 ,2021 My husband and I moved to 509 John Street, Edina in July of 2018, after a two-year search for our retirement home. Our decision to buy our home was based on the beautiful and peaceful/serenity of our lot and the adjoining lots of our neighbors that formed a lovely expanse of openness of lawns that was like a residential park. Now that park- like setting, could be in jeopardy, with Interlachen’s proposed application to build a parking lot which would threaten my home and our residential neighborhood. The very fact that, Interlachen’s Country Club General Manager, Joel Livingood, stated at the planning meeting that Interlachen Country Club has no climate action plan, alarms me when you consider the effects of its proposed CUP on our neighborhood and Edina at large. They have not even considered the effects of turning a current green space into a heat island so it can be used for only a portion of the year. Edina’s Climate Plan calls for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, thus this parking lot would be counterproductive. The non-permeability of this elevated parking lot would produce further runoff, on land that is already existing wet land and feeds into a pond at the end of Maloney Avenue. ICC also has not taken into consideration Edina’s Climate Plan’s goals or timelines or explored green alternative transportation. They offer obsolete solutions to a problem they will create. In addition, per Chapter 36 Article V. Conditional Use Permits 36-305 2) Section “It will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property.” Waterman traffic will increase with large delivery vehicles waiting in queue with motors running, for the Interlachen gate to allow entry. Event parking will ebb and flow with ICC’s needs and calendar. ICC wants to replace the already available, sufficient contract parking at the Shepherd of the Hills Church with this new CUP application, and they want to build a nonpermeable surfaced parking lot in the heart of my quiet neighborhood. 3) Section I feel my privacy, my security and my welfare are threatened with the proposed conditional use permit application of a parking lot in my backyard, especially now that I am a widow, adding more run off over the parking lot from Waterman Avenue resulting in pools of standing water as it waits to dissipate. The stormwater runoff from Waterman across this parking lot will push golf course chemical contaminants/pesticides, leaking fuel/oil into our ground water affecting the health of residents and their pets. Also, I have significant safety concerns. Police records to date, indicate that there have been 39 police reports on incidents at the club in its existing parking lots and have posed that perpetrator utilized Waterman as their approach and departure points to Interlachen property. What would keep foot-traffic from accessing this parking lot via residents’ 2 | Page backyards? With additional parking lots, there will be increased crime events. Why would the Edina City Council approve additional parking lots and increase the opportunity for increasing crime within a residential neighborhood? The proposed parking lot is not just a flat parking lot, it will be an ELEVATED structure, so visibility, privacy and security of my home will be threatened. Currently, installed loudspeakers transmit music until late in the evening impinging upon the neighborhood’s welfare, peace and quiet. The installation of surveillance cameras and lighting would affect mine and my neighbors’ privacy. I also have some concerns about current questionable use for ICC owned residential properties on Waterman Avenue for commercial purposes on a residential street (i.e, storage of golf carts). This is happening today. 4) Section -The increase in the volume of traffic on Waterman will make an already dangerous situation worse for Waterman Avenue residents, given the angle of access and departure to and from Blake Road. 6) Section - This conditional use permit request of Interlachen Country Club is NOT CONSISTENT with the City of Edina’s Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is not reasonable. It is unreasonable to expect our citizens to be subjected to this land use. It interrupts a residential neighborhood. For these reasons Edina City Council cannot approve ICC’s proposed plan. I am against this application. I respectfully request that this letter with photos be included in the agenda as my voice and thus become part of the public record for the City Council meeting to be held on 7/21/2021. Please respectfully confirm receipt of this letter. Respectfully, Christine Hyland-Lamson (509 John Street, Edina, Minnesota) Attachments Photos - these are various views of my property from my home and from adjacent lot – showing the visibility of my home and its privacy proximity of the land in question. 3 | Page House and trees in circle would be taken down and replaced with the proposed non- permeable parking lot. People in the parking lot would have an unobstructed view impacting my privacy and security. 4 | Page RESOLUTION NO. 2021- 54 APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO EXPAND THE BOUNDARIES AND ADD A NEW PARKING LOT AT THE INTERLACHEN COUNTRY CLUB AT 6200 INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 Interlachen Country Club is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to expand the boundaries of the Country Club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. There are two single-family homes, owned by the Country Club, that would continue as single-family homes that would serve as a buffer to the single-family homes to the west. Two single-family homes would be removed. 1.02 A gate would be constructed at the end of Waterman Avenue, just past the single-family homes owned by the Country Club. The gate would be closed for access to the Club from Waterman for the purpose of employees, members, guests, and delivery trucks to use the main entrance off Interlachen Boulevard. The Country Club would be constructing the new cul-de-sac and roadway improvements at their expense. 1.03 A Conditional Use Permit is required for the expanded parking area and boundaries of the Country Club. Golf Courses are a conditionally permitted use in the R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District. 1.04 The property is legally described as follows: See attached legal descriptions. 1.05 To accommodate the request, the following land use applications are requested: 1. A Conditional Use Permit. 1.06 On February 24, 2021 the Planning Commission made the following motions on the project, both of which failed to receive a majority approval: 1. Motion to recommend denial to the City Council of the Conditional Use Permit based on the following findings: a) Does not meet the Conditional Use Permit based on the health, safety, and welfare. b) This project is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Goals to protect single family homes. c) The current Comprehensive Plan designation for the residential lots is Low Density Residential, which is not consistent with the rest of the golf course. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-54 Page 2 Motion failed. Vote: 3 ayes, 3 nays 2. Motion to recommend approval to the City Council of the Conditional Use Permit as outlined in the staff memo subject to the conditions and findings therein. Motion failed. Vote: 2 ayes, 4 nays. 1.07 On July 21, 2021, the City Council held a public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed project meets all city code provisions and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District, uses accessory to a golf course, such as tennis courts, swimming pools, driving ranges, practice facilities and other related recreational uses are permitted. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. R-1 is the zoning designation to accommodate the Comprehensive Plan designation of Low-Density Residential. 2. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the overall uses are permitted in the R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit Zoning District. 3. As demonstrated on pages 2-4 of the Planning Commission staff report dated June 23, 2021, the proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria listed in Section 36-305 of the City Code. 4. The proposed plans would reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue entering the Country Club. 5. The Club would not have to rely on parking outside of the Country Club site for employees. 6. Parking lots are a conditionally permitted use for schools, churches and golf courses in the R- 1, Single-Dwelling Unit District. The City of Edina has many schools, churches and golf courses in the R-1 District. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Conditional Use Permit with setback variance for Shepard of the Hills Church at 500 Blake Road. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 3.01 Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the following plans, unless modified by the conditions below: 1. The Construction Plans must be consistent with the proposed Development Plans dated May 3, 2021, and the project renderings dated April 28, 2021. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-54 Page 3 2. The Final Landscape Plan must be revised to include the following subject to review and approval of the city forester: The planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening should be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet tall. 3. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance and be consistent with the Landscape Plan dated May 3, 2021. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built. 4. Final lighting plan must meet the lighting requirements of Section 36-1260 of the City Code. All exterior lighting and illuminating devices shall be provided with lenses, reflectors or shades so as to concentrate illumination on the property of the owner or operator of the lighting or illuminating devices. Rays of light or illumination shall not pass beyond the property lines of the premises utilizing the lights or illumination at an intensity greater than 0.5 foot-candle measured at property lines abutting property zoned residential and one foot-candle measured at property lines abutting streets or property zoned nonresidential. No light source, lamp or luminaire shall be directed beyond the boundaries of the lighted or illuminated premises. 5. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated June 16, 2021. 6. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the building official and fire marshal memo dated June 17, 2021. Knox Box access for the Fire Department and Police Department must be provided at all gates. 7. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city forester memo dated June 17, 2021. 8. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-54 Page 4 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on August 4, 2021. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, 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 August 4, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2021. _________________________________ City Clerk June 23 2021 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Conditional Use Permit – 6200 Interlachen Boulevard (West side of Interlachen Country Club on Waterman Avenue) Information / Background: Interlachen Country Club is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to expand the boundaries of the Country Club and add a new parking lot and expanded practice area off Waterman Avenue. There are two single-family homes, owned by the Country Club, that would continue as single-family homes that would serve as a buffer to the single-family homes to the west. A gate would be constructed at the end of Waterman Avenue, just past the single- family homes owned by the Country Club. (See attached narrative and plans.) The gate would be closed for access to the Club from Waterman for the purpose of employees, members, guests, and delivery trucks to use the main entrance off Interlachen Boulevard. The Country Club would be constructing the new cul-de-sac and roadway improvements at their expense. A Conditional Use Permit is required for the expanded parking area and boundaries of the Country Club. Golf Courses are a conditionally permitted use in the R-1, Single-Dwelling Unit District. The expansion is requested to address several issues that the Country Club is experiencing including the following: Shortage of parking for members and employees. The Club currently rents space at Shepard of the Hills Lutheran Church for employees to park. There is a safety concern for employees parking in that lot and then walking to Club and having to cross Blake Road and down Waterman Avenue. The new parking lot is intended to be primarily used by employees and for overflow parking during the busy times of the year, mainly during the summer. STAFF REPORT Page 2 Traffic on Waterman. The Club receives a lot of complaints from nearby residents about the volume of traffic on Waterman Avenue. As a public street the Club cannot control its use. Security. Eliminating the access to the Club off Waterman adds a layer of security for the Club. They have experienced an increase in vehicle break-ins and auto theft in recent years and believe that most suspects enter the Club off Waterman, as it is much less visible that the main entrance on Interlachen Boulevard. Limited practice facilities. Due to the advancement in golf club technology and increase in golfer’s desire for practice facilities has created a need to lengthen the driving range and add a putting green. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Easterly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Southerly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Westerly: Single-family homes; zoned and guided low-density residential. Existing Site Features The area where the improvements are proposed contain single-family homes and a gravel area, where a single-family was removed. Planning Guide Plan designation: Public/semi-public and low-density residential Zoning: R-1, Single Dwelling Unit District Conditional Use Permit Per Section 36-305, the City Council shall not grant a Conditional Use Permit unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the use: 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements. The project would not have an adverse impact on the above. Both police and fire would be able to access the country club via Waterman as they do today. Any condition of approval of this project would require that both police and fire would maintain this access in the future. The Club has worked with police and fire regarding public access in the design the gate to ensure the ability for police and fire to easily get in. Knox Box access for the Fire Department and STAFF REPORT Page 3 Police Department must be provided at all gates. The existing utilities are adequate to serve the proposed use. 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property. The project would enhance the entrance to the club on Interlachen Boulevard and reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue. A gate would be installed on Waterman to block members, employees, vendors, and guests from using the Waterman entrance. The primary entrance to the country club would be off Interlachen as intended. The only traffic permitted on Waterman would be delivery trucks that cannot navigate access to the loading dock via Interlachen Boulevard, and emergency vehicles. The uses within the country club all remain the same. 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety, or welfare. Staff does not believe the project would have an adverse impact on public health, safety, or welfare. The applicant wants to make sure that all emergency services can always access the site off Waterman Avenue. This condition would be part of any approval on the site. As mentioned, police and fire have reviewed the plans and have met with the applicant and are confident that they will be able to access the site as needed. 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity. Staff believes the improvements would enhance the area and create a clear boundary for the Country Club. The parking area and practice area would be well screened with a solid row of evergreen shrubs consisting of Cotoneaster Lucidus, Juniperus, and Taxus Cuspidata capitata. (See renderings and landscape plan.) This would include the changes to the plans recommended by the city forester. (See memo from the city forester.) Additionally, the Club would own the two single-family dwellings adjacent to the parking lot and practice green. These homes further provide separation and screening of the expansion area. Lighting would be limited within the lot; fixtures would be downcast and be required to meet the City’s lighting standards. Section 36-1260 of the City Code requires the following for lighting: “All exterior lighting and illuminating devices shall be provided with lenses, reflectors or shades so as to concentrate illumination on the property of the owner or operator of the lighting or illuminating devices. Rays of light or illumination shall not pass beyond the property lines of the premises utilizing the lights or illumination at an intensity greater than 0.5 foot- candle measured at property lines abutting property zoned residential and one foot-candle measured at property lines abutting streets or property zoned nonresidential. No light source, lamp or luminaire shall be directed beyond the boundaries of the lighted or illuminated premises.” This shall be made a condition of any approval. The plans include a stormwater retention area on the north side of the parking lot. The plans direct runoff from Waterman and the parking lot to the stormwater retention area to filter out sediment. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Based on the above, staff does not believe the new parking lot and practice area would impede the normal and orderly development of other property in the area. As mentioned earlier, these uses are allowed in the R-1 Zoning District as a conditionally permitted use. The screening and the gate are proposed to mitigate impacts on the single-family homes. 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located as imposed by this Section. The proposed project meets all city code provisions. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. 6. Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. As mentioned previously, golf courses are a permitted use, and parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District. No variances are requested. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the uses are permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. Landscaping The parking area and practice area would be screened with a solid row of evergreen shrubs consisting of Cotoneaster Lucidus, Juniperus, and Taxus Cuspidata capitata. (See renderings and landscape plan.) This evergreen screening would provide year around screening of automobile headlights within the parking lot. The evergreens along the north side of the parking lot would be 6-foot tall and planted as a double row. The west side would be 4 feet tall. The nearest home to the west would be 250 feet away; and the nearest home to the north about 225 feet away. The city forester has reviewed the proposed landscape plan and has recommended some revisions. (See attached memo.) The revisions would include planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening should be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined in their review memo attached. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts, as they are the City’s review authority over the grading of the site. STAFF REPORT Page 5 Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North lot line South lot line West line East lot line 20 feet 20 feet 10 feet 20 feet 85 – 110 feet 280 feet 1000+ feet 1000+ feet PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issue • Is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria met? Yes, staff believes the criteria is met. 1. The proposed project meets all city code provisions and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District, uses accessory to a golf course, such as tennis courts, swimming pools, driving ranges, practice facilities and other related recreational uses are also permitted. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. 2. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the overall uses are permitted or conditionally permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. 3. As demonstrated on pages 2-4 of this report, the proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria. 4. The parking lot and practice area would be adequately screened with the recommendations from the city forester, including the planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet. Staff Recommendation Recommend that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit at 6200 Interlachen Boulevard for the expanded parking area and expansion to the Country Club Boundaries. Approval is subject to the following findings: STAFF REPORT Page 6 1. The proposed project meets all city code provisions and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District, uses accessory to a golf course, such as tennis courts, swimming pools, driving ranges, practice facilities and other related recreational uses are permitted. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. 2. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the overall uses are permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. 3. As demonstrated on pages 2-4 of this report, the proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria. 4. The proposed plans would reduce traffic on Waterman Avenue entering the Country Club. 5. The Club would not have to rely on parking outside of the Country Club site for employees. Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Construction Plans must be consistent with the proposed Development Plans dated May 3, 2021, and the project renderings dated April 28, 2021. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must be revised to include the following subject to review and approval of the city forester: The planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening should be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet tall. 3. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance and be consistent with the Landscape Plan dated May 3, 2021. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. The property owner is responsible for replacing any required landscaping that dies after the project is built. 4. Final lighting plan must meet the lighting requirements of Section 36-1260 of the City Code. All exterior lighting and illuminating devices shall be provided with lenses, reflectors or shades so as to concentrate illumination on the property of the owner or operator of the lighting or illuminating devices. Rays of light or illumination shall not pass beyond the property lines of the premises utilizing the lights or illumination at an intensity greater than 0.5 foot-candle measured at property lines abutting property zoned residential and one foot-candle measured at property lines abutting streets or property zoned nonresidential. No light source, lamp or luminaire shall be directed beyond the boundaries of the lighted or illuminated premises. 5. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city engineer’s memo dated June 16, 2021. STAFF REPORT Page 7 6. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the building official and fire marshal memo dated June 17, 2021. Knox Box access for the Fire Department and Police Department must be provided at all gates. 7. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the city forester memo dated June 17, 2021. 8. Submit a copy of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. Deadline for a city decision: August 17, 2021 June 17, 2021 Cary Teague, Community Development Director David Fisher, Chief Building Official & Rick Hammerschmidt, Fire Marshall Conditional Use for Interlachen Country Club at 6200 Interlachen Blvd to Add Parking, Putting Green and Practice Tee Information / Background: The proposed plan improvement to the western portion of the property near Waterman Ave is to add parking, putting green and practice tee. - Provide Knox Box access for the Fire Department at all gates. - Verify fire hydrant location outside of gate for the Fire Department. - Provide accessible parking and access isle with an accessible route to the practice tee and putting green. The accessible route that runs from the parking area must not be greater than a 5% slope with a greater than 2% cross slope. Must have new fire hydrant by the main entry. - Provide the required accessible parking spaces and access isles per the building code based on the number of parking spaces. - Verify Noise Ordinance is understood and will be compliant: Working Hours: Monday – Friday 7 A.M. to 7 P.M. Saturdays – 9A.M. to 5 P.M. Sundays and Holidays – No Work Allowed. 273548.DOCX M ALKERSON G UNN M ARTIN L L P 5353 GAMBLE DRIVE, SUITE 225 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416 TELEPHONE 612-344-1111 FACSIMILE 612-344-1414 Patrick B. Steinhoff Attorney at Law Direct: 612.455.6601 pbs@mgmllp.com June 16, 2021 Planning Commission City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Interlachen Country Club Conditional Use Permit Application Our File No. 3584.001 Dear Members of the Planning Commission: I represent Robert and Debra Frimerman, who live at 6229 Maloney Avenue in the City of Edina (“City”). I write on their behalf to state their opposition to the conditional use permit (“CUP”) requested by Interlachen Country Club (“Country Club”) for a proposed new parking lot. The Country Club’s application does not satisfy the requirements necessary for CUP approval established by the City’s zoning ordinance, including (but not limited to) the requirement that a CUP be consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. The parking lot proposed by the County Club is simply not consistent with the comprehensive plan designation for the parking lot site (which is different from the comprehensive plan designation for the rest of the County Club property). For this reason, it would be unlawful of the City to approve the CUP application, and the Planning Commission should therefore recommend denial. I. THE PROPOSED PARKING LOT DOES NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CUP APPROVAL SET FORTH IN THE CITY’S ZONING ORDINANCE. The Frimermans’ home is immediately adjacent to Country Club property to the north of the proposed parking lot site. The Frimermans’ home, the proposed parking lot site and the Country Club are all zoned R-1 (Single Dwelling Unit District). “Publicly and Privately owned golf courses” are permitted uses in R-1 zoning districts. City Code, § 36-433(3). Both “Golf course clubhouses” and “Parking facilities and other uses which are accessory to conditional uses” are conditional uses in R-1 zoning districts. City Code, § 36-434(4). Accordingly, a parking lot is allowable as a conditional use, but only if it is an accessory to a golf course club house (or to Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 2 273548.DOCX some other conditional use)1 and also only if the Country Club satisfies the requirements for CUP approval set forth in the City’s zoning ordinance. Minnesota law requires that a city may lawfully approve a CUP only upon “a showing by the applicant that the standards and criteria stated in the [city’s zoning] ordinance will be satisfied.” Minn. Stat. § 462.3595, subd. 1 (2017); see also RDNT, LLC v. City of Bloomington, 861 N.W.2d 71, 76-78 (Minn. 2015) (holding that a city’s decision to approve or deny a conditional use permit must have a factual basis in the record and must also meet the requirements specified by the relevant zoning ordinance). An applicant has the burden to show that it satisfies the applicable requirements for CUP approval. RDNT, LLC, 861 N.W.2d at 78. Here, the Country Club cannot meet its burden of showing that it satisfies the standards for CUP approval set forth in the City’s zoning ordinance. The provision of the City’s zoning ordinance stating the requirements for CUP approval reads in relevant part as follows: The council shall not grant a conditional use permit, unless it finds that the establishment, maintenance and operation of the use: *** (3) Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare; *** (6) Is consistent with the comprehensive plan. City Code, § 36-305. At the very least, the parking lot proposed by the Country Club fails to satisfy the two subparagraphs identified above. First, the proposed parking lot does not satisfy Section 36-305(3) because it will have “an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety or welfare,” particularly that of the Frimermans and their neighbors. Through the construction of a parking lot, the Country Club proposes to extend its facilities into an established residential neighborhood. The proposed parking lot will irrevocably change the characteristics that currently make the neighborhood such an attractive place to live and raise children. Second, the proposed parking lot does not satisfy Section 36-305(6) because it is not consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. The site of the parking lot is guided LDR (Low Density Residential) in the comprehensive plan. The rest of the Country Club is guided PSP (Public/Semi-Public) in the comprehensive plan. In the “Future Land Use” map in the comprehensive plan, there is a clear boundary between the proposed parking lot site (colored yellow for “LDR”) and the remainder of the Country Club (colored Blue for “PSP”). An excerpt 1Based on information provided by the Country Club to its neighbors, it appears that the Country Club may intend to use this parking lot to provide employee parking for golf course caddies. It also apparently intends to use the lot for valet parking for its dining/banquet/athletic facilities. Such use is not allowed by the City’s zoning ordinance. If approved, the parking lot can only be used as an accessory to the club house. Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 3 273548.DOCX of this map is inserted below for your convenient reference (with a house symbol in the location of the Frimermans’ home and a car symbol in the location of the proposed parking lot). (Comprehensive Plan, Figure 3.12, p. 3-26). The City’s comprehensive plan also includes narrative descriptions of the “LDR (Low Density Residential)” and “PSP (Public/Semi-Public)” future land use categories. These descriptions are inserted below for your convenient reference: Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 4 273548.DOCX (Comprehensive Plan, Table 3.6, pp. 3-28, 3-32). In these narrative descriptions, there is no suggestion that golf course facilities or parking lots in general are appropriate uses in LDR guided areas. To the contrary, the narrative description for PSP guided areas expressly states that there should be “buffering” standards for parking. In other words, even when parking uses are confined to the areas guided PSP (which is not the case here), they are supposed to be buffered from adjoining uses. Here, the Country Club is proposing a parking lot located outside the area guided PSP which intrudes into a residential neighborhood with no buffering. This is clearly not compatible with guidance set forth in the comprehensive Plan. The proposed parking lot will have adverse impacts on the public welfare and will be inconsistent with the City’s comprehensive plan. As the Country Club fails to satisfy at least two of the requirements necessary for CUP approval, the City is legally prohibited from approving the Country Club’s application. For this reason, the Planning Commission should recommend denial. II. THE FRIMERMANS AND OTHER RESIDENTS ARE ENTITLED TO RELY ON THE CITY’S ZONING ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. The Frimermans are very recent newcomers to Edina. They purchased their home in December 2020 and chose its location based on its seeming suitability for raising a family. In doing so, they carefully researched the surrounding area and reviewed, among other things, the City’s zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan (which, as noted, very specifically places the boundary of the PSP designation to the east of the proposed parking lot site). If the Frimermans had known that it was even a remote possibility that their back yard would be adjacent to a parking lot, the Frimermans would not have purchased their home. Other residents of the Frimermans’ neighborhood doubtlessly also made similar calculations when deciding where to live and raise their families. Allowing the Country Club to extend beyond the area designated for PSP uses in the comprehensive plan would be unfair to the Frimermans and other residents. Moreover, it would not be unreasonable to expect the Country Club to confine its operations to the area designated for PSP uses in the comprehensive plan. It is surely possible for the Country Club to find a more appropriate site for its parking lot. The Country Club occupies a massive swath of land, almost all of which is zoned and guided in a way that allows for construction of the proposed parking lot. There is no need for the Country Club to extend beyond the very large area designated for PSP uses and to intrude into an area that has been specifically designated by the City Council for future Edina Planning Commission June 16, 2021 Page | 5 273548.DOCX use as a residential neighborhood. For this reason, the Planning Commission should recommend denial of the Country Club’s application. III. CONCLUSION. By designating the parking lot site as LDR in the comprehensive plan, the City Council has already acted legislatively and made a policy-level determination that a parking lot is not appropriate for the proposed site. I therefore respectfully request that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council deny the CUP application as it is legally obliged to do. The Frimermans and many other residents of their neighborhood will be present at the Planning Commission public hearing to voice their opposition to the proposed parking lot; to answer any questions the members of the Planning Commission may have of them; and to provide the Planning Commission with any requested additional information. Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of this letter. MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP /s/: Patrick B. Steinhoff Patrick B. Steinhoff PBS/ksk c: Clients City Attorney 275209.DOCX M ALKERSON G UNN M ARTIN L L P 5353 GAMBLE DRIVE, SUITE 225 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55416 TELEPHONE 612-344-1111 FACSIMILE 612-344-1414 Patrick B. Steinhoff Attorney at Law Direct: 612.455.6601 pbs@mgmllp.com July 14, 2021 Mayor and City Council VIA EMAIL: cteague@edinaMN.gov City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Interlachen Country Club Conditional Use Permit Application Our File No. 3584.001 Dear Mayor Hovland and Members of the City Council: I represent Robert and Debra Frimerman, who live at 6229 Maloney Avenue in the City of Edina (“City”). I write on their behalf to state their opposition to the conditional use permit (“CUP”) requested by Interlachen Country Club (“Country Club”) for a proposed new parking lot. I submitted a letter to the Planning Commission dated June 16, 2021. I attach a copy of that earlier letter as Exhibit A for your convenient reference and ask that you please read it. In very brief summary, the letter states that the City may not grant the County Club’s application because 1) the proposed parking lot will have an adverse impact on the public health, safety and welfare; and 2) the proposed parking lot is not consistent with the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The Country Club has therefore failed to satisfy the requirements for conditional use permit approval stated in City Code §§ 36-305(3) and (6), and the City Council therefore may not approve the Country Club’s application. I write a second time for the very limited purpose of addressing two mischaracterizations of the applicable law by City Community Development Director Cary Teague during his presentation to the City Planning Commission on June 23, 2021. First, Mr. Teague suggested in his comments that the City has very limited discretion to deny a conditional use permit application and that such a denial must be supported by findings that the applicant does not meet any of the requirements for CUP approval stated in the City’s zoning ordinance. Very respectfully, this is simply not correct and is, in fact, backwards. Minnesota law requires that a city may lawfully approve a CUP only upon “a showing by the applicant that the standards and criteria stated in the [city’s zoning] ordinance will be satisfied.” Minn. Stat. § 462.3595, subd. 1 (2018); see also RDNT, LLC v. City of Bloomington, 861 N.W.2d 71, 78 (Minn. 2015). The applicant has the burden to satisfy all the standards and criteria for CUP approval set forth in a city’s ordinance. RNDT, LLC, 861 N.W.2d at 78. The County Club has not affirmatively Mayor and City Council City of Edina July 14, 2021 Page | 2 275209.DOCX show that it satisfies all the requirements for CUP approval set forth in the City’s zoning ordinance. Therefore, the City Council may not approve the Country Club’s application. Second, Mr. Teague blurred the distinction between the City’s zoning ordinance and the City’s comprehensive plan by stating that the Country Club’s proposed parking lot is consistent with the comprehensive plan merely because golf courses are permitted uses in residential districts under the zoning ordinance currently in effect. However, a zoning ordinance is not the same as a comprehensive plan. The City’s zoning ordinance governs what uses are currently allowed on a site within the City today. The City’s comprehensive plan provides guidance concerning what uses the City plans to allow on that site in the future. In order to obtain a CUP, an applicant must show both 1) that its proposed use is listed as a conditional use in the zoning ordinance today; and 2) that its proposed use is also consistent with the planned future uses of the subject property described in the City’s comprehensive plan. By placing a different “Low-Density Residential” comprehensive plan designation on the proposed parking site than the “Public/Semi-Public” comprehensive plan designation for the Country Club itself, the City Council has made the determination that, in the future, it does not want Country Club to expand beyond its current boundaries. Rather, the City Council has decided that, in the future, it wants the proposed parking lot site to be used for residential purposes. Accordingly, the proposed parking lot use is not consistent with the planned future residential use of the parking lot site described in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan even though, under the City’s zoning ordinance, golf courses are permitted uses in R-1 zoning districts today. I believe that these misstatements by Mr. Teague influenced the Planning Commission members’ vote concerning its recommendation (or lack thereof)1 to the City Council, as some of them appeared to be under the mistaken impression that the City lacks discretion to deny this application. That is not the case. To the contrary, the City Council is obliged to deny the application. For this reason, I respectfully ask that the City Council vote to deny the Country Club’s application MALKERSON GUNN MARTIN LLP /s/ Patrick B. Steinhoff Patrick B. Steinhoff PBS/ksk cc: Clients City Attorney (dkendall@ck-law.com) 1 The Planning Commission public hearing concluded with a deadlocked 3-3 vote. The Planning Commission has therefore passed the application on to the City Council without a recommendation. ¹» ¹» ¹º¹º ¹º ñ ñ ¹» ¹º ¹º ¹º ¹º ¹º ¹º ñ ¹» ñ ñ ñ ñ Lake Edina Lake Cornelia Indianhead Lake Arrowhead Lake Mud Lake Hawkes LakeMirror L ake Highlands Lake Melody Lake Harvey Lake Lake Pamela HWY 62 HWY 62 HWY 100HWY 100HWY 169HWY 16966TH ST W 70TH ST W 76TH ST W FRANCE AVE SYORK AVE SVALLEYVIEWRD70TH ST W VALLEY VIEW RD DEWEY HILL RD CAHILL RDSCHAEFER RDBLAKE RDTRACY AVEHANSEN RDGLEASONRDVERNON AVEVERNON AVEINTERLACHEN BLVD MALONEY AVE 50TH ST W 4 4 T H ST W 54TH ST W 58TH ST WWOODDALE AVEVALLEY VIEW RD I-494 City Hall Public Works Fire Station 2 Fire Station 1 Public Library Concord School Cornelia School Highland School Southdale Library EdinaHigh School Our Ladyof Grace Countryside School Creek ValleySchool NormandaleElementary EdinaCommunityCenter Golden YearsMontessori AvailAcademy Valley ViewMiddle School St PetersLutheran School SouthviewMiddle School August 2019± LegendR-1 - Single Dwelling Unit R-2 - Double Dwelling Unit PRD-1 - Planned Residence PRD-2 - Planned Residence PRD-3 - Planned Residence PRD-4 - Planned Residence PRD-5 - Planned Residence PCD-1 - Planned Commercial PCD-2 - Planned Commercial PCD-3 - Planned Commercial PCD-4 - Planned Commercial POD-1 - Planned Office POD-2 - Planned Office RMD - Regional Medical PID - Planned Industrial PUD - Planned Unit Development APD - Automotive Parking PSR-4 - Planned Residence MDD-4 - Mixed Development MDD-5 - Mixed Development MDD-6 - Mixed Development Lakes Creeks Edina Boundary Railroad ñ Public Building ¹ºPublic School ¹»Private School 0 970Feet W 50TH ST MARKET ST W 49TH ST HALIFAX AVEARDEN AVEMAPLE RDFRANCE AVE SINDIANOLA AVEJUANITA AVEW 51ST ST ¹»St Peter'sLutheran School W 54TH ST FULLER STFRANCE AVE SHALIFAX LNHALIFAX AVEW 61ST ST W 62ND ST VALLEY VIEW RD WOODDALE AVEKELLOGG AVEOAKLAWN AVEBROOKVIEW AVEG A R R IS O N LN F AIRFAXAVE FRANCE AVE SYORK AVE SXERXES AVE SW 69TH ST W 66TH ST VALLEYVIEWRDFRANCE AVE SSANDELL AVELYMAR LNBRISTOL RDW 70TH ST HAZELTON RD MAVELLE DRSUNNYSIDE RDW 4 4 T H S T MORNINGSIDE RD FRANCE AVECURVE AVE ETON PLñ ED EN A V EW 50TH ST WILSON RDHWY 100GRANGERD¹» ñ E D EN A V EVERNON AVEHANKERSON AVEWILLIAM AVEBEDFORD AVEOXFORD AVEW 51ST ST INTERLACHEN BLVD ARCADIA AVEGRANDVIEW LNHWY 100Our Ladyof GraceCanadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadZoning Map GRANDVIEW 44TH & FRANCE 50TH & FRANCE 54TH & FRANCE VALLEY VIEW & WOODDALE SOUTHDALE 70TH & FRANCE WILSON & EDEN CAHILL & 70TH N i n e Mile Creek N in e Mile C r e e k M in n e hahaCreek Canadian Pacific RailroadCity Hall CAHILL RDAMUNDSON AVEW 70TH ST VILLAGE DR CREEK VIEW LN LIMERICK LN ?úA@ ?úA@ ?ÞA@ +¡ %&f( +¡CodeM ilw aukee1st WolfeGarrison ParkBirch c r estBlueCircle R aleig h Belmore Northland169Concord45th EdinboroughE d i n a In d u s t r ia l GusYoung 7th Ramp LynnZarthanLoui sianaAlabamaO xford65th LinkPolk 494 S o u tht o w nPierceGallagherBenton 6 2Harrison Lakeview 2 1 2 66th H a z el ton Laguna HibiscusPark Ni colletWymanTo wnesOttawaNormandaleYorkGrangeGolf MerrittPennsylvaniaMinnetonkaMills Interlachen ParklawnSkylineChantrey RedCedar Va l le yView 52nd StuartDuncanCountryside Wexford40th 41st RedFox XenwoodAbercrombie 42nd 43rd 10064thWaterfordRose MavelleBissenWy cliffe Grove Cou nt r yClub DuncraigTingdaleAspen WestbrookJohnsonIndian Londonder r yBrookwood GleasonBarrieHobartLaradaNorthwood Farmdale OaklawnS ain t L o u is70 1/2Pa r k wo o d69th 71 1/2Malibu HeathertonCooperContinental67th Nancy 75th 76thOverholtBelloIndianPondAshleyParkside58th 60th B e rn e 59thArbour Trillium Sherman EnsignPheasant51st Da rcy 49 1/2 Indi an Hi lls 50th Langford 4 3 1 /2Yosemite Indianola7 GreenFarmsEdinaValleyBruceKent Morningside Flyin g C lo u d VernonJacksonChalice Spruce Lyle SallyArcadiaBraemarRyanB re n d a n WashingtonFranceCheyennePhlox 6th Stauder HalifaxKiplingJoppaInglewoodBlakeK e ntu c k y HuntingtonGl enhurstEdgewoodOlingerWell esl ey38th AkersGardenRuth68th Ashcroft39th TylerIvy ZenithGlenroyAbbottPost Ir o q u ois CahillH a w kes MackeyKresseBrittanyLarkspurComanch eM a r th Southview SidellBrid ge BalfanzLauraParnell LeeValley 5th 63rd Erin 56th VirginiaBrookvi ewParkview 48thPrinceton Ridgeview47th Millers49th 54th WoodcrestWaterman TaraDovre Li mer i ckKenneyJeffrey 72nd Goodrich BoycePreston Maloney 46th 44 th 70th Division 55th Porter Croyden Warden CircleEast 3rd Biscayne Meadow 62nd Bluff McCauley Coolidge57th TracyBlake Ridge DunberrySun Glendale GoyaH ig h la n d A bb ie Duggan AndoverBrooksideAyrshire WoodlandHabitat2nd West Shore78th VillageDakota Rabun PineGrove Highway 62FrontageWarwickCorneli aJayV alla che rViewMapleHillMarkTerrace CrescentWhiting Wo o d hi llMurphyAnnaway Oakdal ePolar Dubli nHi ghway 100Fr ont ageSheridan81st Brook Bonnie Brae C r e s t HarveyMirror LakesWayside DundeeBush LakeS u n n y s i d e JudsonDearbornVermont 77thCecilia DeweyHillArthurExcelsior Gl e n ShaughnessyGlacier MildredApache Sout hcr est LakeRidge SpurScandiaHydePark53rd AutoClub GalwayStonewoodNorman Creek FoxMeadow Viking W ood EndMaddox MelodyLakeRut ledgeHilltop SchaeferCreekridgePowellH e r it a ge TupaKelloggWood HaroldWoods ChowenSouthTelemark ComputerHilary 80th StreetCrestonPointClaremore GrimesM erilane Park CenterWeston LochloyMontereyM a r k e tp o in te OxboroughEtonOhmsC h eroke e VandervorkOak Grace RidgePark Lantan aMo c c a sin V alle y SandellWashburnC urv e RolfG ate Park CoventryLincolnBristolMinnesotaGriffitHidden DoronNi n eMil eBrenRoberts By w ood W est LochmereWooddaleCreek View Ti erneysWoodsMainstreet Braeburn DoncasterDelaneyQue nti n Hia w ath a OakwoodAdamsMadisonJeffersonBeardGlasgow GorgasVan BurenD o w n TownLine Clover GalleriaBlackfootMaitHansen 73rd Tanglewood61st Da rt W illo wWoo dWilryanXerxesThielenBedfordUptonVincentDrewJuanitaFairfaxSaintJohnsTowerWilliam FullerMaple BernardDaleHill Lois Saxony SherwoodHunter BrunswickHollyIkola E d e n m o or AntrimNaomiJohnHarrisWalnutGilford BalderMonroe Pondwood BrowndaleUpperSalemUticaToledoRichwoodOakBendMeadowbrook Tifton Clare d o n GrandviewShannonKelseyDeverMargaretsWebsterRosemaryN orthColgate Forslin Belvidere Scotia Melo d y Ka y m a r Scriver NewportDevilleWarrenE dg ebro okRolli n gGree n W indso r Sioux SouthdaleTelegraphShaneChapelDawsonCamelbackLake Cambridge Creek Sed um Knoll 78th StreetHillsideE astvie w Eden S c h o o lPaiute Samuel LanhamSunnysl opeMcI nt yr eOakglenSusan GlouchesterEvanswood CascoMcGuire Green Valley Mendelssohn TamaracDrexelArdenGlenbraeWi llsonDanens Field Colorado71st Dunham Highwood West AmundsonHealthCare MeroldRidgeway LeaJeff American Nordic MonardoEwingHamilton Yvonne HillcrestLewisRidgeGlengarryCircle WestW estwoodOpportunityPoppySchey ThomasWilford Branson Gold e n T ria n gle CrockerAldenScottSmetanaFondell I d yl w o od Amy TimberNavaho Philbrook ColonyLong Brake MinnehahaPeacedaleKill ar neyLoch Moor Colonial Vi llaFleetwoodPictureShady OakRidgeHighway 169Frontage7 4 thCreekValley A r c t ic MetroForest Glen Edina 2040 Comprehensive Plan Edina, Minnesota DRAFT Future Land Use October 2019 0 3,700Feet Source: City of Edina, Hennepin County, MetCouncil, MnDOT !ILegendLow Density Residential Low Density Attached Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Greater Southdale District Residential Office Residential Office Neigborhood Node Mixed Use Center Community Activity Center Industrial Open Space and Parks Public/Semi Public Regional Medical City Limits Existing Conditionally Permitted Uses (Churches, Schools and Golf Courses) in the R- 1 District with Parking lots adjacent to single- family homes EdinaMN.gov 2 Shepherd of the Hills Church EdinaMN.gov 3 Colony Park Baptist EdinaMN.gov 4 St. Peters Lutheran EdinaMN.gov 5 Edina Community Lutheran EdinaMN.gov 6 Edina Covenant Church EdinaMN.gov 7 Good Samaritan EdinaMN.gov 8 Calvary Church EdinaMN.gov 9 St. Alban’s and St. Patrick’s EdinaMN.gov 10 Edina Country Club EdinaMN.gov 11 Edina High School EdinaMN.gov 12 Highlands School EdinaMN.gov 13 Countryside School INTERLACHEN COUNTRY CLUB WEST PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT PLAN JULY 21, 2021 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION OVERVIEW KEY POINTS 1. Club History 2. Club Membership 3. Club Team Members 4. Current Challenges and Concerns 5. Current Site 6.Project Overview 7. Project Details 8. Planning Process 9. Revisions 10. Alternatives Considered 11. Environmental Stewardship 12. Project Benefits 13. Misinformation 14. Neighborhood Relations CLUB HISTORY FOUNDING Established at present location in 1909 • Farmland purchased by members of the Bryn Mawr Golf Club • Officially incorporated on December 31, 1909 • Golf course opened on July 29, 1911 • Activities included tennis, horseback riding, and trapshooting • Golf course has been recognized as one of the Top 100 Courses in the United States since 1967 CLUB HISTORY CHAMPIONSHIP GOLF Interlachen has been the proud host club of the following tournaments: • 1914 Western Open • 1916 Trans Mississippi • 1930 U.S. Open Championship • 1935 U.S. Women's Amateur • 1986 U.S. Senior Amateur • 1993 Walker Cup • 2002 Solheim Cup • 2008 U.S. Women's Open • 2016 Junior Ryder Cup 1954199820112019 CLUB HISTORY MODERNIZATION Interlachen remains one of the nation's prominent clubs due to reinvestment in our golf course, grounds, and other amenities. Pool Ballroom Maintenance Facility Clubhouse Renovation,Golf Performance Center, Tennis and site improvements CLUB HISTORY MISSION & VISION To enrich the lives of our members by providing outstanding championship golf and family experiences. Our Mission: Our Values: Tradition • Excellence • Stewardship • Innovation • Enjoyment • Community CLUB MEMBERSHIP MEMBER DEMOGRAPHICS Of 825 Member Families,70% Are Edina Residents Memberships include golf, athletic, and social TEAM MEMBERS ROLES & TYPES 350 TEAM MEMBERS190 CADDIES (INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS) Diverse work force Wide-range of positions: Full-time, part-time, & seasonal employees • GOLF STAFF • LIFEGUARDS • GROUNDS CREW • ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF • FOOD/BEVERAGE MANAGERS • HOUSEKEEPERS • FITNESS INSTRUCTORS • SERVERS/BARISTAS • CULINARIANS • EVENT STAFF TEAM MEMBERS COMMUTES 10.7mi Median Commute Distance 1 h 37m Median Public Transit Time INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL CURRENT CHALLENGES & CONCERNS INSUFFICIENT PARKING WATERMAN AVE TRAFFIC & SAFETY EMPLOYEE SAFETY GENERAL SECURITY LIMITED PRACTICE FACILITIES INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL CURRENT SITE APPROXIMATE PROPERTY BOU N D A R Y INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL PLAN OVERVIEW Plan Includes: • NEW PARKING LOT • CUL-DE-SAC • SECURITY GATE • EXPANDED PRACTICE TEE • NEW PUTTING GREEN 68' 80' 128' 100' INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL PROJECT RENDERINGS INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL PROJECT RENDERINGS INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL PARKING LOT SCREENING Tight hedge around border, evergreens plant- ed at six feet on day one, additional layers of plants to the west and northwest, buffer property to the west. Minimal lighting with control features to limit the dispersion of light on neighboring properties. LIGHTING Complete security camera coverage within Interlachen property. SECURITY Project includes treating currently untreated stormwater runoff from Waterman Ave. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Primarily used for employee parking in May through September, allowing employees to avoid walking across Blake Road traffic. USES INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL CUL-DE-SAC AND SECURITY GATE REDUCES WATERMAN AVE TRAFFIC Members and employees will not be able to enter or exit the Club via Waterman Avenue. Access will be limited to deliveries that cannot access the loading dock via the main entry and emergency vehicles. GATE FUNCTIONALITY The gate will match the aesthetics of the Club's other buildings. Specifications on the emergency operation of the gate have been received from city staff. INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL PRACTICE TEE AND PUTTING GREEN ENHANCED AESTHETIC Putting green landscaping will match views more consistent with the rest of the golf course. ADDITIONAL BUFFER Interlachen has purchased the property directly West of the proposed new putting green for additional buffer and screening. LOCATION New practice tee and putting green will be at the current site of 6305 Waterman Ave. INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL PLANNING PROCESS INTERLACHEN ONGOING COLLABORATION WITH EDINA PLANNING & ENGINEERING COMMUNICATION & ENGAGEMENT WITH NEIGHBORS APRIL 16Communicated Project Information to Neighbors APRIL 26Hosted Town-Hall Meeting with Neighbors APRIL 30Communicated Project Changes with Neighbors MAY 3Submitted Final Plans to City of Edina INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PROPOSAL REVISIONS AFTER INVITING WATERMAN AVE, SOUTH SIDE OF MALONEY AVE, AND EAST OF ST. JOHN'S NEIGHBORS TO A TOWN-HALL STYLE MEETING, INTERLACHEN MADE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO OUR PROPOSAL: Added native plants to storm water basin to better match nearby homes' natural, wild landscapes. Added additional tree plantings to vary aesthetics of parking lot boundary. Revised lighting specifications and controls, reducing light pole height, count, and overall lumens. PLANNING ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED SMALLER PARKING LOT Unfortunately, a smaller parking lot will not meet our needs and we will still have many of the costs (mobilization, general conditions, storm water management). OTHER LOCATIONS Interlachen's property is landlocked and other locations would impact the routing of the golf course which has been in place since 1909. PARKING RAMP Multilevel parking is cost prohibitive ($2 million–$3 million vs. $500,000). PERMEABLE SURFACES Utilizing permeable concrete pavers in some capacity is an option. MOVING TENNIS AND SKATING FACILITIES WEST We are concerned this would create more noise, light, and disruption to the neighbors than parking. These activities are active 12 months of the year. PUBLIC TRANSIT Commute times create unreasonable ask to employees. The nearest bus stops are 1.4 miles and 1.6 miles away (25 minute walking time), proposed light rail is approximately 1.5 miles away (30 minute walking time), and there are factors outside our control that require employees to take a car to and from work (day care, school, appointments, etc.) CONTINUE TO PARK AT CHURCH Unfortunately, there is no long term guarantee that parking will be available at the church and there are event conflicts from time to time that prevent when we can use it. The .5 mile walks put us at a disadvantage in the challenging labor market and safety would remain a concern. A shuttle would create more traffic on Waterman Avenue. PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP We have taken several steps to ensure a neutral or positive environmental impact. Project will include treating stormwater runoff from Waterman Ave, which is currently untreated Water quality of Mirror Lake will be improved through proposed plans Paved parking lot will result in less sediment in runoff than current vacant lot. THIS PROJECT MEETS THE CITY OF EDINA AND MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS FOR: Stormwater Management Erosion and Sediment Control Wetland Protection Including rate control of stormwater from site & treatment before discharging into public infrastructure INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY PLAN BENEFITS REDUCED TRAFFIC ON WATERMAN AVE WATERMAN AVE HOMES NOW ON CUL-DE-SAC VS. BUSY ROAD IMPROVED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT APPROXIMATELY 450 FEET LESS STREET FOR CITY OF EDINA TO MAINTAIN, SAVING CITY ~$20,000 IN 2021 IMPROVED SAFETY FOR EMPLOYEES IMPROVED SECURITY "The project creates a clean water benefit to water that currently drains directly to area water bodies. The project will create drainage features such as rain gardens that will filter sediment and pollutants from stormwater before it enters the area water bodies. This is an improvement to what is happening today." -City of Edina Director of Engineering INTERLACHEN WEST PROPERTY ADDRESSING MISINFORMATION PROPERTY • Houses scheduled for removal were purchased for $600,000* in 2018, and $247,500** in 1999. *2021 cost with inflation $646,880, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics **2021 cost with inflation $403,385, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics PROPOSED GATE • Will remain closed when not in use by delivery or emergency vehicles • Will not be used as a member or team member entrance/exit SECURITY • Waterman fence and gate will deter criminal activity • Future Interlachen Blvd gate will further enhance security PARKING LOT CONCERNS • Proposed parking lot will not be used for debris storage • Proposed parking lot will be primarily used for employee parking • Proposed parking lot will not be used for anything other than parking • Light dispersion will be contained within property borders • Video surveillance will not extend beyond parking lot edges • Current parking lot was reduced by only 11 spots in 2019 for pedestrian safety PLANNING NEIGHBORHOOD RELATIONS We pride ourselves on being a good neighbor and community partner. RESPONSIVE TO NEIGHBORHOOD FEEDBACK HIGH STANDARDS FOR RENTAL TENANTS COMMUNICATION BEFORE LARGE EVENTS MAINTENANCE FACILITY PROJECT SUCCESS STREET REPAIR LANDSCAPING ONGOING DIALOGUE WITH RESIDENTS AND WILLINGNESS TO WORK FURTHER WITH RESIDENTS TO ADDRESS REASONABLE CONCERNS INTERLACHEN IS PROUD TO SHARE ITS PROPERTY AND FACILITIES WITH COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AND YOUTH SPORTS TEAMS JOEL LIVINGOOD GENERAL MANAGER/CEO jlivingood@interlachencc.org 952-924-7401 THANK YOU The CITY of EDINA Conditional Use Permit –Interlachen Country Club, 6200 Interlachen Boulevard The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 2 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 3 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 4 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 5 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 6 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 7 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 8 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 9 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 10 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 11 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 12 8 The CITY of EDINARequest Requires EdinaMN.gov 13 ➢Conditional Use Permit –New Parking Lot & Expanded Boundary of the Club The CITY of EDINAPrimary Issue EdinaMN.gov 14 ➢Is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria met? Yes, staff believes the criteria is met. 1. The proposed project meets all city code provisions and are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Golf courses are a permitted use within the R-1 Zoning District, uses accessory to a golf course, such as tennis courts, swimming pools, driving ranges, practice facilities and other related recreational uses are also permitted. Parking areas are a conditionally permitted use within the R-1 District. The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 15 Compliance Table City Standard Proposed North lot line South lot line West line East lot line 20 feet 20 feet 10 feet 20 feet 85 – 110 feet 280 feet 1000+ feet 1000+ feet The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 16 100’ The CITY of EDINA Existing Conditionally Permitted Uses (Churches, Schools and Golf Courses) in the R- 1 District with Parking lots adjacent to single- family homes The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 18 Shepherd of the Hills Church The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 19 Colony Park Baptist The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 20 St. Peters Lutheran The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 21 Edina Community Lutheran The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 22 Edina Covenant Church The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 23 Edina High School The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 24 Highlands School The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 25 Countryside School The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 26 Edina Country Club The CITY of EDINAPrimary Issue EdinaMN.gov 27 ➢Is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria met? 2. The main golf course has public/semi-public land use designation, and the single-family lots have a low-density residential designation. No amendment is needed to the comprehensive plan as the overall uses are permitted or conditionally permitted in the R-1 Zoning District. The CITY of EDINAPrimary Issue EdinaMN.gov 28 ➢Is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria met? 3.The proposal meets the conditional use permit criteria. 1. Does not have an undue adverse impact on governmental facilities, utilities, services or existing or proposed improvements. 2. Will generate traffic within the capacity of the streets serving the property. 3. Does not have an undue adverse impact on the public health, safety, or welfare. 4. Will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of other property in the vicinity. 5. Conforms to the applicable restrictions and special conditions of the district in which it is located as imposed by this Section. The CITY of EDINAPrimary Issue EdinaMN.gov 29 ➢Is the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) criteria met? 4. The parking lot and practice area would be adequately screened with the recommendations from the city forester, including the planting 2.5” caliper trees for the replacement trees; and the Taxus Cuspidata or upright yews planted along the west side of the parking lot for screening be planted to be 6 feet tall instead of 4 feet. The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 30 The CITY of EDINABetter Together Edina EdinaMN.gov 31 The CITY of EDINARecommendation EdinaMN.gov 32 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 33 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 34 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 35 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 36 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 37 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 38 Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:MJ Lamon, Community Engagement Coordinator Item Activity: Subject:2021-2022 Student Commission Appointments Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve student commissioners with a term starting 9/1/21 and ending 9/1/22. INTRODUCTION: A staff report provides a summary and the selected appointments for student commissioners. Council Member Jackson will provide an update. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: 2021-2022 Student Appointments July 21, 2021 Mayor & City Council MJ Lamon, Community Engagement Coordinator 2021-2022 Student Commission Appointments Information / Background: This year the City received 32 applications for student commission positions. There are 16 commission seats available for student members every year. Council Member Carolyn Jackson and community volunteer Jan Seidman interviewed the applicants on July 15,16 and 17. The following are the recommended appointments to start 9/1/21 and end 9/1/22: Commission Appointees Arts & Culture Commission - Reeya Anand - Tiffany Shen Community Health Commission - Elizabeth Mullen - Ben Hykes Energy & Environment Commission - Suryash Rawat - Ava Shumway Heritage Preservation Commission - Ashwin Maheshwari - Sadie Roy Human Rights & Relations Commission - Francesca Lichtenberger - Sabeehudeen Mirza Parks & Recreation Commission - Sammy Prestus - Urva Jha Planning Commission - William Hayward - Kenley Barberot Transportation Commission - Stephen Kanti Mahanty - Anna Clark Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.B. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-52, Ordinance No. 2021-06: Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan for Solhem Companies at 4660 77th Street West Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-52, Ordinance No. 2021-06, Preliminary Rezoning and Preliminary Development Plan for Solhem Companies at 4660 West 77th Street. INTRODUCTION: The City Council is asked to consider a redevelopment proposal to redevelop 4660 W. 77th Street, which is part of the Pentagon Park office development. The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing two office buildings on the site and construct a 5-7 story, 408-unit apartment. ATTACHMENTS: Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report 7-12-21 Noon Staff Memos to Planning Commission, May 26 Resolution No. 2021-52 Ordinance No. 2021-06 Site Location, Zoning, & Comp. Plan Building Height Overlay District Applicant Plans and Narrative Sustainability Questionnaire Approved 2008 Plan and Resolution Traffic and Parking Study Sketch Plans AFO Review of Sketch Plan Denied 2017 Plan and Resolution Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 11 July 2021 Public Hearing Comments-Pentagon North Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Rezoning from MDD-6 to PUD, Planned Unit Development, at 4660 W 77th Street, Pentagon North VISITORS 22 CONTRIBUTORS 12 RESPONSES 15 2 Registered 0 Unverified 10 Anonymous 2 Registered 0 Unverified 13 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 17, 2021 13:43:47 pm Last Seen:May 17, 2021 13:43:47 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jon Hebeisen Q2.Address 4700 West 77th Q3.Comment What is the anticipated completion/tenant occupation date? Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 18, 2021 14:49:31 pm Last Seen:May 18, 2021 14:49:31 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Colleen Bertino Q2.Address 4555 West 77th Street Q3.Comment Are there any plans for a traffic signal at the Seagate entrance? Without traffic controls it will be impossible to make a left turn from any driveway on 77th between the apt building and 76th/Parkway light to the east Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 08:33:55 am Last Seen:May 19, 2021 08:33:55 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name David Hellerman Q2.Address 7453 West Shore Drive, Edina, 55435 Q3.Comment We (my spouse Diana Hellerman and I) strongly support affordable housing on this site, and elsewhere in Edina where feasible. Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 11:48:52 am Last Seen:May 19, 2021 11:48:52 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Derek Johnson Q2.Address 7421 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment I fully support the pursuit of affordable housing and am supportive in general of having an apartment building in this existing locaiton. Similar to other developments either proposed or in process near neighborhoods, I would like to see us commit to existing height and size restrictions, just as I have seen done in other Edina neighborhoods that have wrestled with this. My neighborhood should not be treated any differently because of our location or lower property values. As a result, the commission should work with the developers to either use other lot space to hit a larger number of units with fewer floors or move forward with a smaller unit count footprint. It would still accomplish our goals of having more housing, while also taking into account the surrounding areas. My only other ask is if something smaller does move forward, we use this opportunity to enhance the Fred Richards park a bit more, which was the City's promise to our neighboord many years ago when the decision was made to close the golf course despite our objections. In drawings I have seen on what an improved Fred Richards park coud look like, there was elements to help existing homeowners like myself that face the park to add more visual barriers like trees or tall bushes. This should be in scope if an apartment complex moves forward just to help create that natural visual barrier to what will likely be a large concrete building out our backyards. Thanks for your consideration. Respondent No:5 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 13:35:57 pm Last Seen:May 19, 2021 13:35:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Thomas C Koon Q2.Address 4410 Grimes Avenue , Edina, MN Q3.Comment I support the development. It would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Edina Housing Task Force Report. It is a better use of the land then the current office space. It is near transportation and basic services therefore requiring less dependence on cars. Respondent No:6 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 19, 2021 16:50:57 pm Last Seen:May 19, 2021 16:50:57 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tony Hodgkins Q2.Address 7437 W Shore Dr Q3.Comment I am writing to kindly express my objection to the 4660 W. 77th St. rezoning from MDD-6 to PUD. My hesitation is not of mere aesthetics nor stems from a “not in my backyard” mindset, rather of a fact-based look into what higher concentrations of affordable housing can do to the existing, surrounding neighborhoods and its residents. Housing units do not exist in a vacuum; they affect the neighborhoods they are located in. The preponderance of my following argument comes from the discussion paper “The Impact of Affordable Housing on Communities and Households” released by the Minnesota Housing Financial Agency written by Spencer Agnew. When referencing the Edina zoning map and the identified affordable housing locations on the Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) website, there already exists a disproportionately high amount of affordable housing locations in the Cornelia Elementary area. The rezoning proposition of 4660 W. 77th St. is within this boundary. There are more existing and zoned affordable housing areas in this one Elementary school area than the sum of all other Elementary school areas combined in Edina. Housing has the potential to significantly influence education outcomes for residents and communities. High residential mobility (frequency of moves) is associated with significant deficits in educational achievement. Residential mobility is a particularly important factor because it impacts education outcomes for both mobile and non-mobile students; research finds that teachers in schools with highly mobile student populations tend to focus less on new material and more on review, which results in achievement deficits for mobile and non-mobile students alike. High residential mobility is associated with poorer scores on reading and math tests, higher rates of grade repetition, and higher high school dropout rates. Schools with higher rates of student mobility tend to slow the pace of curriculum and focus more on review-oriented lessons. This adversely impacts academic achievement of stable students compared with stable students in schools with lower student turnover. Cornelia Elementary School underperforms in both reading and math scores compared to other Edina elementary schools. Research indicates that increasing the already disproportionate number of high mobility students in this area will not result in those scores improving. In time, this may bring down the collective Edina Public School district academic ratings in terms of State rankings possibly impacting Edina’s ability to continue to be an attractive option for young middle and upper-middle class families to move and raise families. High concentrations of affordable housing can have a negative impact on crime rates, while smaller scale and dispersed projects do not. The most recent research on this topic has typically found that scale is the most important factor in determining the effect of affordable housing on neighborhood crime. Several studies have found that when affordable units occur in small quantities (less than 50 units), there is typically no impact on neighborhood crime. The project currently up for consideration for rezoning would yield 408 additional units. Large projects or a large concentration of affordable units within an area may have the effect of increasing crime. This finding is a common theme across multiple types of affordable housing, including nonprofit rental, supportive housing, and public housing. The city of Edina’s “crime report and map” indicates that this area (Cornelia Elementary) has an elevated incidence of crime compared to other Edina areas. Research suggests that adding another larger-scale affordable housing project to the area will not improve this statistic. Research indicates that affordable housing areas should be smaller in scope and better dispersed than the current Edina model of consolidating them in the Cornelia Elementary school area. Adding yet another affordable housing project to the Cornelia Elementary area of Edina (an area already hosting a disproportionate amount of affordable housing) will not improve the aforementioned issues. I respectfully recommend that other areas of Edina be considered – areas of Edina not already so disproportionately hosting affordable housing initiatives. Respondent No:7 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 09:25:42 am Last Seen:May 20, 2021 09:25:42 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name George Tortorelis Q2.Address 7441 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment Stop trying to ruin a historic neighborhood with a cringe project. Propping up a massive development in a quiet area is a horrible idea and would bring noise and crime to a safe area. There is no support for this in the lake Edina neighborhood and this plan is viewed as a betreyal among the local community. Respondent No:8 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 11:50:54 am Last Seen:May 20, 2021 11:50:54 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tony Hodgkins Q2.Address 7437 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment Currently in this Cornelia Elementary school area, there is already a disproportionate number of affordable housing locations. In referencing identified affordable housing on the Edina zoning map and on the NOAH website, there exists a disproportionate amount of affordable housing locations in the Cornelia Elementary school area. The rezoning of 4660 W 77th Street is in the boundaries of this existing elementary school area. I am not necessarily against increasing the amount of affordable housing within the city of Edina, but I am against consolidating it all in a single location. If one were to look at the Edina zoning map, its fairly evident that the lower right quadrant of Edina has a disproportionate amount of affordable housing already there. We suggest dispersing affordable housing that would result in minimal to no impact on crime or the public education system. Research does indicate that consolidating them into a single area will impact negatively both the crime rate and the education of those areas. I recently submitted online a more expansive and research-based explanation in terms of my brief comments this evening. Thanks for your time. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 6:56 PM) Respondent No:9 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 12:42:39 pm Last Seen:May 20, 2021 12:42:39 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Geoff London Q2.Address 7424 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment I am completely opposed to this proposal. I vote “no” big time because we don’t need more affordable housing stuff around. I think it is going to pull down the overall level of our city and I am against it. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 9:30 AM) Respondent No:10 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 13:20:27 pm Last Seen:May 20, 2021 13:20:27 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Christine Hodgkins Q2.Address 7437 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment From the committee, I would like further clarification on what rezoning would change with regards to building new apartments on the proposed site. My understanding is that a zone of MDD-6 Mixed Development District allows for buildings containing not fewer than 10 dwelling units or senior citizen units. Can apartment buildings be built without rezoning? Other than ensuring affordable housing on this site, what does changing the zoning at this location accomplish? If the rezoning is simply to create affordable housing on site, I have concerns. Southeast Edina already has a significant concentration of affordable housing. Adding another complex in this already dense area will lead to undesirable outcomes. Research has shown that concentrating low-income housing, greater than 50 units in one area, leads to increased crime rates and less desirable education outcomes. Since this area in Edina is already saturated with affordable housing, I am concerned that adding another 408-unit building is unwise. I suggest keeping the site zoned as-is and spreading out affordable housing options throughout Edina. If affordable housing is spread throughout the city, everyone will benefit from the increased options and not one local will suffer from the high concentration of affordable housing in one area. Thank you for listening to my concerns and thoughts on this request to rezone. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 10:45 AM) Respondent No:11 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 20, 2021 13:54:25 pm Last Seen:May 20, 2021 13:54:25 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Tony Hodgkens Q2.Address 7437 West Shore Drive Q3.Comment I am not necessarily against affordable housing in the city of Edina, but there does already exist a disproportionally high number of affordable housing zoning options within the Cornelia Elementary School district when referencing the Edina zoning map and identified affordable housing locations within the NOAH website. A discussion paper made available by the Minnesota Housing Financial Agency written by Spencer Agnew suggests that higher concentrations of affordable housing do have negative impacts on crime and education within certain areas. Communities wishing to increase the number of affordable housing within their areas should do so in smaller chunks and in a more dispersed area. Research indicates that when affordable housing is in small and widely distributed areas, crime and education are both negligibly impacted. The current city of Edina model to consolidate all of the affordable housing into just the Cornelia area I feel would not improve the statistics in terms of it being one of the higher crime rates in Edina. The Cornelia Elementary school is already underperforming compared to the other elementary schools in math and reading tests (compared to its peers). It is continuing to increase the already disproportionate amount of affordable housing areas within the Cornelia Elementary School area. I encourage other areas of Edina to be considered to increase Edina’s affordable housing areas. This Cornelia Elementary school area should not continue to be the aggregate for where most of the affordable housing is in terms of the zoning map. I encourage this committee to please consider spreading it out. Thank you. -Transcribed by City Staff (voicemail was received 5/19/21 at 7:08 PM) Respondent No:12 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 24, 2021 08:06:54 am Last Seen:May 24, 2021 08:06:54 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Hope Melton Q2.Address 4825 Valley View Road Q3.Comment I write to support the rezoning. This excellent large and sustainable housing project will provide "market rate" affordable housing for working households in the range of 70-80% AMI--an underserved group. The City has long maintained that it wants to serve a broad range of housing affordability, and this project fits that goal. Besides being close to public transit and all of Greater Southdale's amenities, the project embraces the Fred Richards Park and the Nine Mile Creek Trail. It's the ideal location for a large housing project. Solhem ("sun home" in Swedish) has an excellent reputation for quality, sustainable construction and property management. This offers Edina a chance to further promote its reputation for innovative achievements on behalf of both equity and sustainability. I think it's a win/win for the whole community. Respondent No:13 Login:JoelZaslofsky Email:jezaslof@gmail.com Responded At:May 25, 2021 20:03:17 pm Last Seen:May 26, 2021 02:18:19 am IP Address:66.41.86.50 Q1.First and Last Name Joel Zaslofsky Q2.Address 7124 Heatherton Trl, Edina, MN 55435 Q3.Comment I read the full proposal document from the developer to the City and it seems in alignment with the Greater Southdale Area District Plan. It's nice to see a developer attempt to respect the existing green space and general area they want to build in. For example, the site is zoned for a maximum of 12 stories. But they are only proposing an 8 story building – much of which will top out at 4 or 5 stories. I also appreciate how much of the existing empty parking lot will be turned into green space and better integrated into the transition zone between the buildings and Fred Richards Park. Throw in some market rate affordable housing and I can see how a number of people would like this proposal. At the same time, I'm not for all elements of the proposal. The developer talks about sustainable communities, but the emphasis seems to be on the *sustainable* part focused on environmental concerns. It's all well and good they're ecologically-minded. But I see nothing in this proposal that attempts to integrate the people who will live there into the neighborhoods that surround it like Parklawn, Lake Edina, and South Cornelia. They describe the proposed development as an oasis and that's exactly what it looks like to me – a walled area on almost all sides that doesn't invite in the surrounding area or encourage residents to look our their windows and see potential neighbors to engage with. I'd like to challenge the developer and City Council to ask themselves this question: how can this development integrate the people who live there with the areas that surround it? Respondent No:14 Login:Collinnelson Email:collin.nelson@gmail.com Responded At:May 26, 2021 11:32:53 am Last Seen:May 26, 2021 13:46:53 pm IP Address:66.41.85.108 Q1.First and Last Name Collin Nelson Q2.Address 4516 Hibiscus Ave, Edina, MN Q3.Comment I am in support of redeveloping the Pentagon Park area to involve more residential and retail/restaurant opportunities for the Southdale area. I hope that this project will attract more investment to do away with all those tired office buildings to revitalize the area south of Fred Richards Park. Respondent No:15 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:May 26, 2021 13:47:24 pm Last Seen:May 26, 2021 13:47:24 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Alexander Herr Q2.Address 6700 Ridgeview Dr Q3.Comment It's good to see these properties being redeveloped. Please insist on mixed use properties and that the developer include links to biking and public transportation options. Additionally, I would hope they pay for the cost of upgrading existing infrastructure to accommodate the new residents. The Planning Commission is asked to consider a redevelopment proposal to redevelop 4660 77th Street West, which is part of the Pentagon Park office development. The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing two office buildings on the site and construct a 5-7 story, 408-unit apartment. (See attached plans.) As this parcel is considered part of the Greater Southdale District, Mic Johnson, the City’s consultant has provided a review of the proposed plans at sketch plan. (See attached memo.) This site was rezoned to Mixed Development District – 6 (MDD-6) in 2008; however, no development ever took place. The MDD zoning designation was used before the City established PUD Zoning in 2011. Attached is a copy of the approved Overall Development Plan Concept that was approved as part of the rezoning. There was to be a mixture of office and residential uses. Note that the subject property was specifically contemplated for multi- family residential housing. Pentagon Village was part of this MDD-6 District and was where the office and retail uses were to be located. However, that site was recently rezoned to PUD, and is no longer part of the MDD. This site was considered for a PUD Rezoning in 2014 and 2017. However, that proposal was ultimately denied. (See attached resolution denying the project and the concept plan that was considered.) The request would require the following: 1. A Rezoning from MDD-6 to PUD. Flexibility would be requested through the PUD Ordinance to vary from parking and floor area ratio (FAR) requirements. The PUD Zoning is also used to ensure affordable housing on the site. May 26, 2021 Planning Commission Cary Teague, Community Development Director Preliminary Rezoning & Preliminary Development Plan for Solhem Companies at 4660 77th Street West. Information / Background: STAFF REPORT Page 2 The applicant has gone through the sketch plan process and has revised the plans to respond to comments from the Planning Commission and City Council. Below is a list of some of the changes: 77th Street Facade: • Revised entry level to be at sidewalk grade compared to 10 feet above grade. • Created architecturally strong building entrance with a new central massing. • Activated sidewalk and streetscape with added glass and active uses, blended with landscape to great a welcoming pedestrian experience along the porte cochere • Broke up massing along 77th Street into 3 primary facades; recessed the primary massing in two areas; followed the guideline to have no mass longer than 200 feet; created layers of landscaping and vines to soften the façade. 77th Streetscape: • Made curb cuts perpendicular to 77th Street in order to create safer pedestrian to vehicle sight lines. • Activated 77th Street streetscape, and revised massing and elevations to draw people into the building and the trails that connect to the park. • Added double rows of trees along the sidewalk. • Eliminated large change in elevation to connect the building entry with the sidewalk. • Added glass and building articulation to break up the facade and make more transparent/see- through. • Eliminated the idea of an “on-ramp” and made the sidewalk more pedestrian friendly. • Created a buffer area between sidewalk and street. East Side Fred Richards Park Connection: • Developed east side connection with a grove of trees and midpoint connection into the building courtyard. • Angled building to create enhanced pathway connections and view planes into the park. North Side Fred Richards Park Connection: • Seamlessly joined the apartment property with the Nine Mile Creek Trail and park. • Engaged the park with an added aspen grove that guides pedestrians into the park. • Lowered the property elevation to preserve storm water storage while blending with park topography. • Used native landscaping species that are compatible with existing park landscape and climate hardiness. West Side Woonerf: • Created landscape bays throughout parking and street areas to turn the west driveway and parking into a Woonerf. • Will plan to connect rainwater into landscape bays along Woonerf to emulate a green street. • End of Woonerf blends with parkway connection for both pedestrians and bikes that runs along northern edge of site, connecting with the east side park connection trail. Water: • Integrated water storage in the rooftop, added a courtyard stormwater infiltration stream bed, and built-in flood storage zones on the site while reducing impermeable surface area. • Addressed groundwater concerns by bringing basement level up, and relocating parking under the east wing. • Revised elevations to maintain water storage areas in the event of potential flooding. Sustainability: • Added rooftop garden/agricultural space for residents. • Reoriented landscape of the site to best allow for apartment access to light, air, trees, and views. STAFF REPORT Page 3 • Passive and active energy conservation. • Integrated stormwater management (see above). Affordable Housing: • Targeting affordability with typical units at approximately 73% AMI; focusing on an underserved population of lower middle-class families. This housing does not meet the definition of affordable housing. • Created direct park accessibility for lower income families. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Surrounding Land Uses Northerly: Fred Richards Park and Regional Trail; zoned R-1, Single-dwelling Unit District, and guided Open Space and Parks. Easterly: Edina County Club; zoned R-1, Single-dwelling Unit District and public/semi-public. Southerly: Office building; zoned MDD-6, Mixed Development District, and guided OR, Office Residential (20-75 units per acre). Westerly: Office building; zoned MDD-6, Mixed Development District, and guided OR, Office Residential (20-75 units per acre). Existing Site Features The subject property is 5.44 acres in size and contains two office buildings. Planning Guide Plan designation: OR, Office Residential (20-75 units per acre). Zoning: MDD-6, Mixed Development District Parking Based on the proposal for a total of 408 residential units in a Mixed Development District, 714 parking stalls are required with 408 enclosed under the City’s existing off-street parking regulations. Under the draft off-street ordinance amendment, recommended by the Planning Commission, 510 total spaces are required, 408 enclosed. The proposal is to provide 552 stalls total with 502 enclosed and 50 surface stalls. Wenck/Stantec conducted a parking analysis and concluded that 534 spaces would be adequate to serve this development (See attached Traffic and Parking Study.) Site Circulation/Traffic Vehicular access to the site for the restaurant would be off 77th Street and access to the underground parking on the west side of the building. There would be pedestrian trails on all sides of the building. The main trail connection to the Regional Trail in Fred Richard Park is on the east side of the building. The applicant has enhanced this area compared to the sketch plan proposal. Because this is a primary access to the regional trail, staff recommends widening this path from 5 to 8 feet. STAFF REPORT Page 4 Wenck/Stantec Consulting conducted a parking and traffic study. (See attached study.) The study concludes that the existing roadway system would support the project. The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development would have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No roadway improvements are needed. Landscaping Based on the perimeter of the site 50 overstory trees would be required. The applicant is proposing over 100 overstory trees in the boulevard and around the perimeter of the site and within the courtyard. (See attached landscape plan.) A full complement of understory shrubs and bushes are proposed. Grading/Drainage/Utilities The city engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and found them to be acceptable subject to the comments and conditions outlined in their review memo. (See attached.) A developer’s agreement would be required for the construction of the proposed sidewalks and utilities. Any approvals of this project would be subject to review and approval of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, as they are the City’s review authority over the grading of the site. Building/Building Material The building materials would be a combination primarily brick, fiber cement panel, vertical metal panel and glass. (See attached renderings.) Mechanical Equipment No mechanical equipment has been shown on the plans. Any rooftop and/or ground level equipment would have to be screened if visible from adjacent property lines. Final Plans must include location of mechanical equipment and the means of screening. No ground level mechanical equipment shall be located within the front yard of the development. Signage The signage allowed on the site would correspond to the use. The signage proposed would be allowed within the PUD. No signage shall face the park. Way finding signage should be installed on 77th Street to direct pedestrian and bicycle traffic to the regional trail. Sustainability The applicant has provided the sustainability questionnaire. (See attached.) Additionally, the City’s sustainability coordinator has reviewed the plans and provided comments and recommendations in the engineering memo. (See attached engineering memo.) These shall be made conditions of approval. STAFF REPORT Page 5 Living Streets/Multi-Modal Consideration Sec. 36-1274. - Sidewalks, trails and bicycle facilities. (a) In order to promote and provide safe and effective sidewalks and trails in the city and encourage the use of bicycles for recreation and transportation, the following improvements are required, as a condition of approval, on developments requiring the approval of a final development plan or the issuance of a conditional use permit pursuant to article V of this chapter: (1) It is the policy of the city to require the construction of sidewalks and trails wherever feasible so as to encourage pedestrian and bicycle connectivity throughout the city. Therefore, developments shall provide sidewalks and trails which adjoin the applicant's property: a. In locations shown on the city's sidewalk and trail plan; and b. In other locations where the council finds that the provision of such sidewalks and trails enhance public access to mass transit facilities or connections to other existing or planned sidewalks, trails, or public facilities. (2) Developments shall provide sidewalks between building entrances and sidewalks or trails which exist, or which will be constructed pursuant to this section. (3) Developments shall provide direct sidewalk and trail connections with adjoining properties where appropriate. (4) Developments must provide direct sidewalk and trail connections to transit stations or transit stops adjoining the property. (5) Design standards for sidewalks and trails shall be prescribed by the engineer. (6) Nonresidential developments having an off-street automobile parking requirement of 20 or more spaces must provide off-street bicycle parking spaces where bicycles may be parked and secured from theft by their owners. The minimum number of bicycle parking spaces required shall be five percent of the automobile parking space requirement. The design and placement of bicycle parking spaces and bicycle racks used to secure bicycles shall be subject to the approval of the city engineer. Whenever possible, bicycle parking spaces shall be located within 50 feet of a public entrance to a principal building. (b) The expense of the improvements set forth in subsection (a) of this section shall be borne by the applicant. The applicant would be installing sidewalks on all sides of the building, including the boulevard style sidewalk on 77th. See the attached memo from the engineering department regarding the city’s Living Streets Policy. These recommendations would be in the conditions of approval. Planned Unit Development (PUD) Per Section 36-253 the following are the regulations for a PUD: STAFF REPORT Page 6 1. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of the PUD District is to provide comprehensive procedures and standards intended to allow more creativity and flexibility in site plan design than would be possible under a conventional zoning district. The decision to zone property to PUD is a public policy decision for the City Council to make in its legislative capacity. The purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c. provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street or transition to residential neighborhoods, parks or other sensitive uses; d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; f. preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and i. ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. The proposal would meet the purpose and intent of the PUD, as most of the above criteria would be met. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for “Office Residential,” which allows for residential, and office uses. The existing zoning and approved development plan for the site allows residential uses. There is not much housing location within this area. Introducing housing into the area will assist with the commercial areas to the west including the Pentagon Village commercial area on the south side of 77th; which was the intent of the original MDD-6 zoning district. The existing MDD-6 Zoning Designation is not appropriate as that zoning was designed with a specific plan in mind. Since that development did not STAFF REPORT Page 7 happen, and a portion of that MDD-6 Zoning District has already been rezoned to PUD (Pentagon Village), a rezoning to PUD is appropriate. Primary parking is located under and within the building, which is pulled up closer to the street, and separated from the street by green space to promote a more walkable environment. Sidewalks are provided all around the building including a significant connection to the regional bike trail. The proposed buildings would be a high-quality brick, with metal siding. The applicant has indicated that would meet the City’s affordable housing policy by buying in. Ten percent of the of development would include 41 units. Therefore, at $100,000 per required affordable housing units, the applicant would be required to pay $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. (See attached memo from the city’s affordable housing manager.) 2. Applicability/Criteria a. Uses. All permitted uses, permitted accessory uses, conditional uses, and uses allowed by administrative permit contained in the various zoning districts defined in this Chapter shall be treated as potentially allowable uses within a PUD district, provided they would be allowable on the site under the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and the existing zoning on the site. This site was originally contemplated for housing when the MDD was created. (See approved development plan for this site.) b. Eligibility Standards. To be eligible for a PUD district, all development should be in compliance with the following: i. where the site of a proposed PUD is designated for more than one (1) land use in the Comprehensive Plan, the City may require that the PUD include all the land uses so designated or such combination of the designated uses as the City Council shall deem appropriate to achieve the purposes of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as Office Residential, as mentioned, the original Mixed-Use Development contemplated for this site was high density residential. ii. any PUD which involves a single land use type or housing type may be permitted provided that it is otherwise consistent with the objectives of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan; The proposed is a single-land use. However, because it is a use that is not prevalent in this area, the proposal is acceptable. As mentioned, this site was approved for a high-density residential development that was part of a horizontal mixed-use project. STAFF REPORT Page 8 The office and retail uses were contemplated for the Pentagon Park South Site, which is occurring in the Pentagon Village site. iii. permitted densities may be specifically stated in the appropriate planned development designation and shall be in general conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and As mentioned, the uses allowed are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The densities allowed would be specifically stated in the PUD Ordinance. The density proposed is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan at 75 units per acre. iv. the setback regulation, building coverage and floor area ratio of the most closely related conventional zoning district shall be considered presumptively appropriate, but may be departed from to accomplish the purpose and intent described in #1 above. The table on the following page shows how the proposed new building would comply with the MDD-6 Zoning Ordinance Standards and the zoning standard in the new PUD-22 District. Please note that most standards are met under the conventional zoning. The notable changes are height and parking. Compliance Table City Standard (MDD-6) Proposed Building Setbacks Front – 77th Street Rear – Fred Richards Park Side – West Side – East 35 feet 35 feet 20 feet 20 feet 43-55 feet 26 feet 51 feet 55 feet Building Height 4 stories & 48 feet 5-7 stories & 52-86 feet Density 20-75 units per acre (5.44 acres) 75 units per acre Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.0% 1.5%* Parking Housing – 1 enclosed space per unit + .75 surface spaces per unit = 714 spaces required (510 required in draft ordinance) 552 spaces* *Does not meet base Zoning Standards-Flexibility would be requested through a PUD STAFF REPORT Page 9 PRIMARY ISSUES/STAFF RECOMMENDATION Primary Issues • Is the proposal reasonable to justify PUD rezoning for this site? Yes. Staff does support the revised rezoning of the site, for the following reasons: 1. The project that was supposed to be built under the existing MDD-6 Zoning Designation never developed. Part of this original MDD-6 has already been rezoned with the Pentagon Village development that was rezoned to PUD in 2019. (See original MDD-6 Zoning District and the Pentagon Village PUD.) MDD zoning was the tool the City of Edina used before it had a PUD Ordinance. 2. Housing was proposed on this site in the MDD-6 Development that was not built. (See attached MDD-6 Plan.) 3. The project would provide a significant buy in to the City’s affordable housing fund. Ten percent of the of development units (408) would include 41. Therefore, at $100,000 per required affordable housing units, the applicant would be required to pay $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. 4. The proposed height of seven stories is reasonable for this site. To provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City in providing the buy in monies, additional height is needed to create more market rate units to help absorb the cost of the affordable housing units. The building height overlay district limits this site to four stories. The nearest single-family home to this site is 700 feet to the north. Section 36-618 (6) of the City Code requires that buildings that are 7 stories tall, be setback 4 times the height of the building from the 7-story portion of the building to the nearest single-family lot line. The building would be 86 feet tall, therefore, a 344-foot setback is required. Note that the building height steps down toward the Park and the single-family homes to the north. 5. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The site is guided in the Comprehensive Plan for “Office Residential,” which allows for residential uses. The existing zoning and approved development plan for the site allows residential uses. There is not much housing location within this area. Increasing housing into the area will assist with the commercial areas to the west including the Pentagon Village commercial area on the south side of 77th. Primary parking is located under and within the building, which is pulled up closer to the street, and separated from the street by green space to promote a more walkable environment. Sidewalks are provided all around the building including a significant connection to the regional bike trail. The proposed buildings would be a high-quality brick, with metal siding. The applicant has indicated that would meet the City’s affordable housing policy by buying in. Ten percent of the of development would include 41 units. Therefore, at $100,000 per required affordable housing units, the applicant would be required to pay $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. STAFF REPORT Page 10 6. The proposed project would meet the following additional goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Per the Office Residential Land Use Description: Primary uses are offices, attached or multifamily housing. b. Façade Articulation. Primary facades should be designed with a well-defined base, middle and top, providing visual interest at ground level. Building entries and access points should be clearly visible from the primary street. Long building facades should be divided into smaller increments using contrasting materials, textures, detailing, setbacks, or similar techniques. c. Building Height Transitions. Taller buildings (generally four stories or higher) should step down to provide a height transition to surrounding residential buildings, including buildings across a street or pathway, and to avoid excessive shadowing of sidewalks, parks, and public spaces. d. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods and key destinations, and with other communities, to improve multimodal transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on cars. Staff Recommendation Options for Consideration & Recommendation A case can be made for approval and denial of this project. Below are options for the planning commission and city council to consider for approval and denial: Approval Recommend the City Council approve the request for Preliminary Rezoning of the site from MDD-6 to PUD-22, Planned Unit District-22. Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses, and density are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the existing Zoning on the site. 2. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The PUD zoning would: a. Promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. c. Provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements include sustainable design, greater utilization of new STAFF REPORT Page 11 technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street. d. Project is of high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. e. Maintains the efficiency of public streets and utilities. f. Provides a mixture of land uses within the development. g. Project would meet the City’s affordable housing policy. 3. The PUD would ensure that the development proposed would be the only building that would be allowed on the site unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council and ensures the buy-in funds to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City of Edina. 4. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Per the Office Residential Land Use Description: Primary uses are offices, attached or multifamily housing. b. Façade Articulation. Primary facades should be designed with a well-defined base, middle and top, providing visual interest at ground level. Building entries and access points should be clearly visible from the primary street. Long building facades should be divided into smaller increments using contrasting materials, textures, detailing, setbacks, or similar techniques. c. Building Height Transitions. Taller buildings (generally four stories or higher) should step down to provide a height transition to surrounding residential buildings, including buildings across a street or pathway, and to avoid excessive shadowing of sidewalks, parks, and public spaces. d. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods and key destinations, and with other communities, to improve multimodal transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on cars. 6. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Wenck Consulting conducted a traffic and parking impact study and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and proposed parking. 7. The proposed height of seven stories is reasonable for this site. To provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City in providing the buy in monies, additional height is needed to create more market rate units to help absorb the cost of the affordable housing units. The building height overlay district limits this site to four stories. The nearest single- family home to this site is 700 feet to the north. Section 36-618 (6) of the City Code requires that buildings that are 7 stories tall, be setback 4 times the height of the building from the 7-story portion of the building to the nearest single-family lot line. The building would be 86 feet tall, therefore, a 344-foot setback is required. Note that the building height steps down toward the Park. 8. The proposed uses would be an upgrade to the current development on the site. STAFF REPORT Page 12 Approval is subject to the following Conditions: 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated April 30, 2021. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. 3. Provision of code compliant bike racks for each use near the building entrances. 4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the City Code. 5. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened per Section 36-1459 of the City Code. 6. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 7. A Developer’s Agreement/Site Improvement Plan Agreement is required at the time of Final Approval. 8. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer must pay the buy-in amount for affordable housing of $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. 9. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the engineering memo dated May 27, 2021. 10. Compliance with the Wenck Consulting Traffic & Parking Study recommendations. 11. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment revising the PUD, Planned Unit Development for this site. 12. Dedication of public access easement over the north-south sidewalk along the east side of the property and the east west sidewalk along 77th Street. The north-south sidewalk must be widened from 5 feet to 8 feet wide, and maintenance shall be the property owner’s responsibility. The City will maintain the sidewalk along 77th Street. The boulevard between the street and the sidewalk shall be 10 feet. 13. The Maintenance of sidewalks internal to the site to be responsibility of property owner. 14. Submittal of a construction management plan subject to review and approval of city staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 15. Hours of construction must be consistent with City Code. STAFF REPORT Page 13 Denial Recommend the City Council deny the request for Preliminary Rezoning of the site from MDD-6 to PUD-22, Planned Unit District-22. Denial is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed height and density are not reasonable for the site. The maximum height for the property is four stories and 48 feet. 2. The proposal does not meet the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The proposal does not meet the purpose and intent of a PUD is to include most or all of the following: a. provide for the establishment of PUD (planned unit development) zoning districts in appropriate settings and situations to create or maintain a development pattern that is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan; b. promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City; c. provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements may include: sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street or transition to residential neighborhoods, parks or other sensitive uses; d. ensure high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned; e. maintain or improve the efficiency of public streets and utilities; f. preserve and enhance site characteristics including natural features, wetland protection, trees, open space, scenic views, and screening; g. allow for mixing of land uses within a development; h. encourage a variety of housing types including affordable housing; and i. ensure the establishment of appropriate transitions between differing land uses. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request subject to the findings and conditions listed above. Deadline for a City decision: August 17, 2021 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Community Development Department Phone 952-927-8861 • Fax 952-826-0390 • EdinaMN.gov Date: May 20, 2021 To: Planning Commission cc: Cary Teague, Community Development Director From: Stephanie Hawkinson, Affordable Housing Development Manager Subject: Compliance with Affordable Housing Policy Pentagon Park Housing Development, 4660 77th Street West The proposed development at 4660 77th Street West complies with the Policy for New Multifamily Affordable Housing. The Policy offers developers 3 main options: 1) 10% of the units at 50% AMI rent levels; 2) 20% of the units at 60% AMI rent levels; or 3) a buy-in amount of $100,000 per units for 10% 0f the units. The developer is opting for option 3: contributing $100,000 per unit for 10% of the developed units, which amounts to $4,100,000. Although the City has adopted the goal of developing between 992 and 1,804 new affordable units, the Buy- in funds are a flexible source to for the development and preservation of affordable housing in the absence of other eligible sources. For example, Buy-In funds can be used for the development and preservation of single family and multi-family ownership opportunities unlike TIF and Low-Income Housing Tax Credits which can only be used for rental properties. Affordable Housing programs that were financed with Buy-In funds: •Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing preservation program. •Acquisition and rehabilitation of moderately priced single-family homes for Community Land Trust program for long term affordable ownership. •Gap financing for affordable units at Nolan Mains. •Emergency Rental Assistance during COVID. DATE: 5/27/2021 TO: 4660 77th Street, Owner and Development Team CC: Cary Teague – Community Development Director FROM: Chad Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Grace Hancock, Sustainability Coordinator Ross Bintner, PE, Engineering Services Manager RE: 4660 77th St – Development Review The Engineering Department has reviewed the subject property for pedestrian facilities, utility connections, grading, flood risk, and storm water. Plans reviewed included survey, site plan, grading and drainage, utility, stormwater management plans dated April 30, 2021. Review Comment Required For General 1. Deliver as-build records of public and private utility infrastructure post construction. Certificate of Occupancy 2. Maintenance of sidewalks within the property is the responsibility of property owner. Sidewalks in ROW along 77th Street are the City’s responsibility. City snowplowing operations are 5-ft wide on these sidewalks. General Comment Survey 3. An existing and proposed site condition survey is required. Grading/Building Permit 3.1 Show all existing and proposed public and private easements. -City records indicate easements running east-west along the south property line and running north-south along the west property line for public road right-of-way, signals, utilities, and walkways recorded in Doc #3598236 dated July 2002. Grading/Building Permit 3.2 Provide 15-ft road and walkway easement along 77th Street for public sidewalk maintenance purposes and space to allow future installation of on street bike lanes. Certificate of Occupancy 3.3 Provide walkway easement along east property line for public sidewalk connected to NMCRT. Living Streets 4. City supports north-south sidewalk along east property line and the connection to the Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail (NMCRT) Grading/Building Permit managed by Three Rivers Park District (TRPD). TRPD will allow connections to regional trails if the City holds an easement on the sidewalk and if the sidewalk connects to other public sidewalks. Sidewalk size and corners need to meet TRPD standards to be connected. Provide 8-ft wide sidewalk unless otherwise approved by City and TRPD. Corner at north end of the project needs to be softened so cyclists can navigate. Soften corner and provide public walkway easement to the City. Property owner is responsible for maintenance of this sidewalk connection from 77th Street to NMCRT. This future connection location on City property must also be used for future development of 4600 77th Street. 5. Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan notes plans for on-street bike lanes and public sidewalk on 77th Street. Grading/Building Permit 6. Design sidewalks to meet ADA requirements. Grading/Building Permit 7. Saw cut concrete sidewalk joints on public sidewalks. Grading/Building Permit 8. Public sidewalk to be minimum 5’ in width with a 5’ boulevard. Applicant showing 6-ft wide sidewalk with a 4-ft wide boulevard. Recommend placing sidewalk with a 10-ft blvd to create space for a future on street bike lane. Grading/Building Permit 9. Replace Xcel owned street lighting along 77th Street with lighting to support the public sidewalk along 77th Street and resident drop-off area. Lighting shall be property owner’s infrastructure and maintenance responsibility. Traffic and Street 10. Review fire access requirements with fire department. Fire truck turning template attached. Grading/Building Permit 11. Driveway Entrance permit required for entrance construction/ relocation/ removal. Comply with standard plate 415. Indicate the radii; must be 15’. Note maximum width for 2-way entrance is 30’. Close up existing entrances, standard plate 500. Building Permit 12. 77th Street scheduled for mill & overlay in 2023. Road patching shall conform to Edina Standard Plates at the time of any required road patching. Certificate of Occupancy Sanitary and Water Utilities 13. Verify fire demand and hydrant locations with fire department. Comply with standard plate 100. Grading/Building Permit 14. Domestic water shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 15. Domestic sanitary shall be sized by the developer’s engineer. Grading/Building Permit 16. Apply for a sewer and water connection permit with Building Inspections. Three existing connections to abandon at the main. Prior to Starting Utility Work 16.1 Sanitary service shall be planned for flood risk on trunk line. Use either an overhead sanitary service line with minimum service fixture opening 2’ above flood level, or backflow prevention. 16.2 Meter required for building service line and combined lines. No meter required for fire only service line. Grading/Building Permit 16.3 Public Works to determine acceptable installation methods. Grading/Building Permit 17. Disconnected sanitary and water services to be capped at main. 18. A SAC determination will be required by the Metropolitan Council. The SAC determination will be used by the City to calculate sewer and water connection charges Grading/Building Permit 19. Single connection from main for fire and domestic, split after main connection if building code allows. Grading/Building Permit 20. An internal watermain loop exists between 4660 and 4600. Water service changes to 4600 will be the responsibility of the applicant. The City has a need to create a watermain loop along west and north side of the property. City willing to discuss partial funding to upsize watermain with applicant. Watermain loop will require easements provided by the applicant. Floodplain 21. Site drains to NMS_95 to the south, and NMS_74 local subwatershed to the north. The 1%-annual chance flood elevation is 822.7, and 823.2 respectively. The LFE is 824.0, 2’ above the creek tailwater elevation of approximately 822. The lowest opening elevation is 2’ above the local flood elevation. Indicate the proposed lowest opening and lowest floor elevations. No net fill is allowed below local flood elevations. Grading/Building Permit Certificate of Occupancy 22. Per CWRMP Section 3.1.2.2 (2), construction of below-grade parking garages is permitted, provided the structure (including the parking garage) is flood proofed to two feet above the applicable 1-percent-annual-chance flood elevation in accordance with the following design standards: a. Together with associated utility and sanitary facilities, the structure must be designed so that below two feet above Grading/Building Permit the 1%-annual-chance flood elevation the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy. b. A Floodproofing Certificate and Inspection and Maintenance Plan must be provided by a registered professional engineer or architect. c. A floodproofing design that entails human intervention, such as the installation of flood gates or flood shields, will require a Flood Emergency Operation Plan Storm Water Utility 23. Provide final, signed geotechnical report with soil borings. Grading/Building Permit 24. Provide hydraulic and hydrologic report meeting watershed and state construction site permit requirements. Grading/Building Permit 25. Hydraulic design must consider restricted tailwater condition in 10% and 1% annual exceedance events, City hydraulic model is available for developer review. Grading/Building Permit 26. Submit watershed district permit and copies of private maintenance agreement in favor of watershed. Grading/Building Permit Grading Erosion and Sediment Control 27. A SWPPP consistent with the State General Construction Site Stormwater Permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Constructability and Safety 28. Construction staging and traffic control plans will be required. Grading/Building Permit 29. Retaining walls over 4-ft in height require design by a structural engineer. Provide drawings and calculations signed by MN licensed civil engineer. Grading/Building Permit 30. Any short-term road or lanes closures shall be approved by the City Engineer. General Comment 31. Construction staging or construction fencing shall not impede the City’s ability to snowplow the adjacent streets. If construction fencing removes storage space for snow, developer shall be responsible for snow removal in the street adjacent to any impacts to City operations. General Comment Other Agency Coordination 32. Provide copies required permits (e.g., MDH, MPCA, and MCES) Grading/Building Permit MPCA permit shall be closed out for permit closeout. Certificate of Occupancy 33. Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit is required. Grading/Building Permit Sustainability 34. Staff recommends installing EV chargers for a minimum of 5% proposed parking in addition to wiring 10% for EV conversion in the future. General Comment 35. Staff recommends development consider applying to join HOURCAR multi-family carsharing program to supply residents with electric car-sharing options General Comment 36. Site plan shows a bike café within the underground parking. Staff recommends providing a minimum of one bike parking stall for every 10 residential units (41) and one surface bike parking stall for every 20 residential units (21). These parking stalls should be in convenient, well-lit locations within 50’ of a public entrance to the building. Rack style and spacing should follow the recommendations of the Association for Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals (APBP). General Comment 37. Staff recommends implementing four (min.) suggested additional Travel Demand Management strategies: • Provide surface bike parking (21 stall min.); • Provide a bike repair station on-site, located adjacent to surface or underground bike parking; • Construct perimeter and internal sidewalks 8’ wide or more to safely accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists; • Provide directional signage/information for adjacent pedestrians, bicycle and transit facilities and ride-sharing services; • Work with Metro Transit to construct a bus shelter on 77th Street for Local Routes 6 and 540; or • Subsidize Metro Transit passes for tenants and employees. General Comment 38. Staff recommends development consider participating in the Met Council’s Solar for Vouchers program to receive technical advice and support for solar panel installation. General Comment 39. The Metropolitan Council's Extreme Heat map shows that during an extreme heat event (when air temperatures are 90 or above), this area of Edina can be 9-25 degrees F hotter than surrounding areas. Green roofs reduce the urban heat island effect, reducing amount of greenhouse gas emissions trapped in the atmosphere and energy needs to cool a building. Staff recommends adding a General Comment green roof or garden to reduce this urban heat island effect and energy costs to cool the building. 40. The University of Minnesota's Solar Suitability map rates 4660 W 77th St as "good" for solar roof installations with a grade of 81 out of 100. Staff recommends considering this assessment when assessing the roof for green roof or solar options. General Comment 41. See Sustainable Design Questionnaire for additional considerations. General Comment RESOLUTION NO. 2021-52 APPROVING PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY REZONING FROM MDD-6, MIXED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT-6 TO PUD-23, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT – 23, AT 4660 77TH STREET WEST BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. BACKGROUND. 1.01 The applicant is proposing to tear down the existing two office buildings on the site and construct a 5-7 story, 408-unit apartment. 1.02 This site was rezoned to Mixed Development District – 6 (MDD-6) in 2008 as part of rezoning of all of Pentagon Park; however, no development ever took place. The MDD zoning designation was used before the City established PUD Zoning in 2011. There was to be a mixture of office and residential uses. The subject property was specifically contemplated for multi-family residential housing. Pentagon Village was part of this MDD-6 District and was where the office and retail uses were to be located. However, that site was recently rezoned to PUD, and is no longer part of the MDD. 1.03 The property is legally described as follows: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1218, Hennepin County Minn. 1.04 To accommodate the request, the following is required: 1. A Rezoning from MDD-6, Mixed Development District to PUD, Planned Unit Development, and 2. Preliminary Development Plan. 1.05 On May 26, 2021 after published and mailed notice in accordance with Minnesota Statutes and the City Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, at which time all persons desiring to be heard concerning this application were given the opportunity to speak thereon. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the requests. Vote: 8 Ayes and 0 Nays. 1.06 On July 21, 2021 the City Council approved the request. Section 2. FINDINGS 2.01 Approval is based on the following findings: 1. The proposed land uses, and density are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the existing Zoning on the site. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-52 Page 2 2. The proposal meets the City’s criteria for PUD zoning. The PUD zoning would: a. Promote a more creative and efficient approach to land use within the City, while at the same time protecting and promoting the health, safety, comfort, aesthetics, economic viability, and general welfare of the City. c. Provide for variations to the strict application of the land use regulations in order to improve site design and operation, while at the same time incorporate design elements that exceed the City's standards to offset the effect of any variations. Desired design elements include sustainable design, greater utilization of new technologies in building design, special construction materials, landscaping, lighting, stormwater management, pedestrian oriented design, and podium height at a street. d. Project is of high quality of design and design compatible with surrounding land uses, including both existing and planned. e. Maintains the efficiency of public streets and utilities. f. Provides a mixture of land uses within the development. g. Project would meet the City’s affordable housing policy. 3. The PUD would ensure that the development proposed would be the only building that would be allowed on the site unless an amendment to the PUD is approved by City Council and ensures the buy-in funds to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City of Edina. 4. The proposed project would meet the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan: a. Per the Office Residential Land Use Description: Primary uses are offices, attached or multifamily housing. b. Façade Articulation. Primary facades should be designed with a well-defined base, middle and top, providing visual interest at ground level. Building entries and access points should be clearly visible from the primary street. Long building facades should be divided into smaller increments using contrasting materials, textures, detailing, setbacks, or similar techniques. c. Building Height Transitions. Taller buildings (generally four stories or higher) should step down to provide a height transition to surrounding residential buildings, including buildings across a street or pathway, and to avoid excessive shadowing of sidewalks, parks, and public spaces. d. Increase pedestrian and bicycling opportunities and connections between neighborhoods and key destinations, and with other communities, to improve multimodal transportation infrastructure and reduce dependence on cars. 6. The existing roadways and parking would support the project. Wenck Consulting conducted a traffic and parking impact study and concluded that the proposed development could be supported by the existing roads and proposed parking. 7. The proposed height of seven stories is reasonable for this site. To provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City in providing the buy in monies, additional height is needed to create more market rate units to help absorb the cost of the affordable housing units. The building height overlay district limits this site to four stories. The nearest single-family home to this site is 700 feet to the north. Section 36-618 (6) of the City Code requires that buildings that RESOLUTION NO. 2021-52 Page 3 are 7 stories tall, be setback 4 times the height of the building from the 7-story portion of the building to the nearest single-family lot line. The building would be 86 feet tall, therefore, a 344-foot setback is required. Note that the building height steps down toward the Park. 8. The proposed uses would be an upgrade to the current development on the site. Section 3. APPROVAL NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina, approves the Preliminary Rezoning from MDD-6 to PUD, Planned Unit Development District and Preliminary Development Plan for 4660 77th Street West. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The Final Development Plans must be generally consistent with the Preliminary Development Plans dated April 30, 2021. 2. The Final Landscape Plan must meet all minimum landscaping requirements per Chapter 36 of the Zoning Ordinance. A performance bond, letter-of-credit, or cash deposit must be submitted for one and one-half times the cost amount for completing the required landscaping, screening, or erosion control measures at the time of any building permit. 3. Provision of code compliant bike racks for each use near the building entrances. 4. The Final Lighting Plan must meet all minimum requirements per Section 36-1260 of the City Code. 5. Roof-top mechanical equipment shall be screened per Section 36-1459 of the City Code. 6. Submit a copy of the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District permit. The City may require revisions to the approved plans to meet the district’s requirements. 7. A Developer’s Agreement/Site Improvement Plan Agreement is required at the time of Final Approval. 8. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant/developer must pay the buy-in amount for affordable housing of $4.1 million dollars for the City of Edina to provide affordable housing elsewhere in the City. 9. Compliance with all the conditions outlined in the engineering memo dated May 27, 2021. 10. Compliance with the Wenck Consulting Traffic & Parking Study recommendations. 11. Subject to the Zoning Ordinance Amendment revising the PUD, Planned Unit Development for this site. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-52 Page 4 12. Dedication of public access easement over the north-south sidewalk along the east side of the property and the east west sidewalk along 77th Street. The north-south sidewalk must be widened from 5 feet to 8 feet wide, and maintenance shall be the property owner’s responsibility. The City will maintain the sidewalk along 77th Street. The boulevard between the street and the sidewalk shall be 10 feet. 13. The Maintenance of sidewalks internal to the site to be responsibility of property owner. 14. Submittal of a construction management plan subject to review and approval of city staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 15. Hours of construction must be consistent with City Code. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-52 Page 5 Adopted by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, on July 21, 2021. ATTEST: Sharon Allison, 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 July 21, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ____ day of __________________, 2021. _________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk DRAFT ORDINANCE FOR CONSIDERATION JULY 21, 2021 Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX ORDINANCE NO. 2021-06 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ADD PUD-23, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT-23, AT 4660 77th STREET WEST The City Of Edina Ordains: Section 1. Chapter 36, Article VIII, Division 4 is hereby amended to add the following: Sec. 36-505 Planned Unit Development District-23 (PUD-23) – Pentagon Park Apartments (a) Legal description: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1218 Hennepin County Minnesota. (b) Approved Plans. Incorporated herein by reference are the re-development plans, including the master development plan for the site received by the City on ___________ except as amended by City Council Resolution No. 2021-___ on file in the Office of the Planning Department. (c) Principal Uses: Office & Medical Office Multifamily Residential (d) Accessory Uses: All accessory uses allowed in the PCD-1 Zoning District. (e) Conditional Uses: None Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 2 (f) Development Standards. Standard Building Setbacks Front – 77th Street Rear – Fred Richards Park Side – West Side – East 43-55 feet 26 feet 51 feet 55 feet Building Height 5-7 stories & 52-86 feet Density 75 units per acre Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 1.5% Parking 552 spaces* (g) Signs shall be regulated per the PCD-1 Zoning District for the retail uses, and PRD, for the residential uses. Signs shown on the final development plans shall be allowed. Section 3. This ordinance is effective immediately. First Reading: June 15, 2021 Second Reading: July 21, 2021 Published: Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 3 ATTEST: ______________________________ _____________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Please publish in the Edina Sun Current on: Send two affidavits of publication. Bill to Edina City Clerk 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 Ordinance was duly adopted by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of _______, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______ day of ____________, 2021. ________________________________ City Clerk EdinaMN.gov 3 S i t e EdinaMN.gov 4 S i t e EdinaMN.gov 5 2008 Approved Overall Development Plan Site æ ¹» ¹» æ æ æ æ æ¹»æ æ ¹º¹º ¹º ñ ñ ñ ¹»æ æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ ¹º æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ æ ñ æ ¹º ñ æ ñ 40THSTW AVEAVEAVES(CORDNO17)NATCHEZAVESGRIMESFRANCEAVESKIPLINGLYNNMONTEREYNATCHEZAVES(UNDEVELOPED)(CORDNO17)AVEAVEAVEOAKDALEAVEFRANCEAVESDRCTOTTAWA LITTLEST (CORDNO17)CROCKERLYNNNATCHEZAVES GRIMESSCOTTTERFRANCEAVESMORNINGSIDE RD OAKDALEAVE SWST SUNNYSIDEAVE BRANSON AVEST CURVE AVE44THGRIMES2NDSTS GLEN PL 3RD ST S SPRUCERD SPRUCERD 45THSTW SUNNYSIDERD MERILANEDEARBORNCT 44THSTWDRAVE MEADOWGROVEPLARTHURSTAVETERMAITLARDVERNONJOHNSTTHIELENAVE44THSTW(CORDNO20)COOLIDGEAVEBROOKAVEANNAWAYTOWNESDEARBORNCTSUNNYSIDEBROOKSIDEWRDBELMORELASTBELMORELA MEADOW44THBROOKSIDECT44THSTWWESTRDMONROEAVE(TOWNESCIR)ADAMSAVEHARRISONAVEMADISONAVEMOTORST TOWNESCIRJEFFERSONAVEAVESUNNYSIDEVANBURENAVEAVEMACKEYRD RDJACKSONAVEBLAKERDSAVEGRIFFITSTSUNNYSIDEBROOKSIDEAVEAVE 47THSTWOXFORDAVEMOOREAVEBLVDTYLERAVECIRCLEAVEAVEVANDERVORKAVEPARKSIDELANORTHAVERUTLEDGEAVECIRSTATEHWYNO100STATEHWYNO100JOHNSTARTHURSTTOWNES RD RD(BROOKSIDETER)MEADOWEASTLAURAAVEANNAWAYDRMALONEYAVEMALONEYAVEAVEOAKSEASTDIVISIONSTCIRCLERDCTBRIDGELABRIDGELACASCADELA CIRCLE WHITEWMENDELSSOHN RDBRIDGE LAJOHNSTTYLERSPUR 48THSTWARTHURST(CORDNO20)ROLLING LA RDCIR MERILANE LARUTLEDGEAVE RDPARKSIDELA MOORLANDEDINBROOKBROOKSIDEAVEOXFORDAVEGREENTERWATERMAN AVEWATERMANAVE ECOOPERCIRWATERMANAVE 48THSTWCRESCENT BROWNDALELINCOLN 48THSTWPKWY WOODDALEBYWOOD WEST PADDOCKBISSENCIR RDWAY EDINADR HOLLYWOODRDBLAKERDS TOWNESRDDREXELARDENBRUCEMAPLERDWOODHILL CASCOCOOPERAVE49THSTWSTATEHWYNO100RUTLEDGEMILLPONDPLRDVANDERVORKCLUBRDORCHARDLARIDGERDRIDGEPRESCOTTCIRAVECLUBCOUNTRYWESTBROOKLASUNNYSLOPEHOLLYWOODRDBLAKERDINTERLACHENCTGREENFARMSCIRPLINTERLACHENBLVD(CORDNO20)W7THST INTERLACHENBLVDBLVDINTERLACHEN COUNTRYSUNNYSLOPE(CORDNO20)INTERLACHENBLVD 49TH STW(CORDNO20)INTERLACHEN PL (CORDNO17)DRBLUFF WOODDALEAVEBLVD HALIFAXAVECTLACIRLACHENEDINADALEDRINTERTERTER 50THSTWINTERLACHENBLAKERDBENDSKYLINEDR(SUMMITAVE)AVEHILLTOPLA AVESUNNYSLOPE BROWNDALEAVE SKYLINEDR DR50TH ST W JUANITAAVEOAKDALEKELSEYPARKRIDGERD AVECT AVEWOODSHAROLD51STSTW INDIANOLALA BRUCELAKELSEYWOODDALEBLOSSOMCTVERNONDRSCRIVERSCHAEFERRD JUANITAAVEWILLIAMAVEOXFORDAVEBEDFORDAVE 51STSTW LAKERIDGERD HANKERSONAVESLINCOLNDRSKYLINEEDEN AVE MIRRORLAKESDRGREENFARMSRD51STSTW51STSTWRD(LINCOLNCIR)(CORDNO158)APPLELACHALICECT BRUCEAVEARCADIAAVE AVEMALIBUSTATEHWYNO100BROOKSIDEAVE(CORDNO17)ARDENWOODDALEGLEN52NDSTW HALIFAXAVEINDIANOLAGORGASAVEJUANITAAVERD WOODDALEAVEGREEN WILLSONRDNORTHWOODDR DRFOXRIDGEMEADOW (CORDNO158)NORTHWOOD 52NDST WLAEDENAVEFOXLINK52NDSTWMEADOWFARMS RD STATE HWY NO 100 RDLACROYDENLAGRANDVIEWLA GLENGARRYPKWYGREENFARMSCT DRHIDDEN WAYLA WILLSON RD LARADALAAVEDUNDEE (CORDNO17)BLVDMALIBUDRRDRDRD53RDSTWWAY)SCHAEFERRDVERNONEVANSWOODLALOCHLOYHIGHWOODDRW AVELOCHLOYDRWESTWOODCT (VILLAEDENDONCASTERGREENFARMSRDBLAKERDLINCOLNDREVANSWOODLADUNCRAIG ST W53RDCIRCHANTREYDRMIRRORLAKESRDWRD HALIFAXTERDRLAWOODDALEAVESOUTHDRBLVDAYRSHIRE WESTWOODCTTELEMARKTR MINNEHAHA PINEWOODTRRDWILLOWWOODHIGHWOODPARKWOODKELSEY LARADAFRANCEAVESEDENMOORGROVERDPINE STSHERWOODRDGLENBRAE KELLOGGAVEOAKLAWNAVEBROOKVIEW AVE DRAYRSHIREBLVDAYRSHIREBLVDRDDRRICHWOODAKERSLA 54TH ST W54THSTW 54THSTWDRVERNONAVEPARKWOODHIGHWOODWCIRDRLARADALACIRAYRSHIREMALIBUPARKWOODRDMALIBUDRPKWYDRGOLFTERMALIBUDRRICHMOND ABBOTTPLRICHMONDLA RICHWOODRDBLVDCIR AVESLADRTERFULLERSTRDRDRDIDYLWOODDRWAYGLENGARRYRDLAKEVIEWIDYLWOODLAWINDSORAVEGOLFPARKWOOD XERXESAVESMIRRORL AKESDRAVENORMANDALERDSTAUDERLAKEVIEW DRLAKEVIEWBLAKERDKNOLLMALIBUCHANTREYHIGHWOODDRWINDSORWINDSORAVEDUNDEEAVE DREWDR AVESCHAEFERRDBROOKVIEWAVEKELLOGGAVEDR IDYLWOODPLOAKLAWNAVEMALIBU WWILLSONDONCASTERDR 55THST W 55THSTW 55THSTWDEVERKNOLLDRSAXONYRDMERRITTCIRDRDRAVEVERNONAVEDRBEARDDRDRKENTAVELACODEDROAKEWINGCIRHALIFAXLONDONDERRYGOYALA(STATEHWYNO100)DR(CORDNO158) STAUDERCIR PARKPLCONCORDHIGHWOODHIGHWOODPARKWOOD PLEDENPRAIRIERD LEXINGTON (CORDNO31)AVELESLEELADUNDEERDGATEPARKRD 56TH STWVERNONAVE W55THST CIRFIELDWAYJEFFREYLASTJOHNSWKNOLLWOODCREST STAUDER ST 56TH ST W 56THWINDRDDR 56THSTWYVONNETER56THSHEATHERLACIR(CORDNO158)WOODLANDAVERIDGEPARKSTW CIRHAWKESTERDRKAYMARDR RDSCHAEFERDRNEWPORTDRHIGHWOODDRDOVREDR GARDENAVELINCOLNDRDRHAWKESCAMELBACKDR DR TOWERSTWARDENAVE57THSTWRD57THSTWRDBLAKERDRD DLAPRAIRIEDRNA(VERNONLA)LDCONTINENTALODALEAVEOLAKEWRDCODEAVEEDENNORMANDALE CT WYCLIFFE BERNARDPLNORMANDALERDRDDEVILLEBISCAYNEBLVDBISCAYNEBLVDTRACYAVEPARKWOODLA LALAVIEW SOUTHVIEWLA RDJOHNSONDRCIR MELODY(DUNCAN BERNE HANSENRD57THSTW SRD WOODLANDRDWWARDENAVEVERNONAVEMEROLDDR LA)BISCAYNE BLVD WOODLANDWARDEN AVE WOODLANDLONDONDERRY SMELODY S(TUCKER WOODLAND AVEOLINGERRD(STATEHWYNO100)WILLSONPARKWOODLALA)XERXESAVES(BLAKE AVEAVEAVERIDGE CONCORD TER YORKGROVECIRLONDONDERRYRD GROVEST GROVEST AVERD)EWINGAVESZENITHBEARDAVESCHOWENAVESDREWAVESABBOTTGROVE STCIRSCHAEFER WYCLIFFERDPHILBROOK LASHERMANCIRJOHNSCONCORD (CORDNO17)LONDONDERRYDR FAIRFAX(CORDNO31)GROVESTSCHAEFER OAKLAGROVEST GARDENAVE58THSTW 58TH ST WSHERMANCIR 58TH ST W58THSTW 58THSTWOAKLALONDONDERRYDRJOHNSONDRRDEASTVIEW DR VIEW AMY DR LYLECIR AVE AVE(HCSAHNO159) LA DALEAVESTUARTAVELAHANSENRDAVEBENTONGRIMESDRBENTONAVEBENTONAVEBENTONAVEBENTONNORMANDALERDTAMARACLATRACYAVEARBOURAVECODEAVELINCOLNDRAVEAVEBERNARDPLAVEAVEAVEAVEAVETINGDALEAVECONCORDRDVERNONAVEOLINGERRDCRESCENTDR59THSTW59THSTWWALNUT 59THSTWASPENRD59THSTWEWINGAVESDREWAVESCHOWENAVESHALIFAX59THSTWSUNRDBEARDAVESOLINGER(STATEHWYNO100)VIEWLAXERXESAVESOLINGER STJOHNSCOUNTRYSIDERD ASHCROFTJOSEPHINEAVEBLVD FAIRFAX(LANGFORDDR)CIR RUTHDRAVEGLEASONRDKILLARNEYLAABBOTTAVESZENITHAVESRD YORKAVESSCHOOL60THSTW (CORDNO31)(LANGFORDCT)60THSTW CIR(LANGFORDDR)OLINGER HIGHLAND RDARBOUR WILLSONRDLINCOLN DR SCHAEFERRDARBOURSTATEHWYNO169 60THSTW60THSTWTAMARACAVE60THSTW60THSTWHANSENRD60THSTWLAVIEWLACLOVERRIDGEDRGRIMESPORTERAVEKILLARNEYLAFORSLINLAAVEPOLAR(STATEHWYNO100)GLACIERPL VERNON DR AVE60THST W61STSTSTWGLEASONRD61STSTWHUNTERWALNUTCIR DREWAVESHALIFAX EWINGAVESCHOWENAVESAVEFAIRFAXAVETINGDALEAVEARBOURAVEOLINGER BLVD DR61ST VALLEYSTWWESTRIDGEAVEOLINGERRDVALLEYVIEWRD BEARDAVESBIRCHCRESTDR61STSTWARBOURLARIDGEWAY XERXESAVESCODEAVETRACY NORMANDALERDJEFF PLARCTICWAY AVE61ST ST WHANSENRDBLVDVERNONAVE AVECRESCENTAVEWATERFORDCT(WELLESLEYPL)BIRCHCRESTDR VIEWVIRGINIACTWILRYANRD KELLOGGCONCORDRDYORKAVESOAKLAWNRYANAVEVIRGINIAPARNELL RD CURCHOWENARCTICWAYBROOKVIEWHABITAT PLLA (CORDNO31)(HCSAHNO158)ST.JOHNSVERNONCT OLINGERBLVD OLINGERBLVD 62NDSTWROUSHARRD 62ND STWVER BEARDNO62NDRDN ZENITHAVESABBOTTAVESCT DRASHCROFTWESTRIDG ECRESTLA STWMILDRED (ORIOLELA)CT CRESCENTGLEASON WYMANAVE62NDSTWRD62NDSTW 62ND ST WVERNONHILLSRDMADDOXLAROLFCOLONIAL MADDOXLAHILLSIDERD AVE WILRYANAVEVALLEYVIEWVALLEYVIEWAVEPLHANSENROBERTS(SANDPIPERCT)RD(VILLALA)STATEHWYNO62 RYANAVETRACYAVELA GARRISON(REDFOXLA) STATEHWYNO62BLVD LADARCYMCCAULEYTRLALA BEARDPLGARRISONPARNELLAVEVIRGINAAVEWAYNORMANDALERD CHOWENAVESDR(CORDNO158)CONCORDAVEDR 63RD ST WCRESCENTSTATEHWYNO62CT)(PHEASANT AVEPOST WCOLONIALCT(FALCONCT)ST STATEHWYNO62 (REDFOXCT)PARKLA WST63RDGLEASONRD NANCYLA63RDMCCAULEY STATE HWY NO 62HILLSIDE HERITAGEMCINTYRETREWINGRDLATRBROOKVIEWAVEWVIEW XERXESAVESRDMCCAULEYCIRSTATEHWYNO62 (CORDNO31)HALIFAXAVEAVEMCCAULEYTR VALLEYTIMBER ROLFAVEASHCROFTPT TINGDALEAVEWOODDALEAVEEPEACEDALEAVERIDGEVIEWDRGMILDREDAVEDWARRENAVEIR LA SSTATEHWYNO62(STATEHWYNO100)REB WHITINGAVE WHITINGAVE WILRYANAVEMCCAULEYTER MITVALLEYVIEWRDSTJOHNS MILLERS JOSEPHINEAVEROSECTHOLBORNAVE 64THSTW64THSTW 64THSTW64THSTW64TH64THSTWLARIDGESTATEHWYNO62DRTIMBERDORONLA(COLONYWAY)AVEGLEASON MILDREDAVEDORONHILLSPASS DR LIMERICKDRLIMERICK RIDGEVIEWDORONLAINDIAN YORKAVESWATERLALIMERICKDR XERXESAVESNORMANDALERDAVEVALLEYLAINDIANPONDCIRMARGARETSLA LA VALLEYVIEWRD 65TH ST WDCIRRSCHEROKEETRACYLLIVALLEYHRIDGEVIEW65THSTW65THSTW65THSTWN 65TH ST WAICREEKVALLEYRDRDINDIANDROLFAVENIWILRYANAVEWARRENAVERYANAVETINGDALEAVEJOSEPHINEAVEVALLEYVIEWRDFRANCEAVESTRRIDGEVIEWDR 31)BARRIERDCREEK WESTSHOREDRPARNELLAVEHILLSNONORDICDRTRSCANDIARDCT SHERWOOD(CORD HILLSIDE (STATEHWYNO100)BALDERLA (CORDNO17)BRENDANCT INDIANDAKOTAHILLS DRINDIANHILLSCIRARROWHEADPASS NAVAHO CHEROKEETRTR RDHILLSRD HILLSIDEINDIAN 66TH ST WRDSCANDIARD (CORDNO53)66THSTW66THSTWW66THSTWST66THCORNELIACIRAVEDR66THSTWINDIANWAYWRDDRIRDNCDISCANDIARDIVALLEYRDDAWARRENNRHOILNLWESTS SOUTHDALERDLALAGRACETERRDRDPASSPAWNEEDRTRLACIRRDCHEYENNETR APACHE RD CAHILL XERXESAVESDRTRACYAVE LADAKOTABLACKFOOTCREEKVALLEYRD RDSHORELIMERICKIROQUOISTRNOBCREEKVIEWRDMOHAWKTRNORMANDALERDLOISLADANENSLIMERICKHILL DRSALLYWESTTR (CORDNO31)T DRSALVALLEYBA LAGUNANSCIRGLEASONRDLAAVECAHILLDRMEADOW RIDGE 68THSTWWESTYSUSANAVETRRGALWAYAMEHILLSIDES (CORDNO17)ODRRROYCARPAYTONCTTRACYRDSAMUELRDDUGGAN YORKAVESBALFANZ(STATEHWYNO100)RDPLAZA68TH68THSTWSTW(CORDNO39)VALLEYVIEWRDVALLEYVIEWRD DANENS OAKLAWNRUPPERIRDDRCSIOUXTRGALWAYDRHARVEYLAPLDUGGANTRIROQUOISDRHILLSIDECHAPELLADRENRIDGEVIEWDR YORKAVES DRNBRITTANYECHAPELYEH LACVALLEYVIEWRD TER FRANCEAVESPLAZAPAIUTE NORMANDALERDMCCAULEY CHEYENNE JUDSONLABROOKDRBROOKDRLADR XERXESAVESLAWILFORDTRSCIRDRPLAZADUGGANADRL69THSTTIFTONANTRIMRDW POINTSHORETRACYAVEBROOK CRESTONCHAPELDAKOTATR 69THSTWY 69THLTERLALDAWSONLA RD AVE CORNELIAST 69TH ST WDRWAYAWSSHANESTPATRICKSLAHILLCRESTABERCROMBIEDRGLEASONCIRDRDRLADUNBERRYSTATELIMERICKERINSOUTHDALEEVERETTPAIUTECIRNORMANDALERDDRMCGUIRERDMCGUIRERDHWYTERRACEW69üSTVIEWRABUNABERCROMBIECREEKOVERHOLTPASSRDVIEWLAVALLEYVIEWRDDUNBERRY(STATEHWYNO100)NO TIFTON (CORDNO31)LAMARKCHURCHPLVALLEY169SHAWNEECIRWESTDRDUBLINABERCROMBIEDRPAIUTEDRWOODDALECIRGLEASONMOCCASINVALLEYRD DRTUPASCOTIADR 70THSTW 70TH ST W70THSTW70THSTW70THSTWMARKTERRACEDRSCOTIAMOCCASINCIRLEEWESTONRDVALLEYSDRDRVALLEY70THCIRDRWTRDUBLIN VILLAGEDRCIR ST W SANDELLAVECIR ANTRIMRDLANHAMLAANDOVER RD TRKERRY LARKSPURMCCAULEY MAVELLEDRSALLYLAMARKTERRACEDR70TH LAXERXESAVESBLVDDRAVEAVE (CORDNO31)CIR (CORDNO17)AVERDHILLAWAYCT(FORMERLYHCSAHNO18,PLAT18)CAHILLRDBRAEBURN MAVELLECOMANCHECTRDGLEASONRDDOWNRDANTRIMLATUPABELVIDERELAVIEWAVE RDRDASPASIATERMARKVALLEYRDWEXFORDRDDRCORNELIADRVIEWANTRIMTERRACE AMUNDSON WESTSHOREMETROBLVDHAZELTONRD HAZELTON(OAKGLENRD)CTLOCHMOORDRDR LADOWNRD BRISTOLHEATHERTONGLOUCHESTERCLAREMORECTDR KELLOGGSTATEHWYNO169CLAREMOREDRAVELANHAMLAMARKTERRACEDRNORMANDALERD(STATEHWYNO100)VALLEYVALLEYVIEWRD LYNMARASPASIA WOODDAL ETRILLIUMFLEETWOOD CIR FRANCEAVESAMUNDSONSHANNON CLAREMORELEEDUNHAMDRDR DRMETROBLVD 72NDSTWLALANTANALADUNHAMDRRDVALLEYBRISTOLVDACIRHEATHERTONRL72NDSTWLEWYEIVHILARYLNTRALEEHILARYCIRSHANNONRDGLEASONLNLADRLNDRELLSWORTH(FORMERLYHCSAHNO18,PLAT18)(LEWISSCHEY FRANCEAVESAVEHILARY AVERIDGE TRILLIUMDUNHAMPKWY)(STATEHWYNO100)HIBISCUS DRAVE ELLSWORTHDR MONARDOLAYORKAVESSHANNONFRONTAGERD WESTSHOREDRFONDELL DRCORNELIADRNORMANDALERD (COVENTRYVIEW)GLOUCHESTERDR73RDSTWCAHILLRDSTATEHWYNO169 DRAVEGLEASONRD FONDELLDRKEMRICHTARARDDR PL)WOODDALE(COVENTRYDRBUSHLAKERD LA)(CORDNO31)OAKLAWNGLEASONRD XERXESAVE S PHLOXLA GALLAGHERCLAREDONDR(COVENTRYCORNELIADRGILFORDDRGILFORDDR DEWEYHILLRDDRAVE(COVENTRYCT)DEWEYHILLRD DEWEYHILLRDRDHARRISDEWEYHILL 74THSTWLAJOHNSHANNONWESTOAKLAWNAVELA)AVEHIBISCUSRDAVEHIBISCUSAVEGALLAGHERDRFRONTAGERD (COVENTRYAVEPARKLAWNPARKCIR AVEPARKLAWNDRIKOLA74THSTWCOVENTRYWAY74THSTW YORKTERLN PARKLAWNBLVD YORKAVESWAY(FORMERLYHCSAHNO18,PLAT18)NORMANDALERDHILARY KELLOGGAVESHANNONCIR DELANEYBLVDXERXESAVESLASHOREDRMETRO 75THSTWSEDUMHYDEPARKLA(CORDNO17)CAHILLRD(STATEHWYNO100)FRANCEAVESWESTHYDEPARKDR EDINBOROUGHWAYPOPPYLA PARKLAWNCTSTATEHWYNO169POPPY (CORDNO31)GLEASON LATRBONNIEBRAEDR DRBRAKE76THSTWLONG76THSTWSHOREWEST ST76TH W76THSTWDELANEYBLVD CTLONGBRAKECIRTR (PONDWOOD NORMANDALERDMETROBLVDBRAKE PARKLAWNAVELONG (COBUSHLAKERDBLVDDR)BLVD)CAHILLRDRDSTONEWOOD NOGLEASONRD(STATEHWYNO100)31)(WOODVIEWCT)(DELANEYGLASGOW INDUSTRIALTER YORKAVES DR WST EDINA (CORDNO17)EDINAINDUSTRIALBLVD 77TH ST W 77THSTW78TH FRANCEAVESEDINBOROUGHWAYRDLAKECT (DISKDR)LOCHMEREXERXESAVES(OLDSTHWYNO5)BUSH MARTHCTTANGLEWOOD SHAUGHNESSYRDCOMPUTERAVECECILIACIRWST78TH 78THSTW VIKINGDR MINNESOTADR MINNESOTADR 78THSTW (CORDNO169)78THSTW78THSTW (STATEHWYNO5)INTERSTATEHWYNO494 NORDICCIR INGLEWOOD RD LAKEVIEW INTERSTATEHWY94 TIMBERRIDGE CTDREWAVES(CORDNO17)FRANCEAVESFRANCEAVES(CORDNO17)FRANCEAVESWOOD DREND (CORDNO17)FRANCEAVES49THSTW FRANCEAVESFRANCEAVES(CORDNO17)(CORDNO17)FRANCEAVESALDEN42NDSTWEVAAVE42NDSTW BRUCEPL WOODDALEKELLOGGPLAVE41STSTW AVEWOODDALERD E STSHOREDRKELLOGGEDGEBROOK RDWSUNNYSLOPERICHMOND WARWICKCODEAVEKENNEYPLNAOMIDRCIRCLEDR OHMSTIFTONDRHANSENRDCIR AMUNDSONAVE TUPA HYDE TERGLEASONKRESSEKINGSBERRY SAOENLGCT PASSPAIUTE OLLEB BRORRD Mud Lake LakeEdina Mirror Lake Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Melody Lake LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake Minnehaha Creek Nin e Mile Creek Nine Mile Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadCityHall St Peters Lutheran Church & School FireStation PublicWorks GraceChurch PublicLibrary ConcordSchool EdinaCovenant CorneliaSchool ColonialChurch HighlandSchool CalvaryLutheran EdinaHighSchool Our Lady ofGrace Church& School SouthviewMiddle School CrossviewLutheran CountrysideSchool St Albans Episcopal Valley ViewMiddle School Creek Valley School NormandaleLutheran ColonyParkBaptist St PatricksCatholic CreekValley Baptist NormandaleElementary St StephensEpiscopal EdinaCommunityCenter GoldenYearsMontessor CalvinChristianSchool GoodSamaritanMethodist EdinaMorningsideChurch ChristPresbyterian ChapelHillsCongregtional Shepard of the HillsLutheran Edina Community Lutheran Church FireStation CalvinChristianSchool SEEDETAILLEFTCENTER SEEDETAILUPPER LEFT CAHILL RD & 70TH DETAIL VILLAGE DR CAHILL RDW 70TH ST AMUNDSON AVESEEDETAILLOWERLEFT Building Height Overlay DistrictsCity of EdinaHennepin County, MinnesotaAppendix A /Planning DeptDecember, 2013 Legend æ Church ñ City Buildings ¹»Private School ¹ºPublic School HOD-2 Building height shall be determined by required setbacks,but shall not exceed 2 stories or 24 feet, whichever is less. HOD-3 Building height shall be determined by required setbacks,but shall not exceed 3 stories or 36 feet, whichever is less. HOD-8 Building height shall be determined by required setbacks,but shall not exceed 8 stories or 96 feet, whichever is less. HOD-9 Building height shall be determined by required setbacks,but shall not exceed 9 stories or 108 feet, whichever is less. HOD-10Building height shall be determined by required setbacks,but shall not exceed 10 stories or 120 feet, whichever is less. Building height shall be determined by required setbacks,but shall not exceed 12 stories or 144 feet, whichever is less.HOD-12 HOD-4 Building height shall be determined by required setbacks,but shall not exceed 4 stories or 48 feet, whichever is less. VALLEY VIEW RDWOODDALE AVEKELLOGG AVEOAKLAWN AVEBROOKVIEW AVEW 62ND ST VALLEY VIEW & WOODDALE DETAIL W 49TH ST W 50TH ST W 49 1/2 ST FRANCE AVEW 51ST STHALIFAX AVE50TH & FRANCE DETAIL W 54TH ST FRANCE AVEFULLER ST 54TH & FRANCE DETAIL WILSON RD & EDEN AVE DETAIL ñEDE N A V EW 50TH ST WILSON RDHWY 100CITYHALL GRANDVIEW DETAIL E D E N A V EVERNON AVEBROOKSIDE AVEARCADIA AVEW 52ND ST W 53RD STGRANDVIEW LAINTERLACHEN BLVD HWY 100GRANDVIEW SQLINK RD 44TH & FRANCE DETAIL MORNINGSIDE RD W 4 4 T H S T SUNNYSIDE RDFRANCE AVE Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 April 23, 2021 Mr. Cary Teague Community Development Director City of Edina 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Teague: Please find enclosed the summary for our proposed residential development at 4660 W 77th St, Edina, MN 55435, and a description of the requested variances and conditional use permit. Project Description: Pentagon Park Housing Development 4660 77th St W Edina, Minnesota We are proposing a 408-unit mixed use multifamily building. The building consists of seven levels and approximately 530,627 square feet. The building has a primary structure facing 77th Street that is seven levels tall and two wings reaching out to Fred Richards Park that are four and five levels tall. We are expecting to break ground in Fall of 2021 and complete construction in 2023. The existing site: The proposed project is located at 4660 W 77th St, Edina, MN 55435. This site is in the Greater Southdale District. The proposed project will replace two existing three-story office buildings and a large surface parking lot. The site is 236,950 square feet (5.44 acres). The proposed building: The proposed building is a 7 level above ground, 408-unit, residential building, with 2 levels of above ground parking, and a lower partially underground level of basement garage parking. The total gross proposed building square footage excluding the garage is 355,095. Including the garage, the total square footage is 530,627. There will be between 520 and 570 parking stalls in the project. Included in this number will be up to 51 surface parking stalls. The car parking ratio for the building is 1.25 to 1.39 per unit depending on the feasibility of a garage parking level under the east building wing. There will be approximately 400 bike parking stalls. The proposed FAR for the building is 1.5. The building height is 84’-8” feet to the main roof, with an additional elevator overrun of 14 feet for roof access. The 7 level above grade building will be constructed of 5 levels of wood framing over 2 levels of above grade concrete podium with a partially exposed concrete basement at the main building facing 77th Street. Additionally, the building includes two wings facing the park (5 levels of wood framing at the west wing, and 4 levels of wood framing over a potential 1 level concrete garage at the east wing). Architecturally, the project will be unique within the current framework and fabric of West 77th and the current office park area. This residence will be designed as an oasis, converting the current office building and paved parking of mostly impervious area, into a destination that embraces the park. The sige will be transformed from approximately 24% pervious surface to 40% pervious surface. The building will allow for a more thoughtful pedestrian and vehicular experience along W 77th Street. The building will also create new connections to the park via a highly landscaped pedestrian link along its east side. The west side is designed as a woonerf that connects to trails around the site. Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 A covered porte cochere and drop-off drive will be complemented by a beautifully landscaped connection to the building that expands and improves the pedestrian experience along 77th Street. The landscaping and porte cochere will help weave a new urban fabric that links to the park access points along the street frontage. How the building works within the neighborhood context: The building is designed to integrate into the existing built form of the Pentagon Park and Greater Southdale District neighborhood, while providing much needed transit and pedestrian oriented housing and redevelopment on an underutilized site within the vibrant activity center. The building mass and materials are designed to reflect the unique character of the Pentagon Park site. It is designed with a main building that reinforces the street presence of 77th Street West and two wings opening outward to Fred Richards Park. A setback of 55’ at ground level provides extra space to the public realm that creates an inviting streetscape. Particular attention is paid to adjacent relationships and scale. Mass is focused toward 77th, with lower masses appropriately scaling down toward the park. At 77th, the building utilizes material and sculptural modulation to break down the larger scale of the project. Multiple bays and setbacks create a dynamic building that limits unbroken planes and creates visually interesting scales and proportions. Material changes, extensive landscaping, and sculptural form bring scale down to pedestrian/neighborhood friendly dimensions. The design and variation of these surfaces creates energy and dynamism. Functionally, they provide varied view planes of windows, large balcony spaces for indoor/outdoor living, additional eyes on the street and community connections along the public corridor to enhance the neighborhood presence. The project brings a differentiated product to Edina that is sustainably designed and includes a significant amount of housing in the 80% of AMI range. Smaller floor plans, home offices, fitness options, outdoor recreation, and opportunities to build community are part of this model. Amenities include a pool, pickleball court, rooftop party area, sauna and hot tub, and indoor/outdoor pub and entertainment rooms. The landscaping is meant to embrace Fred Richards Park and integrate directly with the Nine Mile Creek Trail. The project provides much needed market rate affordable housing that is in close proximity to jobs, transit, and excellent schools. How Solhem helps build sustainable communities: At Solhem Companies, sustainability is built in. It is part and parcel of each new building we design and develop. Solhem’s sustainable communities are a combination of building features and personal practices. Together with our residents, we create sustainable communities. We have 5 focus areas: Energy, Water, Air, Waste, and Transportation. Solhem installed the first all LED apartment building in Minnesota (Soltvå), the first multi-family organics recycling program in Minnesota (Solhem), and we have pioneered the local use of multiple new sustainable exterior materials. Solhem typically exceeds the goals we establish through the Energy Design Assistance program, reducing expected energy use by up to 40%. Solhem installed one of the first downtown Minneapolis residential rooftop solar arrays at the Borealis project, and works directly with neighborhood groups to create pedestrian oriented landscaping with native shrubs and trees and an enhanced pedestrian streetscape that supports transit oriented streetscape goals for neighborhoods. Solhem supports bike transportation with bike repair stations and indoor bike racks for every resident. In addition, Solhem builds sustainable environments for our four-legged friends including pet washes, designated pet relief areas, and dog runs designed into our projects. Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 The Pentagon Park project includes standards consistent with LEED certification - advanced thermal and glazing techniques, low energy electrical systems, rain water barrel irrigation, rooftop storm water ponding, electric car charging spots, rooftop gardens for herbs and vegetables, sustainable landscaping with native plantings, low or no allergen interior finishes, and organics recycling. The sustainability measures for the Pentagon Park project include the following: ● A carbon footprint approximately 33% lower than comparable new developments ● Opportunities for herb and vegetable gardens on our rooftops and elsewhere on the site ● On site organics recycling ● Recycling chutes that serve every floor of the building ● Decreased water usage through use of dual flush toilets and rainwater harvesting ● Native landscaping that restores permeability to the flood plain and does not require fertilizers or pesticides ● Roof and site retention of stormwater in order to help replenish the aquifer ● Our plans include shifting the site from 15% permeable to 45% permeable; this will help manage long term flooding events for the entire neighborhood ● Electric vehicle charging that can be expanded to meet demand as needed ● Durable exterior materials that stand the test of time ● Low-E dual pane argon-filled windows that increase solar gain in the winter and prevent heat gain in summer ● Low- and No- VOC paints that improve interior building conditions for human health ● Elimination of carpeting in individual apartments in order to decrease repeated contributions to the landfill ● Bike repair station and bike cafe for encouraging bicycle transit ● Create a direct on-site connection to the Nine Mile Creek Trail Proposed site work: The site is approximately 236,950 square feet. The first-floor footprint is approximately 92,387 square feet, covering 39% of the site. The garage entrance is located on the west side of the site. By locating all services and garage traffic on one side of the building, we are able to greatly decrease the number of curb cuts and maximize pedestrian safety and streetscape along the site, and create a pedestrian and bike connector on the east side of the site. The building is set back at the ground level providing extra sidewalk space. To create a welcoming pedestrian presence and varied public space and greenery, we propose multiple levels of landscaping. A boulevard with a street fronting layer of larger hardwoods and internal layer of ornamentals will enhance a walk/public corridor. A porte cochere and access drive rise up from street grade to create an intermediate zone of public enhancement that brings occupants into a grand entrance flanked by planting walls, varied shrubs and climbing vines, trellises and pergolas. Above this zone there will also be activated roof terraces with plantings and amenities that enhance the frontage. Landscaping throughout the frontage will include new boulevard trees, planters, a wide pedestrian- friendly sidewalk, and hardy plantings. Fred Richards Park abuts the north edge of the site. The project slopes gently down to the park, creating connections for residents and visitors to the Nine Mile Creek Trail and the amenities of the park. The building steps back from the park in a way that allows long views into the park for building residents, while also respectfully giving air and light to other homes that abut the park. Lawn areas and recreational facilities in the project complement and expand the Fred Richards Park. Who we are: Solhem is 50% Female-owned, and employs 26% BIPOC employees, and 22% Immigrant employees. All Solhem employees and direct subcontractors share ownership in our developments through a unique profits and capital interest program. Solhem is the primary customer for five subcontractor companies of whom 40% are female Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 owned, and 20% are BIPOC owned. Solhem actively mentors women, BIPOC, and immigrant members of our community to help form their own businesses. Solhem Companies owns, manages, and develops multi-family housing and has 1,468 units currently under management and 391 under construction. Since 2009, Solhem has developed or co-developed over 2,000 housing units in the Twin Cities. Solhem is committed to including Minority, Women, and community members in all aspects of business. Solhem is 50% Woman-owned, works with multiple Woman-owned subcontractors for management and design services, and has a majority female leadership team. Solhem works directly with Women Ventures to promote WBEs. Solhem works actively to hire, mentor, and promote BIPOC and female employees, and has spun off several BIPOC and WBEs. Solhem’s art program, which brings local art into all of our buildings, focuses on diverse talent, including both experienced artists and youth artists. Solhem Companies has been recognized for innovations in green construction and in creation of affordable housing, with a focus on building housing affordable to residents who earn 60-80% of AMI. All of Solhem’s projects use cutting edge, eco-friendly design that is focused on building community. Solhem has been a leader in remediation of environmentally damaged sites while at the same time incorporating organics recycling, rain barrel irrigation, sustainably-sourced materials, bike storage, renewable on-site power generation, and electric vehicle usage in multi-family housing. ● Solhem, LLC is a partnership that has sponsored over 2,000 units of new construction housing over the past 12 years. ● Solhem has completed 16 consecutive projects on time and on budget. ● Solhem delivered 312 apartments in 2020, 375 apartments in 2021, and has three projects totaling 391 apartments currently under construction. ● Learn more about Solhem at: solhem.com Proposed Rezoning and PUD: The project fits well within proposed zoning and long range planning guidelines for Edina. The project does not require TIF or other public assistance. The project requires a PUD for accomplishing the long range goals of the city and our development objectives. The project will require rezoning to meet these goals. See attached zoning summary for proposed modifications. In Conclusion: We share a common goal with the city in that we intend to create a project that is sustainable, urbanely dynamic, and respectful of the existing environment. The building will use high quality, long-lasting materials. The site plan will provide new connectivity to Fred Richards Park for residents and members of the community. This project will provide much needed market rate affordable housing for the City of Edina. Sustainable, durable, affordable. Thank you for considering our proposal. We look forward to discussing your thoughts about our project. Sincerely, Curt Gunsbury Jason Lord Solhem Companies 724 N 1st St Ste 500 Minneapolis Minnesota 55401 Zoning Review Memo - Solhem Pentagon Park Edina, MN ELEMENT Current Zoning Proposed Reference Notes Total Site Area (SF) 236,950 236,950 Total Site Area (acres) 5.44 5.44 District MDD-6 Mixed Use MDD-6 Mixed Use, PUD Zoning Map Total Units 109-408 408 36-552 2040 Edina Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use Units /Acre 20-75 74 36-552 2040 Edina Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use Height 144 feet (12 Stories) 85'-0" Max (8 Stories) Section 36-510 Lot Coverage max lot coverage 30% 200 sf of useable lot area req'd per unit 39% as Proposed in PUD 36-553 (a) F.A.R. Residential Uses shall not exceed 0.5 1.5 36-553 (b) PUDs on adjacent properties allow up to 1.5 Fronting a Street/Front Street (ft) 35 feet Miniumum 45 feet Table 36-553 Porte Cochere Minimum 15 feet Side Street (ft) 35 feet NA Table 36-553 Interior Side Yard (ft) 20 feet Minimum 45 feet Table 36-553 Rear Yard (ft) 35 feet 50 feet Parking Setback >20' from public street ROW or >10' from interior side lot line Minimum 20' from public ROW, 4' from interior lot line 36-1316 As proposed in PUD Total Impervious Surface Current Site 82 % Impervious Proposed PUD 60% Impervious No Standard Required Parking (1 per bedroom) 508 Required Miniumum 520 - Maxmimum 570 36-1311 (w) Visitor Parking Based on PUD Based on PUD Standard 90 degree Parking 8'-6" x 18 ' - 24' drive aisles 8'-6" x 18 ' - 22' drive aisles 36-1317 Parking per private interior garage standards Compact 90 degree Parking 7'-6" x 18 ' - 24' drive aisles 7'-6" x 18 ' - 22' drive aisles 36-1318 Max 20% required parking can be compact; Parking per private interior garage standards Accessilble Parking State Accessibilty Code State Accessibilty Code Bike Parking 1 per every 14 units (30 required) Minimum 408 63.210SITE DATASETBACKSPARKING Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE ULTANTS CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_DESIGN_2021.rvt4/26/2021 9:34:22 AMAuthor Checker 2395-03 EX-3 RENDERINGS PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION VIEW FROM 77TH VIEW FROM THE PARK AERIAL LOOKING SOUTH A1-0 SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Edina - Pentagon Park 4/26/2021 Unit Type Total Lobby/Leasing Amenity MEP & Services Loading& Trash Parking Area Parking Count Gross Building Area GRSF NRSF Efficiency Area (SF)(NRSF / (GROSS BLDG − PARKING)) 12 4 0 16 1,749 1,786 950 969 79,905 190-240 97,581 12,222 11,067 62.61% 24 8 0 32 654 967 169 65,755 193 92,387 24,842 22,729 85.34% 39 10 1 50 12,966 1,174 162 29,512 87 87,713 43,899 35,349 60.74% 2 66 16 2 84 816 182 67,577 66,579 59,769 88.45% 2 38 8 2 48 828 182 39,144 38,134 34,287 87.59% 36 8 2 46 733 828 182 39,144 37,401 33,336 85.16% 319 78 11 408 1,749 16,139 6,379 2,028 175,172 470-520 530,267 327,790 290,593 81.8% 1.00 Per Unit 2.00 Per Unit 3.00 Per Unit 319 Stalls 156 Stalls 33 Stalls 508 520-570 470-520 50 Total Unit 408 236,950 Site Area 5.44 Acres Bed Count 75.0 Density =Total units / Acreage NRSF by Type 290,593 0.39 Lot Coverage =Ground Floor/Site Area NRSF Ave. unit 712 355,095 GFA =Gross Bldg Area - Parking Area Unit Mix 1.50 FAR =GFA / Site Area Unit per Type Parking Ratio Parking Required Surface parking Total Parking Provided 319 33 Tabulations B Level 1 BEDROOM 3 BEDROOMS Amenities & Support2 BEDROOMS 78.2%2.7% G 2 Parking Garage 5-6 3-4 7 156 19.1% Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE NSULTANTS CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_DESIGN_2021.rvt4/22/2021 1:38:06 PMAuthor Checker 2395-03 EX-2 EXISTING PHOTOS PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS 1 1 & 22 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3 45 & 678 9 10VIEW LEGEND ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION N A1-1 SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500Minneapolis, MN 55401 RESIDENTIAL UNITS 7TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN STAIR ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW 5TH - 6TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN3RD - 4TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 2ND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN1ST LEVEL FLOOR PLANP1 LEVEL FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLANS A2-0 ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS STAIRSTAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STOR.STOR.STOR.STOR.STOR.STOR. M T M T M TM T M T M T M TELEVATORSELEVATORSELEVATORS RESIDENTIAL UNITS PLAZA DECK PLAZA DECK PUB GUEST SUITE COWORKLOUNGELOUNGEOPEN TO BELOW CONF. FITNESS WEIGHT ROOM FITNESS YOGA GAME ROOM PLAZA DECK GARAGE ENTRY RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS CLUB ROOM SAUNA POOL MECH RAMP DN.RAMP DN.RAMP UPMECH STOR. M TSTAIR HALF STORY USE TBD OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW MECH RESIDENTIAL UNITS MECH TRASH LOBBY LEASE MAIL PACK.TRASH BIKE CAFE 8% RAMP MECH RAMP UPREFLECTING POOLEXT. METAL GRATE STAIR AMENITY 0 40 80 N COLORED, PATTERNED ROCK BALLASTED ROOF 388'-8"184'-0"65'- 0"65'-0"65'-0"177'-0"402'-0"AMENITY 40'-0"131'-10"65'-0"86'-10"65'-0" STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIR ELEVATORS ELEVATOR ELEVATORS201'-8"ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATORS8'-0"22'-0"OPTIONAL PARKING AREA (BASED ON FEASIBILITY) BUILDING AREA:97,581 SF MEP STORAGE:950 SF TRASH/LOADING:969 SF AMENITY:1,786 SF LOBBY/LEASING:1,749 SF GROSS RES. AREA:12,222 SF CIRCULATION:1,155 SF NET RES. AREA:11,067 SF UNIT COUNT:16 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:79,905 SF 190-240 SPACES BASEMENT TOTAL PARKING: BUILDING AREA:92,387 SF MEP STORAGE:967 SF TRASH/LOADING:169 SF AMENITY:654 SF GROSS RES. AREA:24,842 SF CIRCULATION:2,113 SF NET RES. AREA:22,729 SF UNIT COUNT:32 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:65,755 SF 193 SPACESTOTAL PARKING: GROUND LEVEL BUILDING AREA:87,713 SF MEP STORAGE:1,174 SF TRASH/LOADING:162 SF AMENITY:12,966 SF GROSS RES. AREA:43,899 SF CIRCULATION:8,550 SF NET RES. AREA:35,349 SF UNIT COUNT:50 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:29,512 SF 87 SPACES LEVEL 2 TOTAL PARKING: BUILDING AREA:67,577 SF MEP STORAGE:816 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF GROSS RES. AREA:66,579 SF CIRCULATION:6,810 SF NET RES. AREA:59,769 SF UNIT COUNT:84 UNITS LEVELS 3-4 BUILDING AREA:39,144 SF MEP STORAGE:828 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF GROSS RES. AREA:38,134 SF CIRCULATION:3,847 SF NET RES. AREA:34,287 SF UNIT COUNT:48 UNITS LEVELS 5-6 BUILDING AREA:39,144 SF MEP STORAGE:828 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF AMENITY:733 SF GROSS RES. AREA:37,401 SF CIRCULATION:4,065 SF NET RES. AREA:33,336 SF UNIT COUNT:46 UNITS LEVEL 7 SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3-0 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (825.2 ELEV)P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) ROOF 85'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.0 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.0 ELEV) 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (825.2 ELEV) ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES 1. P1 ELEVATION AT 823.0 BASED ON LOWEST ALLOWED ELEVATION PER FLOOD PLANE ELEVATION 2. LOWEST ALLOWED OPENINGS ON BUILDING TO BE AT 825.2 ELEVATION PER FLOOD PLANE ELEVATION 3. MAX BUILDING HEIGHT OF 85' BASED ON AVERAGE GRADE PLANE OF 829 4. COLORED ELEVATION SKIN KEYED BELOW - SEE ELEVATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES ELEVATION EXTERIOR SKIN KEY FACE BRICK PATTERNED PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL (NOTED ON ELEVS AT GARAGE AREAS ONLY) UTILITY FACE BRICK FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING VERTICAL METAL PANEL WALL MOUNTED BUILDING SIGNAGE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR PERMITTING BY LICENSED SIGN CONTRACTOR - SEE ELEVATIONS FOR POTENTIAL LOCATIONS - SIZE AND QUANTITY TBD PER ZONING CODE FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) FIBER CEMENT PANEL FACE BRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING PREFIN. ALUMINUM DECKS TYP. FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ ACCENT TRIM BANDING FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) FIBER CEMENT PANEL VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL FACE BRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING PREFIN. ALUMINUM DECKS TYP. INSULATED O.H. GARAGE DOOR FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL ELEVATOR OVERRUN ROOF PATIO ACCESS FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ TRIM ACCENT TRELLIS VERTICAL METAL PANEL FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) PORTE COCHERE FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING COURTYARD ELEVATION (EAST FACING) NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION COURTYARD ELEVATION (WEST FACING) SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATIONTRELLIS & PERGOLA PORTE COCHERE POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATIONS POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATIONS POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATION ENLARGED SIGNAGE ELEVATION ELEVATOR OVERRUN ROOF PATIO ACCESS FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDINGFACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL VERTICAL METAL PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ TRIM ACCENT FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING TRELLIS & PERGOLA FIBER CEMENT PANEL SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 UTILITY BRICK VENEER FIBER CEMENT PANEL SIDING VERTICAL METAL PANEL VINYL WINDOW FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING PRECAST PANEL BRICK PATTERN * VARIED COLOR EXPOSURE HUNG ALUMINUM BALCONY FIXED AWNING * TO MATCH UTILITY BRICK VENEER VINYL SLIDING DOOR Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture Engineering 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_DESIGN_2021.rvt4/26/2021 10:39:35 AMAuthor Checker 2395-03 EX-1 EXTERIOR MATERIALS PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500Minneapolis, MN 55401 A3-1 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC0.0TITLE SHEET............PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIALEDINA, MINNESOTASHEET INDEXSHEET NUMBERSHEET TITLEC0.0TITLE SHEETSITE SURVEYV1.0UTILITY PLANC4.0ISSUED FOR: CITY SUBMITTALSWPPP - EXISTING CONDITIONSSW1.0GRADING PLANC3.0C5.0C5.1CIVIL DETAILSSWPPP - PROPOSED CONDITIONSSW1.1SWPPP - DETAILSSW1.2C2.0SITE PLANSWPPP - NARRATIVESW1.3CIVIL DETAILSC1.0REMOVALS PLANC5.2CIVIL DETAILSKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRSWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTSSW1.5DEVELOPER / PROPERTY OWNER:SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONTACT: CURT GUNSBURY612-598-9416ENGINEER:CIVIL SITE GROUP4931 W 35TH STREETSUITE 200ST LOUIS PARK, MN 55416612-615-0060SURVEYOR:GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION11001 HAMPSHIRE AVE SMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55438CONTACT: GERARD HAHN952-995-2000ARCHITECT / LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:BKV GROUP222 N 2ND STSUITE 101MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONTACT: MATHEW H. NUGENT612-339-3752SUNDE LAND SURVEYING9001 E BLOOMINGTON FWY, SUITE 118BLOOMINGTON, MN 55420-3435CONTACT: LEONARD CARLSONSITE LOCATION MAPNSITE LOCATIONALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN AREAPPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL"(651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS,48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIESTHAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NOCOST TO THE OWNER.C5.3CIVIL DETAILS REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONV1.0SITE SURVEY............ CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSREMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES, FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS& BASE MATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES & UTILITIES PER UTILITYCOMPANY AND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGLIGHT POLE, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL, PARKING SIGNS,BOLLARDS, LIGHT POLES, ETC., TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY ANDCITY STANDARDSEXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.EXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT AND BASE MATERIAL,CONCRETE CURB, WALLS, WALK, & STAIRS, UTILITYMANHOLES, UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, LIGHT POLES,LANDSCAPED AREA, AND PARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENTAND BASE MATERIAL ANDPARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES,FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS & BASEMATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE &FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES& UTILITIES PER UTILITY COMPANYAND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGCURB AND GUTTER,TYP.REMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERCITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING HYDRANTAND VALVE, COORD. W/ CITYREMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING LANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES, AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES,TREES AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGEXISTING HYDRANT TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING UNDERGROUND TANKPER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDSEXISTING BUILDINGTO REMAIN,PROTECT FROMDAMAGE DURINGCONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE WITHINPROPERTY LINE TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNERREMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNEREXISTING SIGN TO REMAIN,PROTECT FROM DAMAGEDURING CONSTRUCTION.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGPARTIAL WATERMAINSERVICE PER CITYSTANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGREMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES, FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS& BASE MATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES & UTILITIES PER UTILITYCOMPANY AND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGLIGHT POLE, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL, PARKING SIGNS,BOLLARDS, LIGHT POLES, ETC., TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE ALL EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERUTILITY COMPANY ANDCITY STANDARDSEXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.EXISTING TREES TOREMAIN, PROVIDETREE PROTECTIONFENCING, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING TREESAND ROOT BALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENT AND BASE MATERIAL,CONCRETE CURB, WALLS, WALK, & STAIRS, UTILITYMANHOLES, UNDERGROUND UTILITIES, LIGHT POLES,LANDSCAPED AREA, AND PARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING PAVEMENTAND BASE MATERIAL ANDPARKING SIGNS, TYP.REMOVE EX BUILDING, STRUCTURES,FOUNDATIONS, FOOTINGS & BASEMATERIALS, PER LOCAL STATE &FEDERAL STANDARDS.REMOVE/DISCONNECT ALL SERVICES& UTILITIES PER UTILITY COMPANYAND/OR L.G.U. STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING CURBAND GUTTER, SAWCUTFULL DEPTH, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGCURB AND GUTTER,TYP.REMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTINGUTILITY SERVICES PERCITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING HYDRANTAND VALVE, COORD. W/ CITYREMOVE EXISTING UTILITYSERVICES PER CITY STANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING LANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES, AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,SHRUBS, BUSHES,TREES AND ROOTBALLS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGEXISTING HYDRANT TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING UNDERGROUND TANKPER LOCAL STATE & FEDERAL STANDARDSEXISTING BUILDINGTO REMAIN,PROTECT FROMDAMAGE DURINGCONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE WITHINPROPERTY LINE TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN, PROTECTFROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION.REMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNERREMOVE EXISTING SIGN,COORD. W/ OWNEREXISTING SIGN TO REMAIN,PROTECT FROM DAMAGEDURING CONSTRUCTION.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.SAWCUT FULLDEPTH, FOR CURBMEDIANS, TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGLANDSCAPING,TYP.REMOVE EXISTINGPARTIAL WATERMAINSERVICE PER CITYSTANDARDSREMOVE EXISTING STORMCB AND PARTIAL PIPE TOPROPERTY LINE, PLUGREMOVALS LEGEND:TREE PROTECTIONREMOVAL OF PAVEMENT AND ALL BASE MATERIAL,INCLUDING BIT., CONC., AND GRAVEL PVMTS.REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE INCLUDING ALLFOOTINGS AND FOUNDATIONS.TREE REMOVAL - INCLUDING ROOTS AND STUMPS4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/2101" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NREVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC1.0REMOVALS PLAN............Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALREMOVE CURB AND GUTTER. IF IN RIGHT-OF-WAY,COORDINATE WITH LOCAL GOVERNING UNIT.REMOVAL NOTES:1.SEE STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION STORM WATERMANAGEMENT PLAN.2.REMOVAL OF MATERIALS NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MNDOT, STATE AND LOCALREGULATIONS.3.REMOVAL OF PRIVATE UTILITIES SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH UTILITY OWNER PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITIES.4.EXISTING PAVEMENTS SHALL BE SAWCUT IN LOCATIONS AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS OR THE NEAREST JOINTFOR PROPOSED PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS.5.REMOVED MATERIALS SHALL BE DISPOSED OF TO A LEGAL OFF-SITE LOCATION AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATEAND LOCAL REGULATIONS.6.ABANDON, REMOVAL, CONNECTION, AND PROTECTION NOTES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS ARE APPROXIMATE.COORDINATE WITH PROPOSED PLANS.7.EXISTING ON-SITE FEATURES NOT NOTED FOR REMOVAL SHALL BE PROTECTED THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OFTHE CONTRACT.8.PROPERTY LINES SHALL BE CONSIDERED GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THEDRAWINGS. WORK WITHIN THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL INCLUDE STAGING, DEMOLITION ANDCLEAN-UP OPERATIONS AS WELL AS CONSTRUCTION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.9.MINOR WORK OUTSIDE OF THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION LIMITS SHALL BE ALLOWED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANAND PER CITY REQUIREMENTS.10.DAMAGE BEYOND THE PROPERTY LIMITS CAUSED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY SHALL BE REPAIRED IN A MANNERAPPROVED BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.11.PROPOSED WORK (BUILDING AND CIVIL) SHALL NOT DISTURB EXISTING UTILITIES UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ONTHE DRAWINGS AND APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.12.SITE SECURITY MAY BE NECESSARY AND PROVIDED IN A MANNER TO PROHIBIT VANDALISM, AND THEFT, DURINGAND AFTER NORMAL WORK HOURS, THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT. SECURITY MATERIALSSHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY.13.VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE SITE SHALL BE MAINTAINED FOR DELIVERY AND INSPECTION ACCESS DURINGNORMAL OPERATING HOURS. AT NO POINT THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONTRACT SHALL CIRCULATIONOF ADJACENT STREETS BE BLOCKED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.14.ALL TRAFFIC CONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED AND ESTABLISHED PER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTAMANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT BELIMITED TO, SIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETS SHALLREMAIN OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTED WITHOUT APPROVAL BY THECITY.15.SHORING FOR BUILDING EXCAVATION MAY BE USED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CONTRACTOR AND ASAPPROVED BY THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE AND THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.16.STAGING, DEMOLITION, AND CLEAN-UP AREAS SHALL BE WITHIN THE PROPERTY LIMITS AS SHOWN ON THEDRAWINGS AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNER AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.17.ALL EXISTING SITE TRAFFIC/REGULATORY SIGNAGE TO BE INVENTORIED AND IF REMOVED FOR CONSTRUCTIONSHALL BE RETURNED TO LGU.18.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL"(651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NOCOST TO THE OWNER.CITY OF EDINA REMOVAL NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC REMOVAL NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES: GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING12187754332435' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITS55.7'56.2'86.7'76.7'43.8'55.7'9.0'40.0'20.0'TYP.9.0' TYP.5.3'8.5'TYP.6.3'20.0'5.7'20.0'7.3'22.0'5.1'5.0'5.0'8.5' TYP.8.9'46.6'18.6'26.4'28.3'16.8'13.3'10.0'9.0'TYP.55.7'51.7'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R3.0'R100.0'R78.0'R3.0'R6.0'R3.0'R8.0'R100.0'R3.0'R10.0'R10.0'R10.0'R7.0'R8.0'R3.0'R3.0 'R3.0'R3. 0 ' R 3 6 . 0 ' R20 . 0 'R4.0'R4.0'R4 . 0 'R4.0'R 4 . 0 'R4.0'R8.0'R3.0'R 3 . 0 'ACCESSIBLE PARKINGSPACE, INCL.SIGNAGE, STRIPINGAND RAMPSM.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPVMT.STRIPINGTYP.CONCRETE DRIVEWAYAPRON PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.REMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL TO MATCHEXISTING PAVEMENT SECTIONFOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTIONCONCRETE SIDEWALKPER CITY STANDARDS,TYP.B612 C&G, TYP.M.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPB612 C&G,TYP.B612 C&G,TYP.B612 C&G,TYP.PVMT. STRIPINGTYP.CONCRETE SIDEWALKPER CITY STANDARDS,TYP.CONCRETE DRIVEWAYAPRON PER CITYSTANDARDS, TYP.REMOVE AND REPLACEEXISTING PAVEMENT ANDBASE MATERIAL TO MATCHEXISTING PAVEMENT SECTIONFOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION3' CURBTAPERMATCHEX. C&GMATCHMATCHMATCHMATCHB612 C&G,TYP.B612C&G,TYP.L.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPVMT.STRIPINGTYP.CONC. WALK, TYPCONC. WALK, TYPCONC. WALK, TYPCONC. WALK, TYPBITUMINOUS PATH, TYPPICKLE BALL COURT,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSWOOD DECK BRIDGE,SEE ARCH'L PLANSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSRETAINING WALLS, SEEGRADING PLAN FOR WALLELEVATIONS, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSPLAZA DECK WITH RETAINING WALLS,SEE ARCH'L PLANS FOR DETAILSPLAZA DECK WITH RETAINING WALLS,SEE ARCH'L PLANS FOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. WALK, TYPL.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPL.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPL.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPLAZA DECK WITHRETAINING WALLS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSM.D. BIT.PVMT., TYPPATIO, SEE ARCH'LPLANS FOR DETAILSDOG RUN AREA,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSSEE LANDSCAPINGPLAN, BY OTHERSCONC. STAIRS,SEE ARCH'L PLANSFOR DETAILSCONC. WALK, TYPCONC. PAVEMENT3' CURBTAPER3' CURBTAPERRIBBONCURB3' CURBTAPER22.0'MATCHEX. C&GMATCHEX. C&GMATCHEX. C&GMATCHEX. C&GMATCHACCESSIBLE ROUTEARROW. DO NOT PAINT,FOR CODE REVIEW ONLY,TYP.PERMEABLEPAVEMENTAREAS, TYP. SEEDETAIL.16.0' 12.2' 6.0'4.0' 16.0'11.5'8.0'44.0'5.7'18.0'TYP.22.0'4.7'8.0'24.0'5.7'9.0'TYP.22.0'18.0'TYP.4.7'20.0'TYP.9.0'TYP.22.0'18.0'TYP.4.7'20.0'TYP.2.9'5.0'29.8'6.0'14.8'18.0'TYP.24.0'8.3'18.0'TYP.24.0'10.1'18.0'TYP.24.0'8.9'18.0' 24.3'35.6'24.6'35.4'22.6'8.0'8.4'8.0'16.0'13.1'6.0'4.0'8.0'44.0'TOP=821.00EOF=820.80SITE 100-YR HWL=823.203:1 SIDE SLOPESMIN. BOTTOM AREA=5800 SF4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC2.0SITE PLAN............SITE AREA TABLE:1.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATIONS AND LAYOUT OF ALL SITE ELEMENTS PRIOR TO BEGINNINGCONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED PROPERTY LINES,EASEMENTS, SETBACKS, UTILITIES, BUILDINGS AND PAVEMENTS. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR FINALLOCATIONS OF ALL ELEMENTS FOR THE SITE. ANY REVISIONS REQUIRED AFTER COMMENCEMENT OFCONSTRUCTION, DUE TO LOCATIONAL ADJUSTMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TOOWNER. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIORTO INSTALLATION OF MATERIALS. STAKE LAYOUT FOR APPROVAL.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, INCLUDING ARIGHT-OF-WAY AND STREET OPENING PERMIT.3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED IN THE GEO TECHNICAL REPORT PRIOR TOINSTALLATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENT MATERIALS.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY COORDINATES AND LOCATION DIMENSIONS OF THE BUILDING AND STAKE FORREVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE OWNERS REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF FOOTING MATERIALS.5.LOCATIONS OF STRUCTURES, ROADWAY PAVEMENTS, CURBS AND GUTTERS, BOLLARDS, AND WALKS AREAPPROXIMATE AND SHALL BE STAKED IN THE FIELD, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION, FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BYTHE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.6.CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO FACE OF CURB. BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CONCRETEFOUNDATION. LOCATION OF BUILDING IS TO BUILDING FOUNDATION AND SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.7.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT SHOP DRAWINGS OR SAMPLES AS SPECIFIED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BYTHE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FABRICATION FOR ALL PREFABRICATED SITE IMPROVEMENTMATERIALS SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING, FURNISHINGS, PAVEMENTS, WALLS, RAILINGS,BENCHES, FLAGPOLES, LANDING PADS FOR CURB RAMPS, AND LIGHT AND POLES. THE OWNER RESERVES THERIGHT TO REJECT INSTALLED MATERIALS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.8.PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH TRUNCATED DOME LANDING AREAS IN ACCORDANCEWITH A.D.A. REQUIREMENTS-SEE DETAIL.9.CROSSWALK STRIPING SHALL BE 24" WIDE WHITE PAINTED LINE, SPACED 48" ON CENTER PERPENDICULAR TOTHE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. WIDTH OF CROSSWALK SHALL BE 5' WIDE. ALL OTHER PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BEWHITE IN COLOR UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED OR REQUIRED BY ADA OR LOCAL GOVERNING BODIES.10.SEE SITE PLAN FOR CURB AND GUTTER TYPE. TAPER BETWEEN CURB TYPES-SEE DETAIL.11.ALL CURB RADII ARE MINIMUM 3' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.12.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO FINAL PLAT FOR LOT BOUNDARIES, NUMBERS, AREAS AND DIMENSIONS PRIOR TOSITE IMPROVEMENTS.13.FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS, DIMENSIONS.14.PARKING IS TO BE SET PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO EXISTING BUILDING UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.15.ALL PARKING LOT PAINT STRIPPING TO BE WHITE, 4" WIDE TYP.16.BITUMINOUS PAVING TO BE "LIGHT DUTY" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. SEE DETAIL SHEETS FOR PAVEMENTSECTIONS.17.ALL TREES THAT ARE TO REMAIN ARE TO BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE WITH A CONSTRUCTION FENCE AT THEDRIP LINE. SEE LANDSCAPE DOCUMENTS.18.ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL"(651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THECONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NOCOST TO THE OWNER.SITE LAYOUT NOTES:SITE PLAN LEGEND:TRAFFIC DIRECTIONAL ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGSCITY OF EDINA SITE SPECIFIC NOTES:SIGN AND POST ASSEMBLY. SHOP DRAWINGS REQUIRED.HC = ACCESSIBLE SIGNNP = NO PARKING FIRE LANEST = STOPCP = COMPACT CAR PARKING ONLY01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"N1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC NOTES.Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRCONCRETE PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE) ASSPECIFIED (PAD OR WALK) SEE GEOTECHNICALREPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE & CONCRETEDEPTHS, SEE DETAIL.PROPERTY LINECURB AND GUTTER-SEE NOTES (T.O.) TIP OUTGUTTER WHERE APPLICABLE-SEE PLANLIGHT DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE).SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE& WEAR COURSE DEPTH, SEE DEATIL.MEDIUM DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE).SEE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR AGGREGATE BASE &WEAR COURSE DEPTH, SEE DETAIL.CONSTRUCTION LIMITSTOSPECIALTY PAVEMENT (IF APPLICABLE) - PROVIDE BIDFOR THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS, INCLUDE VARIATIONSOF BASE MATERIAL AND OTHER NECESSARYCOMPONENTS.1. STAMPED & COLORED CONCRETE2. CONCRETE PAVERSMAKERS, COLORS, MODELS, & PATTERN TO BEINCLUDED IN SHOP DRAWING SUBMITTAL PRIOR TOCONSTRUCTION.OPERATIONAL NOTES:SNOW REMOVAL:ALL SNOW SHALL BE STORED ON-SITE AT OUTSIDE EDGES OF PARKING LOT. WHEN THOSEAREAS ARE FULL, SNOW REMOVAL COMPANY WILL REMOVE TO OFFSITE LOCATIONTRASH REMOVAL:TRASH SHALL BE COLLECTED IN INTERIOR COLLECTION AREA AND STAGED OUTSIDE,WHERE DESIGNATED, ON DAY OF PICK-UP BY BUILDING PERSONNEL. PICK-UP SHALL BE BYCOMMERCIAL REFUSE AND RECYCLING HAULER COMPANY.DELIVERIES:DELIVERIES SHALL OCCUR AT THE MAIN ENTRANCE VIA STANDARD COMMERCIAL DELIVERYVEHICLES (UPS, FED EX, USPS). MOVE-IN/OUT OPERATIONS MAY BE STAGED AT OTHEREGRESS LOCATIONS WITH COORDINATION AND OPERATIONS ORGANIZED BY BUILDINGSTAFF, INCLUDING TRAFFIC CONTROL, AS REQUIRED.ACCESSIBILITY ARROW (IF APPLICABLE) DO NOTPAINT.PERVIOUS PAVEMENT - INCLUDE ALL BASE MATERIALAND APPURTENANCES AS SPECIFIED PERMANUFACTURER SPECIFICATIONS & INSTRUCTIONS.MAKE: T.B.D.MODEL: T.B.D.COLOR: T.B.D. - PROVIDE SAMPLES, SHOP DRAWINGS & PRODUCT DATA REQUIRED PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITS4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC3.0GRADING PLAN............1.SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL LAYOUT & GENERAL GRADING NOTES.2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SITEPREPARATION, SOIL CORRECTION, EXCAVATION, EMBANKMENT, ETC.) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS AND INSPECTIONSWITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.3.GRADING AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NATIONAL POLLUTIONDISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT REQUIREMENTS & PERMIT REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY.ALLEXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLREPAIR OR REPLACE ANY UTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.4.PROPOSED SPOT GRADES ARE FLOW-LINE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.5.GRADES OF WALKS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH 5% MAX. LONGITUDINAL SLOPE AND 1% MIN. AND 2% MAX. CROSSSLOPE, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.6.PROPOSED SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED 3:1 UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE ON THE DRAWINGS. MAXIMUMSLOPES IN MAINTAINED AREAS IS 4:17.PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS, FREESTANDING WALLS, OR COMBINATION OF WALL TYPES GREATER THAN 4' INHEIGHT SHALL BE DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED BY A REGISTERED RETAINING WALL ENGINEER. DESIGNDRAWINGS SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF GRADE STAKES THROUGHOUT THE DURATIONOF CONSTRUCTION TO ESTABLISH PROPER GRADES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AFINAL FIELD CHECK OF FINISHED GRADES ACCEPTABLE TO THE ENGINEER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TOTOPSOIL AND SODDING ACTIVITIES.9.IF EXCESS OR SHORTAGE OF SOIL MATERIAL EXISTS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TRANSPORT ALL EXCESS SOILMATERIAL OFF THE SITE TO AN AREA SELECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR, OR IMPORT SUITABLE MATERIAL TO THESITE.10.EXCAVATE TOPSOIL FROM AREAS TO BE FURTHER EXCAVATED OR REGRADED AND STOCKPILE IN AREASDESIGNATED ON THE SITE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SALVAGE ENOUGH TOPSOIL FOR RESPREADING ON THESITE AS SPECIFIED. EXCESS TOPSOIL SHALL BE PLACED IN EMBANKMENT AREAS, OUTSIDE OF BUILDING PADS,ROADWAYS AND PARKING AREAS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBCUT CUT AREAS, WHERE TURF IS TO BEESTABLISHED, TO A DEPTH OF 6 INCHES. RESPREAD TOPSOIL IN AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED TOA MINIMUM DEPTH OF 6 INCHES.11.FINISHED GRADING SHALL BE COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL UNIFORMLY GRADE AREAS WITHIN LIMITSOF GRADING, INCLUDING ADJACENT TRANSITION AREAS. PROVIDE A SMOOTH FINISHED SURFACE WITHINSPECIFIED TOLERANCES, WITH UNIFORM LEVELS OR SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARESHOWN, OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES. AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN FINISH GRADED SHALL BEPROTECTED FROM SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS, TRAFFIC AND EROSION. REPAIR ALL AREAS THATHAVE BECOME RUTTED BY TRAFFIC OR ERODED BY WATER OR HAS SETTLED BELOW THE CORRECT GRADE. ALLAREAS DISTURBED BY THE CONTRACTOR'S OPERATIONS SHALL BE RESTORED TO EQUAL OR BETTER THANORIGINAL CONDITION OR TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NEW WORK.12.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL WILL BE REQUIRED ON THE STREET AND/ORPARKING AREA SUBGRADE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADED TANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSSWEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BE AT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BECOMPLETED IN AREAS AS DIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. THE SOILS ENGINEER SHALL DETERMINE WHICHSECTIONS OF THE STREET OR PARKING AREA ARE UNSTABLE. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BECOMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER. NO TEST ROLL SHALL OCCURWITHIN 10' OF ANY UNDERGROUND STORM RETENTION/DETENTION SYSTEMS.13. TOLERANCES13.1.THE BUILDING SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN 0.30 FOOTABOVE, OR 0.30 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION AT ANY POINT WHERE MEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.2.THE STREET OR PARKING AREA SUBGRADE FINISHED SURFACE ELEVATION SHALL NOT VARY BY MORE THAN0.05 FOOT ABOVE, OR 0.10 FOOT BELOW, THE PRESCRIBED ELEVATION OF ANY POINT WHEREMEASUREMENT IS MADE.13.3.AREAS WHICH ARE TO RECEIVE TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 0.30 FOOT ABOVE OR BELOW THEREQUIRED ELEVATION, UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER.13.4.TOPSOIL SHALL BE GRADED TO PLUS OR MINUS 1/2 INCH OF THE SPECIFIED THICKNESS.14.MAINTENANCE14.1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT NEWLY GRADED AREAS FROM TRAFFIC AND EROSION, AND KEEP AREAFREE OF TRASH AND DEBRIS.14.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AND REESTABLISH GRADES IN SETTLED, ERODED AND RUTTED AREAS TOSPECIFIED TOLERANCES. DURING THE CONSTRUCTION, IF REQUIRED, AND DURING THE WARRANTY PERIOD,ERODED AREAS WHERE TURF IS TO BE ESTABLISHED SHALL BE RESEEDED AND MULCHED.14.3.WHERE COMPLETED COMPACTED AREAS ARE DISTURBED BY SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONSOR ADVERSE WEATHER, CONTRACTOR SHALL SCARIFY, SURFACE, RESHAPE, AND COMPACT TO REQUIREDDENSITY PRIOR TO FURTHER CONSTRUCTION.GENERAL GRADING NOTES:1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALGRADING PLAN LEGEND:SPOT GRADE ELEVATION GUTTERSPOT GRADE ELEVATION TOP OF CURBSPOT GRADE ELEVATION BOTTOM OF STAIRS/TOP OF STAIRSGROUNDWATER INFORMATION:CITY OF EDINA GRADING NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC GRADING NOTES.SEE SWPPP ON SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5EROSION CONTROL NOTES:01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallREX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSPOT GRADE ELEVATION (GUTTER/FLOW LINEUNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)CURB AND GUTTER (T.O = TIP OUT)EMERGENCY OVERFLOWEOF=1135.52TOPER GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY XXXXX, INC., DATED XX-XX-XX GROUNDWATER WASOBSERVED AT ELEVATIONS RANGING FROM XXX.XX TO XXX.XXTHE BORINGS & GROUNDWATER ARE AS FOLLOWS:SB-1XXX.XXSB-2XXX.XXSB-3XXX.XXSB-4XXX.XXPROPOSED FOOTING DRAIN TILE INVERT ELEVATION = XXX.XXSPOT GRADE ELEVATION MATCH EXISTINGGRADE BREAK - HIGH POINTS GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSSTUB 8" SANITARY TO5' FROM BUILDINGIE @ STUB=813.15COORD. W/ MECH'L82 LF 8" PVC SDR 26SANITARY SERVICE@ 2.00%MAKE CONNECTION TO EXISTING12" TRUSS SANITARY SEWEREX IE (E/W)=811.51(FIELD VERIFY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION)PROP IE (N)=811.51COORD. W/ CITYSTUB 8" COMBINED DIP WATERSERVICE AND VALVE, STUB TOWITHIN 5' FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/ MECH'LPROPOSED GATEVALVE & VALVE BOXMAKE WET TAP CONNECTION TOEXISTING 8" CIP WATER MAIN,(FIELD VERIFY LOCATION PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION)COORD. W/ CITYEXISTINGHYDRANTHYD &GV, TYP.HYD &GV, TYP.MAKE WET TAP CONNECTION TOEXISTING 8" CIP WATER MAIN,(FIELD VERIFY LOCATION PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION)COORD. W/ CITY8" DIPWATERMAIN10" DIP WATERMAIN8" DIPWATERMAIN10"X6"TEE45° BEND8"X6" TEEMAKE CONNECTIONTO EX. 8" DIP(FIELD VERIFY SIZEAND LOCATION)45° BENDPROPOSED GATEVALVE & VALVE BOX10"X8"TEE10" TO 8"REDUCER10"PLUGPROP. FDC LOCATIONRAINWATER REUSE/IRRIGATION CISTERN(2) 65 LF ROWS OF 60" DUAL WALL PP PIPEW/ STONE SEPARATION, TOP, ENDS & SIDESPER MANUFACTURER'S SHOP DRAWINGMIN. STORAGE VOLUME (BELOWOVERFLOW) REQUIRED=2,500 CFCISTERN IE=812.9015" OVERFLOW IE=817.90FLOOD STORAGE BASIN, SEE GRADINGPLAN.12" FES 8IE=819.00INSTALL RIP RAP PER MNDOT SPEC155 LF 12" HDPE @ 0.00%IE=819.0012" FES 7IE=818.00INSTALL RIP RAP PER MNDOT SPEC33 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00%OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE 5RE=822.00IE(S/N)=818.30CONSTRUCT WEIR WALL IN MHTOP OF WEIR WALL=820.00STMH 6RE=822.00IE(S/N)=818.30IE (E)=819.006 LF 12" HDPE @ 0.00%IE=818.30UNDERGROUND POND 2PFOOTPRINT=202' X 17'1 ROW OF 202 LF 29"T X 42" WPERFORATED CMP ARCH PIPE6" STONE BASE AND TOP12" STONE ENDS6'-9" STONE SIDESSTONE BASE IE=817.80CMP IE=818.30CMP TOP=820.72STONE TOP=821.22SEE DETAIL100-YR HWL=820.46NWL=820.00UNDERGROUND POND 1PTWO CONNECTING SECTIONS OF 48" PERF. CMPSECTION A FOOTPRINT=140' X 30'SECTION B FOOTPRINT=102' X 30'INCLUDING 12" STONE SIDES AND ENDS6" STONE BASE AND TOPSTONE BASE IE=816.00CMP IE=816.50CMP TOP=820.50STONE TOP=821.00100-YR HWL=822.29NWL=818.00SEE DETAILOUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE 2RE=823.00IE(E/W)=816.50CONSTRUCT WEIR WALL IN MHTOP OF WEIR WALL=818.503" ORIFICE IN WEIR WALL, IE=818.0061 LF 24" HDP @ 0.00%IE=816.50STMH 1RE=821.40±IE=815.818 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.00%IE=816.5073 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.94%EX. MHRIM=820.30EX IE (S)=815.30(FIELD VERIFY)PR IE (NE)=815.50CORE DRILL NEWCONNECTION TOEXISTING MHCOORD. RELOCATIONOF EXISTINGELECTRIC MH WITHUTILITY OWNER33 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.94%CBMH 3RE=821.33IE=817.4112" INLETIE=816.5091 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00%69 LF 12" HDPE @ 1.00%CB 4RE=821.98±IE=818.1061 LF 24" HDP @ 0.00%IE=816.50STUB 10" STORM TO 5' FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/ MECH'LSTUB IE=819.14STUB 10" STORM TO 5' FROM BUILDING,COORD. W/ MECH'LSTUB IE=819.147 LF 10" PVC SCH. 40 @ 2.00%10" BUILDING STORMDRAIN INLETIE=819.00, TYP.823.24 SURFACE INLET CBSTMH 9RE=825.00IE=816.8115" INLETIE=816.5062 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.50%182 LF 15" HDPE @ 0.50%CISTERN OVERFLOW OUTLETIE=817.90±CISTERN PUMP HOUSE FOR IRRIGATION &REUSERAINWATER FILTER MHSTUB 12" STORM SEWER TO 5' FROM BLDG,COORD. W/ MECH'LSTUB IE=816.50INLET IE=816.304931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC4.0UTILITY PLAN............GENERAL UTILITY NOTES:UTILITY LEGEND:CITY OF EDINA UTILITY NOTES:1.RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC UTILITY NOTES.01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRCATCH BASINGATE VALVE AND VALVE BOXSANITARY SEWERSTORM SEWERWATER MAINPROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTMANHOLEFES AND RIP RAP1. SEE SITE PLAN FOR HORIZONTAL DIMENSIONS AND LAYOUT.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF EXISTING UTILITIESAND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALLIMMEDIATELY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THEPLANS.3. ALL EXISTING UTILITY LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTACT "GOPHERSTATE ONE CALL" (651-454-0002 OR 800-252-1166) FOR UTILITY LOCATIONS, 48 HOURSPRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE ANYUTILITIES THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER.4. UTILITY INSTALLATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE CURRENT EDITION OF "STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS FOR WATER MAIN AND SERVICE LINE INSTALLATION" AND "SANITARYSEWER AND STORM SEWER INSTALLATION" AS PREPARED BY THE CITY ENGINEERSASSOCIATION OF MINNESOTA (CEAM), AND SHALL CONFORM WITH THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE CITY AND THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS.5. CASTINGS SHALL BE SALVAGED FROM STRUCTURE REMOVALS AND RE-USED ORPLACED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE OWNER.6. ALL WATER PIPE SHALL BE CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON PIPE (DIP) AWWA C151, ASME B16.4,AWWA C110, AWWA C153 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7. ALL SANITARY SEWER SHALL BE SDR 26 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) ASTM D3034 & F679,OR SCH 40 ASTM D1785, 2665, ASTM F794, 1866) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.8. ALL STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HDPE ASTM F714 & F2306 WITH ASTM D3212 SPECFITTINGS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9. PIPE LENGTHS SHOWN ARE FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF STRUCTURE OR TO END OFFLARED END SECTION.10. UTILITIES ON THE PLAN ARE SHOWN TO WITHIN 5' OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT. THECONTRACTOR IS ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FINAL CONNECTION TO BUILDINGLINES. COORDINATE WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND MECHANICAL PLANS.11. CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES IN PAVED AREAS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.04 FEET. ALLCATCH BASINS IN GUTTERS SHALL BE SUMPED 0.15 FEET PER DETAILS. RIMELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN DO NOT REFLECT SUMPED ELEVATIONS.12. ALL FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE LOCATED 5 FEET BEHIND BACK OF CURB UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED.13. HYDRANT TYPE, VALVE, AND CONNECTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITYREQUIREMENTS. HYDRANT EXTENSIONS ARE INCIDENTAL.14. A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET OF COVER IS REQUIRED OVER ALL WATERMAIN, UNLESSOTHERWISE NOTED. EXTRA DEPTH MAY BE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 18"VERTICAL SEPARATION TO SANITARY OR STORM SEWER LINES. EXTRA DEPTHWATERMAIN IS INCIDENTAL.15. A MINIMUM OF 18 INCHES OF VERTICAL SEPARATION AND 10 FEET OF HORIZONTALSEPARATION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL UTILITIES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.16. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING UTILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITYSTANDARDS AND COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.17.CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING STRUCTURES SHALL BE CORE-DRILLED.18. COORDINATE LOCATIONS AND SIZES OF SERVICE CONNECTIONS WITH THE MECHANICALDRAWINGS.19. COORDINATE INSTALLATION AND SCHEDULING OF THE INSTALLATION OF UTILITIESWITH ADJACENT CONTRACTORS AND CITY STAFF.20. ALL STREET REPAIRS AND PATCHING SHALL BE PERFORMED PER THE REQUIREMENTSOF THE CITY. ALL PAVEMENT CONNECTIONS SHALL BE SAWCUT. ALL TRAFFICCONTROLS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE ESTABLISHEDPER THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MINNESOTA MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROLDEVICES (MMUTCD) AND THE CITY. THIS SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TOSIGNAGE, BARRICADES, FLASHERS, AND FLAGGERS AS NEEDED. ALL PUBLIC STREETSSHALL BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC AT ALL TIMES. NO ROAD CLOSURES SHALL BE PERMITTEDWITHOUT APPROVAL BY THE CITY.21. ALL STRUCTURES, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO PROPOSED GRADESWHERE REQUIRED. THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL OWNERS MUST BE COMPLIED WITH.STRUCTURES BEING RESET TO PAVED AREAS MUST MEET OWNERS REQUIREMENTSFOR TRAFFIC LOADING.22. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES.23. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE CONNECTION OF IRRIGATION SERVICE TO UTILITIES.COORDINATE THE INSTALLATION OF IRRIGATION SLEEVES NECESSARY AS TO NOTIMPACT INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES.24. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN AS-BUILT PLANS THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION ANDSUBMIT THESE PLANS TO ENGINEER UPON COMPLETION OF WORK.25.ALL JOINTS AND CONNECTIONS IN STORM SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE GASTIGHT ORWATERTIGHT. APPROVED RESILIENT RUBBER JOINTS MUST BE USED TO MAKEWATERTIGHT CONNECTIONS TO MANHOLES, CATCHBASINS, OR OTHER STRUCTURES.26.ALL PORTIONS OF THE STORM SEWER SYSTEM LOCATED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THEBUILDING OR WATER SERVICE LINE MUST BE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MN RULES,CHAPTER 4714, SECTION 1109.0.27.FOR ALL SITES LOCATED IN CLAY SOIL AREAS, DRAIN TILE MUST BE INSTALLED AT ALLLOW POINT CATCH BASINS 25' IN EACH DIRECTION. SEE PLAN AND DETAIL. INSTALL LOWPOINT DRAIN TILE PER PLANS AND GEOTECHNICAL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS ANDREQUIREMENTS. 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.0CIVIL DETAILS............6"8"12"13 1/2" 6"1/2" RADIUSFINISHED GRADE3" RADIUS CORNERS1:3 BATTER SLOPE GUTTER3/4"/1'NOTES:1. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS AT10'-0" O.C. +/-2. BASE DEPTH DEPENDANT UPONSOIL CONDITIONSCLASS V AGGREGATE SUBBASE-SEEBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT DETAIL (6" MIN.)FINISHED GRADE0.5% SLOPE-CONSTRUCT WITH REVERSE SLOPEGUTTER (T.O. GUTTER) WHERE THE PAVEMENT SLOPESAWAY FROM CURB. SEE PLANN T SB-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER7"37"20"FINISHED GRADESLOPE GUTTER 3/4"/1'NOTES:1. INSTALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS AT 10'-0" O.C. +/-2. BASE DEPTH DEPENDANT UPON SOIL CONDITIONSCONTINUOUS SLOPE CONCRETE CURBAND GUTTERPAVEMENT MATERIALSSEE DETAIL6"6"RIBBON CURBN T S4EXTEND POST PAST TOP OF POST10 DEGREE SLOPE1 INCH SILICONE RUBBEROR ASPHALTIC CAULKINGCOMPOUNDFILL ANNULAR SPACE TO 1 INCHFROM TOP WITH SILICA SANDCONCRETE FOOTING AS SPECIFIED6"3'-6"2'-6" 60"-66" FROM PAVEMENT TO BOTTOM OF SIGN 1/2"MATERIAL VARIES-SEE PLANMETAL SIGN ACCORDINGTO MN STATE CODENOTE:1. SIGN SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED.2. VERIFY POST PAINT C0LOR WITH LANDSCAPEARCHITECT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND POSTN T S1'-6"6" O.D. GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE PAINTED WITH 1COAT OF APPROPRIATE PRIMER AND TWO COATSSIGN ENAMEL. FILL ANNULAR SPACE WITH GROUT.COVER WITH YELLOW "IDEAL SHIELD" PLASTICCOVER.GREEN POWDER COATED STEEL SQUAREPOST AS SPECIFIED1/4" METAL PLATE WELDED TOBOTTOM OF 6” PIPEGALVANIZED STEEL FASTENER(TYP. OF 2)6MEDIUM-DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT8" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)2.0" BASE COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)1.5" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T S1NOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.LIGHT-DUTY BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT6" CLASS 5 AGGREGATESUBBASE (MNDOT 3138)1.5" BASE COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPNWB330B)TACK COAT (MNDOT 2357)1.5" WEAR COURSE (MNDOT 2360 - SPWEA340B)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OF STANDARDPROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY)N T SNOTE:SECTION IS FORBIDDING PURPOSESONLY. REFER TOGEOTECH FORFINAL PAVEMENTSECTION.2UNREINFORCED CONCRETE PAVEMENTN T SNOTES:1. SEE GEO-TECHNICALREPORT FOR BASERECOMMENDATIONS.2. INSTALLATION SHALLBE IN ACCORDANCE TO ACERTIFIED, ON-SITEM.A.P.A. TECHNICIAN ASSPECIFIED.6" UNREINFORCED CONCRETEPAVEMENT (MNDOT 2461)6" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE SUBBASE(MNDOT 3138)COMPACTED SUBGRADE (100% OFSTANDARD PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRYDENSITY)5 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.1CIVIL DETAILS............ 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.2CIVIL DETAILS............PERMEABLE PAVEMENT - #1 (1P)N T SNOTES:1. INSTALLATION TO BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS.2. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS.3. A SUBGRADE CONSISTING OF GRADED AGGREGATES MAY BE REQUIRED WHEN SUBGRADE CONDITIONS ARE POOR.1.5"6"3/4" - 2"ANGULARWASHEDSTONERETENTION PIPINGASTM NO. 8 STONESETTING BED ANDIN-FILLPERMEABLE PAVEMENT- COORD. WITH OWNER,SEE MANUFACTURERSPECIFICATIONS18" 29"6"818.00 GWB612 CURB& GUTTERLIGHT DUTYPAVEMENTCOMPACTED SUBGRADE821.771OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTUREN T SWEIR PLATEGEOTEXTILE, TYPICAL TOWRAP AROUND FILTERMATERIALNATIVE MATERIALCOMPACTED PERGEOTECHNICAL REPORT,TYPICAL48"Ø CMP0.75"-2" STONEELEV=MH RIMSEE UTILITY PLANOUTLETELEV=SEE PLANELEV=SEE PLAN (TOP WEIRWALL)SUBGRADE SOILS(IN-SITU SAND)2148" 6" MIN.6" MIN.KEY1. TOPSOIL2. FREE DRAINING ANGULAR WASHED STONE 3/4" - 2" PARTICLE SIZE (NON LIMESTONE MATERIAL THAT CONTAINS LESS THAN 5% DELETERIOUS MATERIALS). INSTALL TO MIN. 95% STANDARD DENSITY PER AASHTO T99.FABRIC WRAP TOP ANDSIDES WITHCONTECH C-40NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILESECTION DETAILNTS1.INSTALL SILT FENCE AND/OR OR OTHER APPROPRIATE TEMPORARY EROSIONCONTROL DEVICES TO PREVENT SEDIMENT FROM LEAVING OR ENTERING THEPRACTICE DURING CONSTRUCTION.2.ALL DOWN-GRADIENT PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S MUST BE INPLACE BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENT LAND DISTURBING ACTIVITY BEGINS.3.PERFORM CONTINUOUS INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.4.INSTALL UTILITIES (WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ELECTRIC, PHONE, FIBER OPTIC,ETC) PRIOR TO SETTING FINAL GRADE OF BIORETENTION DEVICE.5.PERFORM ALL OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS.6.SEED AND MULCH ALL AREAS AFTER DISTURBANCE.7.CONSTRUCT RETENTION DEVICE UPON STABILIZATION OF CONTRIBUTINGDRAINAGE AREA.8.IMPLEMENT TEMPORARY AND PERMENATE EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES.9.PLANT AND MULCH SITE.10.REMOVE TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AFTER THE CONTRIBUTINGDRAINAGE AREA IS ADEQUATELY VEGETATED.GENERAL NOTES1.IN THE EVENT THAT SEDIMENT IS INTRODUCED INTO THE BMP DURING ORIMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING EXCAVATION, THIS MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVEDFROM THE PRACTICE PRIOR TO CONTINUING CONSTRUCTION.2.GRADING OF RETENTION DEVICES SHALL BE ACCOMPLISHED USINGLOW-COMPACTION EARTH-MOVING EQUIPMENT TO PREVENT COMPACTION OFUNDERLYING SOILS.3.ALL SUB MATERIALS BELOW THE SPECIFIED RETENTION DEPTH (ELEVATION)SHALL BE UNDISTURBED, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCINGGRADEPAVEMENT/LANDSCAPING / SOD12"(TYP)24"PERFORATEDCMP PIPEUNDERGROUND RETENTION SYSTEM (4P)N T S12"(TYP321P2P 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONC5.3CIVIL DETAILS............ CONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS BEINGREMOVEDCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCECONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEPLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINS.PLACE EROSION CONTROLBLANKET ON ALL SLOPES4:1 OR STEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.0SWPPP - EXISTINGCONDITIONS............01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"N1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF EDINA EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:Know what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. GUESTSUITEPUBCOWORK LOUNGE CONF.FITNESSWEIGHTROOMFITNESSYOGAGAME ROOMSAUNAPOOLCLUB ROOMRAMPDNMECH.326C TANDEM4 C19C587 STALLS57 C6RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS3CNOPARKING35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK35' BUILDING SETBACK20' BUILDING SETBACKCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONSTRUCTION LIMITSCONST.LIMITSCONSTRUCTIONENTRANCECONSTRUCTIONENTRANCEINLET PROTECTION ATCATCH BASINS, TYPPLACE EROSIONCONTROL BLANKETON ALL SLOPES 4:1 ORSTEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEINLET PROTECTION AT ALLDOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINS.PLACE EROSION CONTROLBLANKET ON ALL SLOPES4:1 OR STEEPER, TYP.(MNDOT CATEGORY 3)4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.1SWPPP - PROPOSEDCONDITIONS............01" = 20'-0"20'-0"10'-0"NKnow what'sbelow.before you dig.CallRLEGEND:EX. 1' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALINLET PROTECTIONSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCEDRAINAGE ARROW1.0' CONTOUR ELEVATION INTERVALSILT FENCE / BIOROLL - GRADING LIMITEROSION CONTROL BLANKET1. RESERVED FOR CITY SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES.CITY OF EDINA EROSION CONTROL NOTES:1. THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN ONE ACRE AND WILL REQUIRE ANMPCA NPDES PERMIT. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAININGANY EROSION CONTROL PERMITS REQUIRED BY THE CITY.2. SEE SHEETS SW1.0 - SW1.5 FOR ALL EROSION CONTROL NOTES,DESCRIPTIONS, AND PRACTICES.3. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL GRADING AND EROSIONCONTROL NOTES.4. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION,INSPECTIONS, AND COMPLIANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT.SWPPP NOTES:ALL SPECIFIED EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES, ANDMEASURES CONTAINED IN THIS SWPPP ARE THE MINIMUMREQUIREMENTS. ADDITIONAL PRACTICES MAY BE REQUIRED DURINGTHE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.2SWPPP - DETAILS............OVERFLOW AT TOP OFFILTER ASSEMBLYOVERFLOW IS 12 OF THE CURBBOX HEIGHTHIGH-FLOW FABRICFILTER ASSEMBLY DIAMETER, 6"ON-GRADE 10" AT LOW POINTEXISTING CURB, PLATE, BOX,AND GRATENOTES:1. REPLACE INLET GRATE UPON COMPLETE INSTALLATION OF INLET PROTECTION FABRIC.2. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS FROM THE SURFACE OF THE SYSTEMAFTER EACH STORM EVENT AND AT THE COMPLETION OF THE CONTRACT.3. REFERENCE APPLE VALLEY STANDARD PLATE ERO-4C.CURB INLET FILTERN T S1PROFILE6" MIN CRUSHED STONE75' MINIMUMPLANFINISHEDGRADETO CONSTRUCTION AREA35' REXISTINGUNDISTURBEDROADWAYN T S30' FROM EDGE OF ROADTO FRONT OF SPEED BUMPGEOTEXTILE FILTERFABRIC4" HIGH, 18" WIDESPEED BUMPSTABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ACCESS24' (MIN)NOTES:1.PROVIDE APPROPRIATE TRANSITION BETWEEN STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE AND UNDISTURBEDROADWAY.2.THE ENTRANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN A CONDITION WHICH WILL PREVENT TRACKING OR FLOWING OF SEDIMENTONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY. THIS MAY REQUIRE PERIODIC TOP DRESSING WITH ADDITIONAL STONE OR ADDINGSTONE TO THE LENGTH OF THE ENTRANCE.3.REPAIR AND CLEANOUT MEASURES USED TO TRAP SEDIMENT.4.ALL SEDIMENT SPILLED, DROPPED, WASHED, OR TRACKED ONTO UNDISTURBED ROADWAY SHALL BE REMOVED ASDIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.5.FINAL LOCATION AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.6.CRUSHED STONE SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIA. CLOSE GRADED, AND IN ACCORDANCE TO MNDOT SECTION 2118.EXISTING UNDISTURBED ROADWAY35' RTO CONSTRUCTIONAREA2TAMP THE TRENCH FULL OF SOIL.SECURE WITH ROW OF STAPLES,10" SPACING, 4" DOWN FROMTRENCHOVERLAP: BURY UPPER ENDOF LOWER STRIP AS IN 'A'AND 'B'. OVERLAP END OFTOP STRIP 4" AND STAPLE.EROSION STOP: FOLD OF MATTINGBURIED IN SILT TRENCH ANDTAMPED. DOUBLEROW OFSTAPLES.PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APARTTO KEEP MATTING FIRMLYPRESSED TO SOIL.'D''C''B'BURY THE TOP END OF THEMATTING IN A TRENCH 4" ORMORE IN DEPTHTYPICAL STAPLE #8GAUGE WIRE1 1/2"10"OVERFALL'E''A'NOTE:1. PLACE STAPLES 2 FEET APART TOKEEP MATTING FIRMLY PRESSED TOSOIL.EROSION BLANKETN T S3FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIEDEXISTING GROUNDSURFACEDIRECTION OF FLOWWOODEN STAKES 1/2"X2"X16" MIN. PLACED 10' O.C.WHEN INSTALLED ON GROUND. IF INSTALLED ONPVMT. PROVIDE SANDBAGS BEHIND AND ON TOP ATMIN. 10' O.C.8" MIN.SEDIMENT BIO-ROLL / COMPOST FILTER LOGN T SFILLER AS SPECIFIEDNOTE:1. COMPOST FILTER LOGS (BIO ROLLS) SHALL BE FILTREXX EROSION CONTROL SOXX OR APPROVED EQUAL.2. COMPOST FILLER TO BE MADE FROM A COMPOST BLEND 30%-40% GRADE 2 (SPEC 3890) AND 60%-70%PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED WOOD CHIPS, PER MNDOT SPEC 3897.3. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE GEOTEXTILE KNITTED MATERIAL WITH MAX. OPENINGS OF 3/8".4. IF MULTIPLE ROLLS NEEDED, OVERLAP BY MIN. 12" AT ENDS AND STAKE.5. SILT SHALL BE REMOVED ONCE IT REACHES 80% OF THE HEIGHT OF THE ROLL OR AS DEEMED NECESSARYBY SITE CONTRACTOR TO MAINTAIN PROPER FUNCTION.FILL UPSTREAM BASE EDGE WITH2" OF DIRT OR COMPOST TOEMBED ROLL.4FILTER FABRIC WITH WIRE SUPPORT NETAS SPECIFIED.METAL POST ASSPECIFIED.FILTER FABRIC AS SPECIFIED SECURETO WIRE SUPPORT NET WITH METALCLIPS 12"O.C.SUPPORT NET: 12 GAUGE 4" x 4"WIRE HOOKED ONTOPREFORMED CHANNELS ONPOSTS AS SPECIFIED.EXISTING GROUNDSURFACECARRY WIRE SUPPORT NETDOWN INTO TRENCHDIRECTION OF FLOWANCHOR FABRIC WITHSOIL, TAMP BACKFILLMETAL POSTS 8'-0" O.C.MAX.24" 24" 24" MIN. 6"6"SEDIMENT FENCEN T S5 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.3SWPPP - NARRATIVE............OWNER:SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401CONTACT:CURT GUNSBURY612-598-9416OWNER INFORMATIONTRAINING SECTION 21PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PERMANENTSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMPERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT TO MEET NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS. THEPROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE PROPOSED STORMWATER SYSTEM.AREAS AND QUANTITIES:SWPPP CONTACT PERSONCONTRACTOR:SWPPP INSPECTOR TRAINING:ALL SWPPP INSPECTIONS MUST BE PERFORMED BY APERSON THAT MEETS THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THENPDES CONSTRUCTION SITE PERMIT.TRAINING CREDENTIALS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THECONTRACTOR AND KEPT ON SITE WITH THE SWPPPNOTE: QUANTITIES ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. CONTRACTOR SHALL DETERMINE FOR THEMSELVES THE EXACTQUANTITIES FOR BIDDING AND CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT NARRATIVE:PROJECT IS A REDEVELOPMENT OF AN EXISTING GAS STATION BUILDING INTO TWO NEW COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT BUILDINGS. SITE ANDLANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WILL OCCUR.NATIVE BUFFER NARRATIVE:PRESERVING A 50' NATURAL BUFFER AROUND WATER BODIES IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT BECAUSE WATER BODIES ARE NOTLOCATED ON SITE.INFILTRATION NARRATIVE:INFILTRATION IS NOT REQUIRED AS PART OF THE PROJECT BECAUSE PERMANENT STORM WATER MANAGEMENT IS NOT REQUIRED.SOIL CONTAMINATION NARRATIVE:SOILS ONSITE HAVE NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AS CONTAMINATED. AN MPCA SOILS ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THATTHIS SITE IS APPROPRIATE FOR INFILTRATION.SPECIAL TMDL BMP REQUIREMENTS SITE SPECIFIC (IF REQUIRED):THIS PROJECT IS WITHIN ONE MILE AND DISCHARGES TO BOTH EDINA LAKE AND NINEMILE CREEK - THEY ARE IDENTIFIED AS IMPAIRED WATERBODIES PER THE MPCA'S 303(D) IMPAIRED WATERS LIST. EDINA LAKE IS IMPAIRED FOR NUTRIENTS AND NINEMILE CREEK IS IMPAIRED FORBENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE BIOASSESSMENTS; FISHES BIOASSESSMENTS. BECAUSE THESE WATERS ARE LOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF THESITE, BMPS AS DEFINED IN THE NPDES PERMIT ITEMS 23.9 AND 23.10 APPLY. THESE ARE AS FOLLOWS:1.DURING CONSTRUCTION:A.STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION BUT IN NO CASE COMPLETEDLATER THAN SEVEN (7) DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLYCEASED.B.TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN SECTION 14. MUST BE USED FOR COMMON DRAINAGE LOCATIONS THATSERVE AN AREA WITH FIVE (5) OR MORE ACRES DISTURBED AT ONE TIME.PERMANENT STABILIZATION NOTES SITE SPECIFIC:PERMANENT SEED MIX·FOR THIS PROJECT ALL AREAS THAT ARE NOT TO BE SODDED OR LANDSCAPED SHALL RECEIVE A NATIVE PERMANENT SEED MIX.··AREAS IN BUFFERS AND ADJACENT TO OR IN WET AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 33-261 (STORMWATER SOUTH AND WEST) AT 35 LBS PERACRE.··DRY AREAS MNDOT SEED MIX 35-221 (DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL) AT 40 LBS PER ACRE.·MAINTENANCE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.SUPPLEMENTARY SITE SPECIFIC EROSION CONTROL NOTES:THESE NOTES SUPERCEDE ANY GENERAL SWPPP NOTES.THIS PROJECT IS GREATER THAN 1.0 ACRES SO AN NPDES PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA. THECONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW THE GUIDELINES IN THE NPDES PERMIT THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.SWPPP ATTACHMENTS (ONLY APPLICABLE IF SITE IS 1 ACRE OR GREATER):CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE FOLLOWING SWPPP ATTACHMENTS WHICH ARE A PART OF THE OVERALL SWPPP PACKAGE:ATTACHMENT A. CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE - SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTATTACHMENT B. CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLISTATTACHMENT C. MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMSATTACHMENT D: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.ATTACHMENT E: GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT - ON FILE AT THE OFFICE OF PROJECT ENGINEER. AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.THE CONTRACTOR AND ALL SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY THAT DISTURBS SITE SOIL OR WHO IMPLEMENT A POLLUTANT CONTROL MEASURE IDENTIFIED IN THE STORM WATER POLLUTIONPREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) MUST COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) GENERAL PERMIT (DATED AUGUST 1, 2018 # MNR100001) AND ANY LOCALGOVERNING AGENCY HAVING JURISDICTION CONCERNING EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL.STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTSSWPPPTHE NATURE OF THIS PROJECT WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS REPRESENTED IN THIS SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS. SEE THE SWPPP PLAN SHEETS AND SWPPP NARRATIVE (ATTACHMENT A:CONSTRUCTION SWPPP TEMPLATE) FOR ADDITIONAL SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP INFORMATION. THE PLANS SHOW LOCATIONS AND TYPES OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLBMP'S. STANDARD DETAILS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS SWPPP DOCUMENT.THE INTENDED SEQUENCING OF MAJOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES IS AS FOLLOWS:1. INSTALL STABILIZED ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE2. INSTALLATION OF SILT FENCE AROUND SITE3. INSTALL ORANGE CONSTRUCTION FENCING AROUND INFILTRATION AREAS4. INSTALL INLET PROTECTION AT ALL ADJACENT AND DOWNSTREAM CATCH BASINS5. CLEAR AND GRUB FOR TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND INSTALL6. CONSTRUCT TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN / POND (SECTION 14)7. CLEAR AND GRUB REMAINDER OF SITE8. STRIP AND STOCKPILE TOPSOIL9. ROUGH GRADING OF SITE10. STABILIZE DENUDED AREAS AND STOCKPILES11. INSTALL SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN STORM SEWER AND SERVICES12. INSTALL SILT FENCE / INLET PROTECTION AROUND CB'S13. INSTALL STREET SECTION14. INSTALL CURB AND GUTTER15. BITUMINOUS ON STREETS16. FINAL GRADE BOULEVARD, INSTALL SEED AND MULCH17. REMOVE ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT FROM BASIN / POND18. FINAL GRADE POND / INFILTRATION BASINS (DO NOT COMPACT SOILS IN INFILTRATION AREAS.)19. WHEN ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS COMPLETE AND THE SITE IS STABILIZED BY EITHER SEED OR SOD/LANDSCAPING, REMOVE SILT FENCE AND RESEED ANY AREAS DISTURBED BY THE REMOVAL.RECORDS RETENTION:THE SWPPP (ORIGINAL OR COPIES) INCLUDING, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE RECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THE PERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONALCONTROL OF THAT PORTION OF THE SITE. THE SWPPP CAN BE KEPT IN EITHER THE FIELD OFFICE OR IN AN ON SITE VEHICLE DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS.ALL OWNER(S) MUST KEEP THE SWPPP, ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL RECORDS, ON FILE FOR THREE (3) YEARS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 4. THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE ANYRECORDS AFTER SUBMITTAL OF THE NOT.1.THE FINAL SWPPP;2.ANY OTHER STORMWATER RELATED PERMITS REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT;3.RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION (SEE SECTION 11, INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE);4.ALL PERMANENT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, INCLUDING ALL RIGHT OF WAY, CONTRACTS, COVENANTS AND OTHER BINDING REQUIREMENTS REGARDING PERPETUALMAINTENANCE; AND5.ALL REQUIRED CALCULATIONS FOR DESIGN OF THE TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.SWPPP IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES:1.THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ARE PERMITTEE(S) AS IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE ACTIVITIES OF ALL OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO OVERSEE ALL INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OFBMPS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP.4.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO CONDUCT INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS INACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR AN ONSITE INSPECTION WITHIN 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDETRAINING DOCUMENTATION FOR THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. THIS TRAINING DOCUMENTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITH THE SWPPP BEFORE THE START OF CONSTRUCTION ORAS SOON AS THE PERSONNEL FOR THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN DETERMINED. DOCUMENTATION SHALL INCLUDE:4.1.NAMES OF THE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE TRAINED PER SECTION 21 OF THE PERMIT.4.2.DATES OF TRAINING AND NAME OF INSTRUCTOR AND ENTITY PROVIDING TRAINING.4.3.CONTENT OF TRAINING COURSE OR WORKSHOP INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF TRAINING.5.FOLLOWING FINAL STABILIZATION AND THE TERMINATION OF COVERAGE FOR THE NPDES PERMIT, THE OWNER IS EXPECTED TO FURNISH LONG TERM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (O & M) OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY REQUIREMENTSSWPPP AMENDMENTS (SECTION 6):1.ONE OF THE INDIVIDUALS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.A OR ITEM 21.2.B OR ANOTHER QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL MUST COMPLETE ALL SWPPP CHANGES. CHANGES INVOLVING THE USE OF A LESS STRINGENT BMP MUSTINCLUDE A JUSTIFICATION DESCRIBING HOW THE REPLACEMENT BMP IS EFFECTIVE FOR THE SITE CHARACTERISTICS.2.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN,CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS OR GROUNDWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST AMEND THE SWPPP TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS AS NECESSARY TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONS WHENEVER INSPECTIONS OR INVESTIGATIONS BYTHE SITE OWNER OR OPERATOR, USEPA OR MPCA OFFICIALS INDICATE THE SWPPP IS NOT EFFECTIVE IN ELIMINATING OR SIGNIFICANTLY MINIMIZING THE DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS TO SURFACE WATERS ORGROUNDWATER OR THE DISCHARGES ARE CAUSING WATER QUALITY STANDARD EXCEEDANCES (E.G., NUISANCE CONDITIONS AS DEFINED IN MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2) OR THE SWPPP IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THEOBJECTIVES OF A USEPA APPROVED TMDL.BMP SELECTION AND INSTALLATION (SECTION 7):1.PERMITTEES MUST SELECT, INSTALL, AND MAINTAIN THE BMPS IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP AND IN THIS PERMIT IN AN APPROPRIATE AND FUNCTIONAL MANNER AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELEVANT MANUFACTURERSPECIFICATIONS AND ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES.EROSION PREVENTION (SECTION 8):1.BEFORE WORK BEGINS, PERMITTEES MUST DELINEATE THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED.2.PERMITTEES MUST MINIMIZE THE NEED FOR DISTURBANCE OF PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT WITH STEEP SLOPES. WHEN STEEP SLOPES MUST BE DISTURBED, PERMITTEES MUST USE TECHNIQUES SUCH AS PHASINGAND STABILIZATION PRACTICES DESIGNED FOR STEEP SLOPES (E.G., SLOPE DRAINING AND TERRACING).3.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS, INCLUDING STOCKPILES. STABILIZATION MUST BE INITIATED IMMEDIATELY TO LIMIT SOIL EROSION WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS PERMANENTLY ORTEMPORARILY CEASED ON ANY PORTION OF THE SITE AND WILL NOT RESUME FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING 14 CALENDAR DAYS. STABILIZATION MUST BE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THECONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS CEASED. STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON CONSTRUCTED BASE COMPONENTS OF ROADS, PARKING LOTS AND SIMILAR SURFACES. STABILIZATION IS NOT REQUIRED ON TEMPORARYSTOCKPILES WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT SILT, CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS (E.G., CLEAN AGGREGATE STOCKPILES, DEMOLITION CONCRETE STOCKPILES, SAND STOCKPILES) BUT PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SEDIMENTCONTROLS AT THE BASE OF THE STOCKPILE.4.FOR PUBLIC WATERS THAT THE MINNESOTA DNR HAS PROMULGATED "WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS" DURING SPECIFIED FISH SPAWNING TIME FRAMES, PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSEDSOIL AREAS WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE WATER'S EDGE, AND THAT DRAIN TO THESE WATERS, WITHIN 24 HOURS DURING THE RESTRICTION PERIOD.5.PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF THE LAST 200 LINEAR FEET OF TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES OR SWALES THAT DRAIN WATER FROM THE SITE WITHIN 24 HOURSAFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER OR PROPERTY EDGE. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE STABILIZATION OF REMAINING PORTIONS OF TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDARDAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER OR PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASES.6.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES BEING USED AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DURING CONSTRUCTION (WITH PROPERLY DESIGNED ROCK-DITCH CHECKS, BIO ROLLS, SILT DIKES, ETC.) DO NOTNEED TO BE STABILIZED. PERMITTEES MUST STABILIZE THESE AREAS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER THEIR USE AS A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM CEASES7.PERMITTEES MUST NOT USE MULCH, HYDROMULCH, TACKIFIER, POLYACRYLAMIDE OR SIMILAR EROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES WITHIN ANY PORTION OF THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF A TEMPORARY ORPERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE SECTION WITH A CONTINUOUS SLOPE OF GREATER THAN 2 PERCENT.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION AT ALL PIPE OUTLETS WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTION TO A SURFACE WATER OR PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENTSYSTEM.9.PERMITTEES MUST NOT DISTURB MORE LAND (I.E., PHASING) THAN CAN BE EFFECTIVELY INSPECTED AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 11.SEDIMENT CONTROL (SECTION 9):1.PERMITTEES MUST ESTABLISH SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS ON ALL DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETERS OF THE SITE AND DOWNGRADIENT AREAS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO ANY SURFACE WATER, INCLUDING CURB ANDGUTTER SYSTEMS. PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES UPGRADIENT OF ANY BUFFER ZONES. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE ANY UPGRADIENTLAND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES BEGIN AND MUST KEEP THE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES IN PLACE UNTIL THEY ESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER.2.IF DOWNGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLS ARE OVERLOADED, BASED ON FREQUENT FAILURE OR EXCESSIVE MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL ADDITIONAL UPGRADIENT SEDIMENT CONTROLPRACTICES OR REDUNDANT BMPS TO ELIMINATE THE OVERLOADING AND AMEND THE SWPPP TO IDENTIFY THESE ADDITIONAL PRACTICES AS REQUIRED IN ITEM 6.3.3.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCHES AND SEDIMENT BASINS DESIGNED AS PART OF A SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM (E.G., DITCHES WITH ROCK-CHECK DAMS) REQUIRE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICESONLY AS APPROPRIATE FOR SITE CONDITIONS.4.A FLOATING SILT CURTAIN PLACED IN THE WATER IS NOT A SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP TO SATISFY ITEM 9.2 EXCEPT WHEN WORKING ON A SHORELINE OR BELOW THE WATERLINE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE SHORT TERMCONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (E.G., INSTALLATION OF RIP RAP ALONG THE SHORELINE) IN THAT AREA IS COMPLETE, PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL AN UPLAND PERIMETER CONTROL PRACTICE IF EXPOSED SOILS STILL DRAINTO A SURFACE WATER.5.PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL ALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES ADJUSTED OR REMOVED TO ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING OR GRUBBING, OR PASSAGE OF VEHICLES, IMMEDIATELYAFTER THE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED. PERMITTEES MUST RE-INSTALL SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES BEFORE THE NEXT PRECIPITATION EVENT EVEN IF THE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITY IS NOT COMPLETE.6.PERMITTEES MUST PROTECT ALL STORM DRAIN INLETS USING APPROPRIATE BMPS DURING CONSTRUCTION UNTIL THEY ESTABLISH PERMANENT COVER ON ALL AREAS WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGING TO THEINLET.7.PERMITTEES MAY REMOVE INLET PROTECTION FOR A PARTICULAR INLET IF A SPECIFIC SAFETY CONCERN (E.G. STREET FLOODING/FREEZING) IS IDENTIFIED BY THE PERMITTEES OR THE JURISDICTIONAL AUTHORITY(E.G., CITY/COUNTY/TOWNSHIP/MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER). PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE NEED FOR REMOVAL IN THE SWPPP.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT THE BASE OF STOCKPILES ON THE DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER.9.PERMITTEES MUST LOCATE STOCKPILES OUTSIDE OF NATURAL BUFFERS OR SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING STORMWATER CONVEYANCES SUCH AS CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS UNLESS THERE IS A BYPASS IN PLACEFOR THE STORMWATER. 10. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL A VEHICLE TRACKING BMP TO MINIMIZE THE TRACK OUT OF SEDIMENT FROM THE CONSTRUCTION SITE OR ONTO PAVED ROADS WITHIN THE SITE. 11. PERMITTEES MUST USE STREET SWEEPING IF VEHICLE TRACKING BMPS ARE NOT ADEQUATE TO PREVENT SEDIMENT TRACKING ONTO THE STREET. 12. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 14. 13. IN ANY AREAS OF THE SITE WHERE FINAL VEGETATIVE STABILIZATION WILL OCCUR, PERMITTEES MUST RESTRICT VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT USE TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION. 14. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE TOPSOIL ON THE SITE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 15. PERMITTEES MUST DIRECT DISCHARGES FROM BMPS TO VEGETATED AREAS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. 16. PERMITTEES MUST PRESERVE A 50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER OR, IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE ON THE SITE, PROVIDE REDUNDANT (DOUBLE) PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS WHEN A SURFACE WATER IS LOCATEDWITHIN 50 FEET OF THE PROJECT'S EARTH DISTURBANCES AND STORMWATER FLOWS TO THE SURFACE WATER. PERMITTEES MUST INSTALL PERIMETER SEDIMENT CONTROLS AT LEAST 5 FEET APART UNLESS LIMITEDBY LACK OF AVAILABLE SPACE. NATURAL BUFFERS ARE NOT REQUIRED ADJACENT TO ROAD DITCHES, JUDICIAL DITCHES, COUNTY DITCHES, STORMWATER CONVEYANCE CHANNELS, STORM DRAIN INLETS, ANDSEDIMENT BASINS. IF PRESERVING THE BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE, PERMITTEES MUST DOCUMENT THE REASONS IN THE SWPPP. SHEET PILING IS A REDUNDANT PERIMETER CONTROL IF INSTALLED IN A MANNER THATRETAINS ALL STORMWATER. 17. PERMITTEES MUST USE POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, OR OTHER SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES, DOSING SPECIFICATIONS AND SEDIMENT REMOVALDESIGN SPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER. THE PERMITTEES MUST USE CONVENTIONAL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS PRIOR TO CHEMICAL ADDITION AND MUST DIRECT TREATEDSTORMWATER TO A SEDIMENT CONTROL SYSTEM FOR FILTRATION OR SETTLEMENT OF THE FLOC PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (SECTION 10):1.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATERS RELATED TO DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING (E.G., PUMPED DISCHARGES, TRENCH/DITCH CUTS FOR DRAINAGE) TO A TEMPORARY ORPERMANENT SEDIMENT BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITE UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MAY DEWATER TO SURFACE WATERS IF THEY VISUALLY CHECK TO ENSURE ADEQUATE TREATMENT HAS BEEN OBTAINED ANDNUISANCE CONDITIONS (SEE MINN. R. 7050.0210, SUBP. 2) WILL NOT RESULT FROM THE DISCHARGE. IF PERMITTEES CANNOT DISCHARGE THE WATER TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING A SURFACEWATER, PERMITTEES MUST TREAT IT WITH APPROPRIATE BMPS SUCH THAT THE DISCHARGE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE SURFACE WATER OR DOWNSTREAM PROPERTIES.2.IF PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE WATER CONTAINING OIL OR GREASE, THEY MUST USE AN OIL-WATER SEPARATOR OR SUITABLE FILTRATION DEVICE (E.G., CARTRIDGE FILTERS, ABSORBENTS PADS) PRIOR TODISCHARGE.3.PERMITTEES MUST DISCHARGE ALL WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN-DRAINING ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION OR SCOUR IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS ORINUNDATION OF WETLANDS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY OF DISCHARGE POINTS THAT CAUSES SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT TO THE WETLAND.4.IF PERMITTEES USE FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER, THEY MUST HAUL THE BACKWASH WATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURN THE BACKWASH WATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENT PROCESS, ORINCORPORATE THE BACKWASH WATER INTO THE SITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (SECTION 11):1.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE A TRAINED PERSON, AS IDENTIFIED IN ITEM 21.2.B, WILL INSPECT THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION SITE AT LEAST ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND WITHIN 24HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 1/2 INCH IN 24 HOURS.2.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT AND MAINTAIN ALL PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT BMPS.3.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS AND POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT MEASURES TO ENSURE INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS. PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR,REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENT ALL NONFUNCTIONAL BMPS WITH FUNCTIONAL BMPS BY THE END OF THE NEXT BUSINESS DAY AFTER DISCOVERY UNLESS ANOTHER TIME FRAME IS SPECIFIED IN ITEM 11.5 OR 11.6.PERMITTEES MAY TAKE ADDITIONAL TIME IF FIELD CONDITIONS PREVENT ACCESS TO THE AREA.4.DURING EACH INSPECTION, PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE DITCHES AND CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS BUT NOT CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS, FOR EVIDENCE OF EROSION ANDSEDIMENT DEPOSITION. PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL DELTAS AND SEDIMENT DEPOSITED IN SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING DRAINAGE WAYS, CATCH BASINS, AND OTHER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND RESTABILIZE THEAREAS WHERE SEDIMENT REMOVAL RESULTS IN EXPOSED SOIL. PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS OF DISCOVERY UNLESS PRECLUDED BY LEGAL,REGULATORY, OR PHYSICAL ACCESS CONSTRAINTS. PERMITTEES MUST USE ALL REASONABLE EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS. IF PRECLUDED, REMOVAL AND STABILIZATION MUST TAKE PLACE WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS OFOBTAINING ACCESS. PERMITTEES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING ALL LOCAL, REGIONAL, STATE AND FEDERAL AUTHORITIES AND RECEIVING ANY APPLICABLE PERMITS, PRIOR TO CONDUCTING ANY WORK INSURFACE WATERS.5.PERMITTEES MUST INSPECT CONSTRUCTION SITE VEHICLE EXIT LOCATIONS, STREETS AND CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMS WITHIN AND ADJACENT TO THE PROJECT FOR SEDIMENTATION FROM EROSION OR TRACKEDSEDIMENT FROM VEHICLES. PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE SEDIMENT FROM ALL PAVED SURFACES WITHIN ONE (1) CALENDAR DAY OF DISCOVERY OR, IF APPLICABLE, WITHIN A SHORTER TIME TO AVOID A SAFETY HAZARDTO USERS OF PUBLIC STREETS.6.PERMITTEES MUST REPAIR, REPLACE OR SUPPLEMENT ALL PERIMETER CONTROL DEVICES WHEN THEY BECOME NONFUNCTIONAL OR THE SEDIMENT REACHES 1/2 OF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE.7.PERMITTEES MUST DRAIN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASINS AND REMOVE THE SEDIMENT WHEN THE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT COLLECTED IN THE BASIN REACHES 1/2 THE STORAGE VOLUME.8.PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE THAT AT LEAST ONE INDIVIDUAL PRESENT ON THE SITE (OR AVAILABLE TO THE PROJECT SITE IN THREE (3) CALENDAR DAYS) IS TRAINED IN THE JOB DUTIES DESCRIBED IN ITEM 21.2.B.9.PERMITTEES MAY ADJUST THE INSPECTION SCHEDULE DESCRIBED IN ITEM 11.2 AS FOLLOWS:a. INSPECTIONS OF AREAS WITH PERMANENT COVER CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH, EVEN IF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY CONTINUES ON OTHER PORTIONS OF THE SITE; ORb.WHERE SITES HAVE PERMANENT COVER ON ALL EXPOSED SOIL AND NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IS OCCURRING ANYWHERE ON THE SITE, INSPECTIONS CAN BE REDUCED TO ONCE PER MONTH AND, AFTER 12MONTHS, MAY BE SUSPENDED COMPLETELY UNTIL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RESUMES. THE MPCA MAY REQUIRE INSPECTIONS TO RESUME IF CONDITIONS WARRANT; ORc.WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS BEEN SUSPENDED DUE TO FROZEN GROUND CONDITIONS, INSPECTIONS MAY BE SUSPENDED. INSPECTIONS MUST RESUME WITHIN 24 HOURS OF RUNOFF OCCURRING, ORUPON RESUMING CONSTRUCTION, WHICHEVER COMES FIRST. 10. PERMITTEES MUST RECORD ALL INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BEING CONDUCTED AND THESE RECORDS MUST BE RETAINED WITH THE SWPPP. THESE RECORDS MUST INCLUDE:a.DATE AND TIME OF INSPECTIONS; ANDb.NAME OF PERSONS CONDUCTING INSPECTIONS; ANDc.ACCURATE FINDINGS OF INSPECTIONS, INCLUDING THE SPECIFIC LOCATION WHERE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS ARE NEEDED; ANDd.CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TAKEN (INCLUDING DATES, TIMES, AND PARTY COMPLETING MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES); ANDe.DATE OF ALL RAINFALL EVENTS GREATER THAN 1/2 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL FOR EACH EVENT. PERMITTEES MUST OBTAIN RAINFALL AMOUNTS BY EITHER A PROPERLY MAINTAINED RAINGAUGE INSTALLED ONSITE, A WEATHER STATION THAT IS WITHIN ONE (1) MILE OF YOUR LOCATION, OR A WEATHER REPORTING SYSTEM THAT PROVIDES SITE SPECIFIC RAINFALL DATA FROM RADAR SUMMARIES;ANDf.IF PERMITTEES OBSERVE A DISCHARGE DURING THE INSPECTION, THEY MUST RECORD AND SHOULD PHOTOGRAPH AND DESCRIBE THE LOCATION OF THE DISCHARGE (I.E., COLOR, ODOR, SETTLED OR SUSPENDEDSOLIDS, OIL SHEEN, AND OTHER OBVIOUS INDICATORS OF POLLUTANTS); ANDg.ANY AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP PROPOSED AS A RESULT OF THE INSPECTION MUST BE DOCUMENTED AS REQUIRED IN SECTION 6 WITHIN SEVEN (7) CALENDAR DAYS.POLLUTION PREVENTION MANAGEMENT (SECTION 12):1.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE BUILDING PRODUCTS AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TOMINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER. PERMITTEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COVER OR PROTECT PRODUCTS WHICH ARE EITHER NOT A SOURCE OF CONTAMINATION TO STORMWATER OR ARE DESIGNED TO BEEXPOSED TO STORMWATER.2.PERMITTEES MUST PLACE PESTICIDES, FERTILIZERS AND TREATMENT CHEMICALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING OR TEMPORARY ROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TOMINIMIZE CONTACT WITH STORMWATER.3.PERMITTEES MUST STORE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND TOXIC WASTE, (INCLUDING OIL, DIESEL FUEL, GASOLINE, HYDRAULIC FLUIDS, PAINT SOLVENTS, PETROLEUM-BASED PRODUCTS, WOOD PRESERVATIVES,ADDITIVES, CURING COMPOUNDS, AND ACIDS) IN SEALED CONTAINERS TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHER DISCHARGE. STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MATERIALS MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITHMINN. R. CH. 7045 INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT AS APPLICABLE.4.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY STORE, COLLECT AND DISPOSE SOLID WASTE IN COMPLIANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7035.5.PERMITTEES MUST POSITION PORTABLE TOILETS SO THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT TIP OR BE KNOCKED OVER. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE SANITARY WASTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7041.6.PERMITTEES MUST TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS, INCLUDING FUEL, FROM ANY AREA WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED OR UNLOADEDINCLUDING THE USE OF DRIP PANS OR ABSORBENTS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE ADEQUATE SUPPLIES ARE AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP DISCHARGED MATERIALS AND THAT ANAPPROPRIATE DISPOSAL METHOD IS AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERED SPILLED MATERIALS. PERMITTEES MUST REPORT AND CLEAN UP SPILLS IMMEDIATELY AS REQUIRED BY MINN. STAT. 115.061, USING DRY CLEAN UPMEASURES WHERE POSSIBLE.7.PERMITTEES MUST LIMIT VEHICLE EXTERIOR WASHING AND EQUIPMENT TO A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE. PERMITTEES MUST CONTAIN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHING AREA IN A SEDIMENT BASIN OR OTHER SIMILARLYEFFECTIVE CONTROLS AND MUST DISPOSE WASTE FROM THE WASHING ACTIVITY PROPERLY. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY USE AND STORE SOAPS, DETERGENTS, OR SOLVENTS.8.PERMITTEES MUST PROVIDE EFFECTIVE CONTAINMENT FOR ALL LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES GENERATED BY WASHOUT OPERATIONS (E.G., CONCRETE, STUCCO, PAINT, FORM RELEASE OILS, CURING COMPOUNDS ANDOTHER CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS) RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. PERMITTEES MUST PREVENT LIQUID AND SOLID WASHOUT WASTES FROM CONTACTING THE GROUND AND MUST DESIGN THECONTAINMENT SO IT DOES NOT RESULT IN RUNOFF FROM THE WASHOUT OPERATIONS OR AREAS. PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE LIQUID AND SOLID WASTES IN COMPLIANCE WITH MPCA RULES. PERMITTEESMUST INSTALL A SIGN INDICATING THE LOCATION OF THE WASHOUT FACILITY.PERMIT TERMINATION (SECTION 4 AND SECTION 13):1.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ALL TERMINATION CONDITIONS LISTED IN SECTION 13 ARE COMPLETE.2.PERMITTEES MUST SUBMIT A NOT WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER SELLING OR OTHERWISE LEGALLY TRANSFERRING THE ENTIRE SITE, INCLUDING PERMIT RESPONSIBILITY FOR ROADS (E.G., STREET SWEEPING) ANDSTORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINAL CLEAN OUT, OR TRANSFERRING PORTIONS OF A SITE TO ANOTHER PARTY. THE PERMITTEES' COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT TERMINATES AT MIDNIGHT ON THE SUBMISSIONDATE OF THE NOT.3.PERMITTEES MUST COMPLETE ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY AND MUST INSTALL PERMANENT COVER OVER ALL AREAS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT. VEGETATIVE COVER MUST CONSIST OF A UNIFORM PERENNIALVEGETATION WITH A DENSITY OF 70 PERCENT OF ITS EXPECTED FINAL GROWTH. VEGETATION IS NOT REQUIRED WHERE THE FUNCTION OF A SPECIFIC AREA DICTATES NO VEGETATION, SUCH AS IMPERVIOUSSURFACES OR THE BASE OF A SAND FILTER.4.PERMITTEES MUST CLEAN THE PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM OF ANY ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND MUST ENSURE THE SYSTEM MEETS ALL APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 15 THROUGH 19AND IS OPERATING AS DESIGNED.5.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL SEDIMENT FROM CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT.6.PERMITTEES MUST REMOVE ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS PRIOR TO SUBMITTING THE NOT. PERMITTEES MAY LEAVE BMPS DESIGNED TO DECOMPOSE ON-SITE INPLACE.7.FOR RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ONLY, PERMIT COVERAGE TERMINATES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS IF THE STRUCTURES ARE FINISHED AND TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION AND DOWNGRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROLIS COMPLETE, THE RESIDENCE SELLS TO THE HOMEOWNER, AND THE PERMITTEE DISTRIBUTES THE MPCA'S "HOMEOWNER FACT SHEET" TO THE HOMEOWNER.8.FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ON AGRICULTURAL LAND (E.G., PIPELINES ACROSS CROPLAND), PERMITTEES MUST RETURN THE DISTURBED LAND TO ITS PRECONSTRUCTION AGRICULTURAL USE PRIOR TO SUBMITTINGTHE NOT.SEED NOTES:ALL SEED MIXES AND APPLICATION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MNDOT SEEDING MANUAL.GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO SALVAGE AND PRESERVE EXISTING TOPSOIL NECESSARY FOR FINAL STABILIZATION AND TO ALSO MINIMIZE COMPACTION IN ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS. IMMEDIATELY BEFORE SEEDINGTHE SOIL SHALL BE TILLED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 3 INCHES.TEMPORARY EROSION CONTROL SEEDING, MULCHING & BLANKET.SEED·TEMPORARY SEED SHALL BE MNDOT SEED MIX 21-112 (WINTER WHEAT COVER CROP) FOR WINTER AND 21-111 (OATS COVER CROP) FOR SPRING/SUMMER APPLICATIONS. BOTH SEED MIXES SHALL BE APPLIED AT ASEEDING RATE OF 100 LBS/ACRE.MULCH·IMMEDIATELY AFTER SEEDING, WITHIN 24 HOURS, MNDOT TYPE 1 MULCH SHOULD BE APPLIED TO PROTECT AND ENHANCE SEED GERMINATION. MULCH SHALL BE APPLIED AT 90% COVERAGE (2 TONS PER ACRE OFSTRAW MULCH)SLOPES·3:1 (HORIZ/VERT.) OR FLATTER MUCH SHALL BE COVERED WITH MULCH·SLOPES STEEPER THAN 3:1 OR DITCH BOTTOMS SHALL BE COVERED WITH EROSION CONTROL BLANKET.·SEE PLAN FOR MORE DETAILED DITCH AND STEEP SLOPE EROSION CONTROL TREATMENTS.DESIGN ENGINEER: DAVID J. KNAEBLE P.E.TRAINING COURSE: DESIGN OF SWPPPTRAINING ENTITY: UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAINSTRUCTOR: JOHN CHAPMANDATES OF TRAINING COURSE: 8/22/2012- 8/23/2012TOTAL TRAINING HOURS: 12DATE OF RECERTIFICATION: 5/31/19EXPIRATION: 5/31/2022 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.4SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT A: SITE SPECIFIC SWPPP DOCUMENTPROJECT NAME: PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIALPROJECT LOCATION (BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHERE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OCCURS. INCLUDE ADDRESS IF AVAILABLE.)ADDRESS: 4660 W 77TH STCITY OR TOWNSHIP: EDINASTATE: MNZIP CODE: 55435LATITUDE/LONGITUDE OF APPROXIMATE CENTROID OF PROJECT: 44.863799 N, 93.342648 WMETHOD OF LAT/LONG COLLECTION (CIRCLE ONE): GPS ONLINE TOOL USGS TOPOGRAPHICALL CITIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: EDINAALL COUNTIES WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: HENNEPINALL TOWNSHIPS WHERE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR: NAPROJECT SIZE (NUMBER OF ACRES TO BE DISTURBED): 5.8PROJECT TYPE (CIRCLE ONE): RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ROAD CONSTRUCTION RESIDENTIAL & RD CONSTRUCTION OTHER (DESCRIBE): XXXXXCUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE (TO THE NEAREST TENTH ACRE)EXISTING AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE : 4.1POST CONSTRUCTION AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: 3.6TOTAL NEW AREA OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACE: -0.5RECEIVING WATERSWATER BODY IDNAME OF WATER BODY WATER BODY TYPE SPECIAL WATER? (Y/N) IMPARIED WATER (Y/N)07020012-51827-0027-00..NINEMILE CREEKEDINA LAKE..CREEKLAKE.. NN..YY..DATES OF CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCTION START DATE: 06/22ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 11/24GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT INFORMATIONDESCRIBE THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (WHAT WILL BE BUILT, GENERAL TIMELINE, ETC): THE CONSTRUCTION IS TO BE A PROPOSED 400-UNIT RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT FACILITY WITH RELATED PARKING, STORMWATERMANAGEMENT AND MISC. SITE FEATURES ON A +/- 5.44-ACRE SITE.DESCRIBE SOIL TYPES FOUND AT THE PROJECT: XXXXXSITE LOCATION MAP - ATTACH MAPS (U.S. GEOLOGIC SURVEY 7.5 MINUTE QUADRANGLE, NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY MAPS OR EQUIVALENT) SHOWING THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL RECEIVING WATERS, INCLUDINGWETLANDS, DRAINAGE DITCHES, STORMWATER PONDS, OR BASINS, ETC. THAT WILL RECEIVE RUNOFF FROM THE PROJECT. USE ARROWS SHOWING THE DIRECTION OF FLOW AND DISTANCE TO THE WATER BODY.GENERAL SITE INFORMATION (III.A)1. DESCRIBE THE LOCATION AND TYPE OF ALL TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICIES (BMP'S). INCLUDE THE TIMING FOR INSTALLATION AND PROCEDURESUSED TO ESTABLISH ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY BMP'S AS NECESSARY. (III.A.4.A)THE PROJECT IS PROTECTED BY TWO (W) MAIN BMP'S, SILT FENCE AND INLET PROTECTION DEVICES. THE SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT THE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE AND MONITORED AS NECESSARY. INLETPROTECTION DEVIDES WILL BE INSTALLED IN ALL CATCH BASINS ON THE SITE AND ANY OFF SITE THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THIS SITE. AS THE PROJECT PROGRESSES ADDITIONAL BMP'S SUCH AS EROSIONCONTROL BLANKET MAY BE UTILITZED.2. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A TABLE WITH THE ANTICIPATED QUANITITIES FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT FOR ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (III.A.4.B) SEE PAGE SW1.33. ATTACH TO THIS SWPPP A SITE MAP THAT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING FEATURES (III.A.3.B-F):EXIST AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMRWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN THE PROJECT LIMITS.LOCATIONS OF IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AND SOIL TYPES.·EXISTING AND FINAL GRADES, INCLUDING DIVIDING LINES AND DIRECTION OF FLOW FOR ALL PRE AND POST-CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF DRAINAGE AREAS LOCATED WITHIN PROJECT LIMITS.·LOCATIONS OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTRUBED.·LOCATION OF AREAS OF PHASED CONSTRUCTION.·ALL SURFACE WATERS AND EXISTING WETLANDS WITHIN ONE MILE FROM THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES THAT WILL RECEIVE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THE SITE (IDENTIFIABLE ON MAPS SUCH AS USGS 7.5 MINUTEQUADRANGLE MAPS OR EQUIVALENT. WHERE SURFACE WATERS RECEIVING RUNOFF ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL NOT FIT ON THE PLAN SHEET, THEY MUST BE IDENTIFIED WITH AN ARROW,INDICATING BOTH DIRECTION AND DISTANCE TO THE SURFACE WATER.·METHODS TO BE USED FOR FINAL STABILIZATION OF ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREA4. WERE STORMWATER MITIGATION MEASURES REQUIRED AS THE RESULT OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, OR OTHER REQUIRED LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW THESE MEASURES WERE ADDRESSED IN THE SWPPP. (III.A.6)N/A5. IS THE PROJECT LOCATED IN A KARST AREA SUCH THAT ADDITIONAL MEASURES WOULD BE NECESSARY OT PROJECT DRINKING WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AREAS AS DESCRIBED IN MINN. R. CHAPTERS 7050 AND 7060? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO BE USED. (III.A.7)N/A6. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A CALCEREOUS FEN LISTED IN MINN. R. 7050.0180, SUBP. 6 B? NOIF YES, A LETTER OF APPROVAL FROM THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO APPLICATION FOR THIS PERMIT. (PART I B.6 AND PART III.A.8)7. DOES THE SITE DISCHARGE TO A WATER THAT IS LISTED AS IMPARED FOR THE FOLLOWING POLLUTANT(S) OR STRESSOR(S): PHOSPHORUS, TURBIDITY, DISSOLVED OXYGEN OR BIOTIC IMPAIRMENT? USE THE SPECIAL ANDIMPAIRED WATERS SEARCH TOOL AT: WWW.PCA.STATE.MN.US/WATER/STORMWATER/STORMWATER-C.HTMLN/AIF NO, SKIP TO TRAININGDOES THE IMPAIRED WATER HAVE AN APPROVED TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOADS (TMDL) WITH AN APPROVED WASTE LOAD ALLOCATION FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY? NOIF YES:A. LIST THE RECEIVING WATER, THE AREAS OF THE SITE DISCHARGING TO IT, AND THE POLLUTANT(S) IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.B. LIST THE BMP'S AND ANY OTHER SPECIFIC CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RELATED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL.IF THE SITE HAS A DISCHARGE POINT WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE IMPAIRED WATER AND THE WATER FLOWS TO THE IMPAIRED WATER BUT NO SPECIFIC BMPS FOR CONSTRUCTION ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE TMDL, THE ADDITIONALBMPS IN APPENDIX A (C.1, C.2, C.3 & (C.4-TROUT STREAM)) MUST BE ADDED TO THE SWPPP AND IMPLEMENTED. (III.A.7). THE ADDITIONAL BMPS ONLY APPLY TO THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT THAT DRAIN TO ONE OF THEIDENTIFIED DISCHARGE POINTS.N/A8. IDENTIFY ADJACENT PUBLIC WATERS WHERE THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (DNR) HAS DECLARED “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS” DURING FISH SPAWNING TIMEFRAMESN/ASELECTION OF A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (III.D.)1. WILL THE PROJECT CREATE A NEW CUMULATIVE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO ONE ACRE? NOIF YES, A WATER QUALITY VOLUME OF ONE INCH OF RUNOFF FROM THE CUMULATIVE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES MUST BE RETAINED ON SITE (SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT) THROUGH INFILTRATION UNLESS PROHIBITED DUETO ONE OF THE REASONS IN PART III.D.1.J. IF INFILTRATION IS PROHIBITED IDENTIFY OTHER METHOD OF OTHER VOLUME REDUCTION (E.G., FILTRATION SYSTEM, WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN, REGIONAL PONDING OR EQUIVALENTMETHOD2. DESCRIBE WHICH METHOD WILL BE USED TO TREAT RUNOFF FROM THE NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACES CREATED BY THE PROJECT (III.D):·WET SEDIMENTATION BASIN·INFILTRATION/FILTRATION·REGIONAL PONDS·COMBINATION OF PRACTICESINCLUDE ALL CALCULATIONS AND DESIGN INFORMATION FOR THE METHOD SELECTED. SEE PART III.D OF THE PERMIT FOR SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH EACH METHOD.INFILTRATION / FILTRATION / REGIONAL PONDINGCALCULATIONS ARE WITHIN THE SITE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT REPORT AND PART OF THIS SWPPP AS ATTACHMENT D.3. IF IT IS NOT FEASIBLE TO MEET THE TREATMENT REQUIREMENT FOR THE WATER QUALITY VOLUME, DESCRIBE WHY. THIS CAN INCLUDE PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAYPRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT, SUCH AS GRASSES SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS, WILL BE IMPLEMENTEDTO TREAT RUNOFF PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. (III.C)IT IS FEASIBLE TO MEET REQUIREMENT FOR WATER QUALITY VOLUME.4. FOR PROJECTS THAT DISCHARGE TO TROUT STREAMS, INCLUDING TRIBUTARIES TO TROUT STREAMS, IDENTIFY METHOD OF INCORPORATING TEMPERATURE CONTROLS INTO THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENTSYSTEM.N/AEROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES (IV.B)DESCRIBE THE TYPES OF TEMPORARY EROSION PREVENTION BMP'S EXPECTED TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCITON:1. DESCRIBE CONSTRUCTION PHASING, VEGETATIVE BUFFER STRIPS, HORIZONTAL SLOPE GRADING, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES TO MINIMIZE EROSION. DELINEATE AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED (E.G., WITH FLAGS,STAKES, SIGNS, SILT FENCE, ETC.) BEFORE WORK BEGINS.SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AT ATHE DOWNHILL LOCATIONS OF THE SITE.2. DESCRIBE METHODS OF TEMPORARILY STABILIZING SOILS AND SOIL STOCKPILES (E.G., MULCHES, HYDRAULIC TACKIFIERS, EROSION BLANKETS, ETC.):TEMPORARY EROSION PROTECTION WILL BE SEED AND MULCH AND EROSION BLANKETS WHERE REQUIRED, WITH PERMANENT COVER BEING EITHER SOD OR LANDSCAPE FEATURES.3. DESCRIBE METHODS OF DISSIPATING VELOCITY ALONG STORMWATER CONVEYANCE CHANNELS AND AT CHANNEL OUTLETS (E.G., CHECK DAMS, SEDIMENT TRAPS, RIP RAP, ETC.):SOD WILL BE UTILIZED ALONG CHANNELS AND RIP RAP AT CHANNEL.4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STABILIZATION OF DITCH AND SWALE WETTED PERIMETERS (NOTE THAT MULCH, HYDRAULIC SOIL TACKIFIERS, HYDROMULCHES, ETC. ARE NOT ACCEPTABLE SOIL STABILIZATION METHODSFOR ANY PART OF A DRAINAGE DITCH OR SWALE)FINAL STABILIZATION OF SWALES WILL BE SOD5. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR ENERGY DISSIPATION AT PIPE OUTLETS (E.G., RIP RAP, SPLASH PADS, GABIONS, ETC.)RIP RAP WILL BE UTILIZED AT PIPE OUTLETS6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO PROMOTE INFILTRATION AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL ON THE SITE PRIOR TO OFFSITE DISCHARGE, UNLESS INFEASIBLE (E.G., DIRECT STORMWATER FLOW TO VEGETATED AREAS):DISCONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA AND INFILTRATION AREAS WILL BE UTILIZED7. FOR DRAINAGE OR DIVERSION DITCHES, DESCRIBE PRACTICES TO STABILIZE THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER WITHIN 200 LINEAL FEET OF THE PROPERTY EDGE OR POINT OF DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATER. THE LAST 200LINEAL FEET MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER CONNECTING TO SURFACE WATERS AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT PORTION OF THE DITCH HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED FOR ALL DISCHARGES TOSPECIAL, IMPAIRED OR “WORK IN WATER RESTRICTIONS”. ALL OTHER REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCHES OR SWALES WITHIN 14 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER,PROPERTY EDGE AND CONSTRUCTION IN THAT AREA HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED.N/A, NO DITCHES ON SITE8. DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION MEASURES THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION (E.G., CONSTRUCTION PHASING, MINIMIZING SOIL DISTURBANCE, VEGETATIVE BUFFERS, HORIZONTALSLOPE GRADING, SLOPE DRAINING/TERRACING, ETC.):OTHER EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES INCLUDE BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO; MINIMIZING SITE EXPOSURE WHEN POSSIBLE.9. IF APPLICABLE, INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN APPENDIX A PART C.3 REGARDING MAINTAINING A 100-FOOT BUFFER ZONE OR INSTALLING REDUNDANT BMPS FOR PORTIONS OF THE SITE THAT DRAIN TO SPECIALWATERS).N/A10. IF APPLICABLE, DESCRIBE ADDITIONAL EROSION PREVENTION BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THE SITE TO PROTECT PLANNED INFILTRATION AREASMINIMIZE SITE EXPOSURE IN AREAS ADJACENT TO INFILTRATION AREAS.SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICIES (IV.C)DESCRIBE THE METHODS OF SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS TO BE IMPLEMENTED AT THIS SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION TO MINIMIZE SEDIMENT IMPACTS TO SURFACE WATERS, INCLUDING CURB AND GUTTER SYSTEMSSILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED AROUND THE ENTIRE PERIMETER OF THE SITE2. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO CONTAIN SOIL STOCKPILES:SEED AND MULCH AS WELL AS EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS WILL BE UTILIZED AS NECESSARY3. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED FOR STORM DRAIN INLET PROTECTION:SEE INLET PROTECTION DETAILS4. DESCRIBE METHODS TO MINIMIZE VEHICLE TRACKING AT CONSTRUCTION EXITS AND STREET SWEEPING ACTIVITIES:THE PROJECT WILL UTILIZE A ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE.5. DESCRIBE METHODS, IF APPLICABLE, ADDITIONAL SEDIMENT CONTROLS (E.G., DIVERSION BERMS) TO BE INSTALLED TO KEEP RUNOFF AWAY FROM PLANNED INFILTRATION AREAS WHEN EXCAVATED PRIOR TO FINALSTABILIZATION OF THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA:SILT FENCE TO BE INSTALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER GRADING TO PROTECT INFILTRATION AREAS.6. DESCRIBE METHODS TO BE USED TO MINIMIZE SOIL COMPACTION AND PRESERVE TOP SOIL (UNLESS INFEASIBLE) AT THIS SITE:LIGHT TRACKED EQUIPMENT WILL BE USED, TOPSOIL WILL BE STRIPPED AND STOCKPILED7. DESCRIBE PLANS TO PRESERVE A 50-FOOT NATURAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE PROJECT'S SOIL DISTURBANCE AND A SURFACE WATER OR PLANS FOR REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS IF A BUFFER IS INFEASIBLE:DOUBLE ROW OF SILT FENCE WILL BE INSTALLED ALONG WETLAND. PROJECT WILL NOT DISTURB WITHIN 200 FEET OF WETLAND.8. DESCRIBE PLANS FOR USE OF SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS (E.G., POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, ETC.) SEE PART IV.C.10 OF THE PERMIT:N/A9. IS THE PROJECT REQUIRED TO INSTALL A TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN DUE TO 10 OR MORE ACRES DRAINING TO A COMMON LOCATION OR 5 ACRES OR MORE IF THE SITE IS WITHIN 1 MILE OF A SPECIAL OR IMPAIRED WATER?NOIF YES, DESCRIBE (OR ATTACH PLANS ) SHOWING HOW THE BASIN WILL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.C OF THE PERMIT.N/ADEWATERING AND BASIN DRAINING (IV.D)1. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE MEASURES TO BE USED TO TREAT/DISPOSE OF TURBID OR SEDIMENT-LADEN WATER AND METHOD TO PREVENT EROSION OR SCOUR OF DISCHARGE POINTS (SEE PART IV. D OF THE PERMIT):N/A 2. WILL THE PROJECT INCLUDE USE OF FILTERS FOR BACKWASH WATER? NOIF YES, DESCRIBE HOW FILTER BACKWASH WATER WILL BE MANAGED ON THE SITE OR PROPERLY DISPOSED (SEE PART III.D.3. OF THE PERMIT):N/AADDITIONAL BMP'S FOR SPECIAL WATERS AND DISCHARGES TO WETLANDS (APPENDIX A, PARTS C AND D)1. SPECIAL WATERS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE TO SPECIAL WATERS? NO2. IF PROXIMITY TO BEDROCK OR ROAD PROJECTS WHERE THE LACK OF RIGHT OF WAY PRECLUDES THE INSTALLATION OF ANY OF THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, THEN OTHER TREATMENT SUCH ASGRASSED SWALES, SMALLER PONDS, OR GRIT CHAMBERS IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO DISCHARGE TO SURFACE WATERS. DESCRIBE WHAT OTHER TREATMENT WILL BE PROVIDED.N/A3. DESCRIBE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS FOR EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WITH A CONTINUOUS POSITIVE SLOPE TO A SPECIAL WATERS, AND TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASINS FOR AREAS THAT DRAIN FIVE OR MORE ACRESDISTURBED AT ONE TIME.N/A4. DESCRIBE THE UNDISTURBED BUFFER ZONE TO BE USED (NOT LESS THAN 100 LINEAR FEET FROM THE SPECIAL WATER).N/A5. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL ENSURE THAT THE PRE AND POST PROJECT RUNOFF RATE AND VOLUME FROM THE 1, AND 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATION EVENTS REMAINS THESAME.N/A6. DESCRIBE HOW THE PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WILL MINIMIZE ANY INCREASE IN THE TEMPERATURE OF TROUT STREAM RECEIVING WATERS RESULTING IN THE 1, AND 2-YEAR 24-HOUR PRECIPITATIONEVENTS.N/A7. WETLANDS. DOES YOUR PROJECT DISCHARGE STORMWATER WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACTS TO A WETLAND (E.G., CONVERSION OF A NATURAL WETLAND TO A STORMWATER POND)? YES OR NOIF YES, DESCRIBE THE WETLAND MITIGATION SEQUENCE THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART D OF APPENDIX A.N/AINSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE (IV.E)DESCRIBE PROCEDURES TO ROUTINELY INSPECT THE CONSTRUCTION SITE:·ONCE EVERY SEVEN (7) DAYS DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION AND·WITHIN 24 HOURS AFTER A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN 0.5 INCHES IN 24 HOURS, AND WITHIN (7) DAYS AFTER THATINSPECTIONS MUST INCLUDE STABILIZED AREAS, EROSION PREVENTION,AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S AND INFILTRATION AREAS.INSPECTOR WILL FOLLOW REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIED ABOVE AND FILL OUT "ATTACHMENT B - CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER INSPECTION CHECKLIST"1. Describe practices for storage of building products with a potential to leach pollutants to minimize exposure to stormwater:ALL BUILDING PRODUCTS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE EXPOSURE2. Describe practices for storage of pesticides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers, treatment chemical, and landscape materials:ALL LANDSCAPE TREATMENT CHEMICALS WILL BE SEALED AND STORED IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZED EXPOSURE3. Describe practices for storage and disposal of hazardous materials or toxic waste (e.g., oil, fuel, hydraulic fluids, paint solvents, petroleum-based products, wood preservative, additives, curing compounds, and acids) according to Minn. R. ch. 7045, includingrestricted access and secondary containment:ALL HAZARDOUS WASTE WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS.4. Describe collection, storage and disposal of solid waste in compliance with Minn. R. ch. 7035:ALL CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND SOLID WASTER WILL BE APPROPRIATELY DISPOSED OF OFF SITE ACCORDING TO LOCAL AND STATE LAWS5. Describe management of portable toilets to prevent tipping and disposal of sanitary wastes in accordance with Minn. R. ch. 7040:SANITARY AND SEPTIC SERVICES WILL BE PROVIDED TO WORKERS WITH PORTABLE FACILITIES MAINTAINED AS NEEDED BY THE PROVIDER.6. Describe spill prevention and response for fueling and equipment or vehicle maintenance:EMPLOYEES WILL BE TRAINED IN TECHNIQUES DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE SPILLS. VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SHALL BE CHECKED FOR LEAKS.7. Describe containment and disposal of vehicle and equipment wash water and prohibiting engine degreasing on the site:ALL CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES SHALL BE WASHED OFF SITE8. Describe storage and disposal of concrete and other washout wastes so that wastes do not contact the ground:ALL CONCRETE WASHOUT SHALL OCCUR OFF SITE.FINAL STABILIZATION (IV.G)1. DESCRIBE METHOD OF FINAL STABILIZATION (PERMANENT COVER) OF ALL DISTURBED AREAS:FINAL STABILIZATION WILL BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH PAVEMENT, SOD AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS.2. DESCRIBE PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING FINAL STABILIZATION AND TERMINATING PERMIT COVERAGE (SEE PART IV.G.1-5):UPON STABILIZATION DESCRIBED ABOVE, THE CONTRCTOR AND OWNER SHALL MUTUALLY TRANSFER THE NPDES PERMIT TO THE NEXT OWNER WITH DOCUMENTS DESCRIBING THE NATURE OF TERMINATION PROCEDURE.DOCUMENTATION OF INFEASIBILITY: (IF APPLICABLE)SOILS INFORMATIONMAP UNITSYMBOLL50AMUSKEGO AND HOUGHTONSOILS, 0 TO 1 PERCENT SLOPESMAP UNIT NAMEU1AURBAN LAND-UDORTHENTS, WETSUBSTRATUM, COMPLEX, 0 TO 2PERCENT SLOPES....U1AL50A 4931 W. 35TH ST. SUITE 200ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416CivilSiteGroup.com612-615-0060PENTAGON PARK RESIDENTIAL 4660 W 77TH ST, EDINA MN 55435 724 N 1ST ST, SUITE 500, MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 SOLHEM COMPANIES PROJECT P R E L I M I N A R Y : N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T I O NISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTION............PROJECT NUMBER:21105............04/30/2021CITY SUBMITTALDRAWN BY:REVIEWED BY:RL, MWDK..............COPYRIGHT CIVIL SITE GROUP INC.c202148776David J. KnaebleLICENSE NO.DATEI HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.04/30/21REVISION SUMMARYDATEDESCRIPTIONSW1.5SWPPP - ATTACHMENTS............ATTACHMENT B: SWPPP INSPECTION FORMATTACHMENT C: MAINTENANCE PLAN FOR PERMANENT STORM WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMNOTE: THIS INSPECTION REPORT DOES NOT ADDRESS ALL ASPECTS OF THE NATIONAL APOLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM/STATE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (NPDES/SDS) CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER PERMIT ISSUED ON AUGUST 1,2013. THE COMPLETION OF THIS CHECKLIST DOES NOT GUARANTEE THAT ALL PERMIT REQUIREMENTS ARE IN COMPLIANCE; IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PERMITTEE(S) TO READ AND UNDERSTAND THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.FACILITY INFORMATIONSITE NAME: FACILITY ADDRESS: PERMIT NUMBER:CITY: STATE: ZIP CODE:INSPECTION INFORMATIONINSPECTOR NAME: _______________________ PHONE NUMBER: _________________________DATE (MM/DD/YYYY): _____________________TIME: ____________ AM / PMIS THE INSPECTOR CERTIFIED IN SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL AND IS IT DOCUMENTED IN THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP)?IS THIS INSPECTION ROUTINE OR IN RESPONSE TO A STORM EVENT:RAINFALL AMOUNT (IF APPLICABLE): ____________IS THE SITE WITHIN ONE AERIAL MILE OF A SPECIAL OR IMPARED WATER?IF YES, FOLLOW APPENDIX A AND OTHER APPLICABLE PERMIT REQUIREMENTSNOTE: IF N/A IS SELECTED AT ANY TIME, SPECIFY WHY IN THE COMMENT AREA FOR THAT SECTION.EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.B)1.SOIL STABILIZATION WHERE NO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR 14 DAYS? (7 DAYS WHERE APPLICABLE)2.HAS THE NEED TO DISTURB STEEP SLOPES BEEN MINIMIZED?3.ALL DITCHES STABILIZED 200; BACK FROM POINT OF DISCHARGE WITHIN 24 HOURS? (NOT MULCH)4.ARE THERE BMP'S FOR ONSITE STOCKPILES?5.ARE APPROPRIATE BMP'S INSTALLED PROTECTING INLETS/OUTLETS?6.DO PIPE OUTLETS HAVE ENERGY DISSIPATION?COMMENTS:SEDIMENT CONTROL REQUIREMENT (PART IV.C)1.PERIMETER CONTROL INSTALLED ON ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETERS?2.PERIMETER CONTROL TRENCHED IN WHERE APPROPRIATE?3.50 FOOT NATURAL BUFFER MAINTAINED AROUND ALL SURFACE WATERS?3.1.IF NO, HAVE REDUNDANT SEDIMENT CONTROLS BEEN INSTALLED?4.INLET PROTECTION ON ALL CATCH BASINS AND CULVERT INLETS?5.VEHICLE TRACKING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) AT ALL SITE EXITS?6.ALL TRACKED SEDIMENT REMOVED WITHIN 24 HOURS?7.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS STAKED AND MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?8.ARE ALL INFILTRATION AREAS PROTECTED WITH A PRETREATMENT DEVICE?9.DO ALL STOCKPILES HAVE PERIMETER CONTROLS?COMMENTS:MAINTENANCE-EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S (PART IV.E.)1.ARE ALL PREVIOUSLY STABILIZED AREAS MAINTAINING 90% GROUND COVER?2.ANY DITCH EROSION OBSERVED?3.PERIMETER CONTROL--HAS SEDIMENT REACHED ONE HALF THE HEIGHT OF THE DEVICE?4.ARE INLET PROTECTION DEVICES MAINTAINED AND FUNCTIONING PROPERLY?COMMENTS:OTHER1.ARE ALL MATERIALS THAT CAN LEACH POLLUTANTS UNDER COVER?2.HAS ACCESS BEEN RESTRICTED TO ONSITE HAZARDOUS MATERIALS?3.DOES ON-SITE FUELING ONLY OCCUR IN A CONTAINED AREA?4.ARE ALL SOLID WASTES BEING PROPERLY DISPOSED OF?5.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA COMPLETELY CONTAINED?6.IS THE CONCRETE WASHOUT AREA MARKED WITH SIGN?COMMENTS:7.WERE ANY DISCHARGES SEEN DURING THIS INSPECTION, SEDIMENT, WATER, OR OTHERWISE?7.1.IF YES, STATE THE EXACT LOCATION OF ALL POINTS OF DISCHARGE. PHOTOGRAPH THE DISCHARGE AND DESCRIBE THE DISCHARGE (COLOR, ODOR, FOAM, OIL SHEEN, ETC). HOW WILL IT BE REMOVED? HOW DID THE DISCHARGEHAPPEN? HOW MUCH WAS DISCHARGED? HOW WILL IT BE STOPPED, AND HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO STOP? IS THE DISCHARGE GOING INTO AN ADJACENT SITE? WAS THE DISCHARGE A SEDIMENT DELTA? IF YES, WILL THE DELTA BERECOVERED WITHIN 7 DAYS?8.WILL A PERMANENT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM BE UTILIZED IN THIS PROJECT AS REQUIRED AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART III.D OF THE PERMIT? DESCRIBE:9.IS ANY DEWATERING OCCURRING ON SITE?9.1.IF YES, WHERE? WHAT BMP IS BEING USED? HOW MUCH WATER IS BEING DEWATERED? IS THE WATER CLEAR? WHERE IS THE WATER BEING DISCHARGED TO?10.IS A COPY OF THE SWPPP LOCATED ON THE CONSTRUCTION SITE?11.HAS THE SWPPP BEEN FOLLOWED AND IMPLEMENTED ON SITE?12.IS A SEDIMENTATION BASIN REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?12.1.IF YES, ARE THEY MAINTAINED AS SPECIFIED IN THE PERMIT?13.IS THE TOPSOIL ON THIS PROJECT BEING PRESERVED?13.1.IF YES, EXPLAIN HOW THE TOP SOIL IS BEING PRESERVED. IF NO, EXPLAIN WHY IT WAS INFEASIBLE.14.ARE ALL INFILTRATION SYSTEMS MARKED TO AVOID COMPACTION?14.1.DO ALL INFILTRATION AREAS HAVE PRETREATMENT DEVICES?15.DESCRIPTION OF AREAS OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTED DURING THE INSPECTION, REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, AND RECOMMENDED DATE OF COMPLETION OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:16.PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SWPPP:17.POTENTIAL AREAS OF FUTURE CONCERN:18.ADDITIONAL COMMENTSDISCLOSURES:·AFTER DISCOVERY, THE PERMIT REQUIRES MANY OF THE DEFICIENCIES THAT MAY BE FOUND IN THIS CHECKLIST BE CORRECTED WITHIN A SPECIFIED PERIOD OF TIME. SEE PERMIT FOR MORE DETAILS.·THIS INSPECTION CHECKLIST IS AN OPTION FOR SMALL CONSTRUCTION SITES. LARGE CONSTRUCTION SITES AND LINEAR PROJECTS REQUIRE MORE EXTENSIVE/MORE LOCATION SPECIFIC INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS.·THE PERMITTEE(S) IS/ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE OF TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT BMP'S AS WELL AS EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S UNTILANOTHER PERMITTEE HAS OBTAINED COVERAGE UNDER THIS PERMIT ACCORDING TO PART II.B.5., OR THE PROJECT HAS UNDERGONE FINAL STABILIZATION AND A NOTICE OF TERMINATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE MPCA.Y N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AY N N/AATTACHMENT C - CHAMBERFACILITY MANAGEMENT SCHEDULE1.ALL GRIT CHAMBERS, SUMP CATCH BASINS, SUMP MANHOLES, OUTLET STRUCTURES, CULVERTS, OUTFALL STRUCTURES AND OTHERSTORM WATER FACILITIES FOR WHICH MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT OTHERWISE SPECIFIED HEREIN MUST BE INSPECTED IN THESPRING, SUMMER AND FALL OF EACH YEAR. WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE INSPECTION DATE, ALL ACCUMULATED SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS MUST BEREMOVED SUCH THAT EACH STORM WATER FACILITY OPERATES AS DESIGNED AND PERMITTED. CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS MUST BEKEPT CLEAR OF LITTER AND VEGETATIVE DEBRIS, INFLOW PIPES AND OVERFLOW SPILLWAYS KEPT CLEAR, INLET AREAS KEPT CLEAN, ANDUNDESIRABLE VEGETATION REMOVED. EROSION IMPAIRING THE FUNCTION OR INTEGRITY OF THE FACILITIES, IF ANY, WILL BE CORRECTED,AND ANY STRUCTURAL DAMAGE IMPAIRING OR THREATENING TO IMPAIR THE FUNCTION OF THE FACILITIES MUST BE REPAIRED.2.VOLUME CONTROL FACILITIES AND CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREAS MUST BE INSPECTED EVERY THREE MONTHS DURING THEOPERATIONAL PERIOD (BETWEEN SPRING SNOWMELT AND FIRST SUBSTANTIAL SNOWFALL) AND MONITORED AFTER RAINFALL EVENTS OF 1INCH OR MORE TO ENSURE THAT THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS CLEAR OF LITTER AND DEBRIS, INFLOW PIPES AND OVERFLOWSPILLWAYS ARE CLEAR, INLET AREAS ARE CLEAN, UNDESIRABLE VEGETATION IS REMOVED AND THERE IS NO EROSION IMPAIRING ORTHREATENING TO IMPAIR THE FUNCTION OF A FACILITY. IF SEDIMENT HAS ACCUMULATED IN A INFILTRATION FEATURE, WITHIN 30 DAYS OFINSPECTION DEPOSITED SEDIMENTS MUST BE REMOVED, THE INFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE UNDERLYING SOILS MUST BE RESTORED,AND ANY SURFACE DISTURBANCE MUST BE STABILIZED. INSPECTION MUST ENSURE THAT SEDIMENT TRAPS AND FOREBAYS ARE TRAPPINGSEDIMENT AND THAT MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE STORAGE VOLUME REMAINS, THE CONTRIBUTING DRAINAGE AREA IS STABLE (I.E., NOEROSION IS OBSERVED), AND INLETS AND OUTLET/OVERFLOW SPILLWAYS ARE IN GOOD CONDITIONS WITH NO EROSION. MAINTENANCETECHNIQUES USED MUST PROTECT THE INFILTRATION CAPACITY OF THE PRACTICE BY LIMITING SOIL COMPACTION TO THE GREATESTEXTENT POSSIBLE (E.G., BY USING LOW-IMPACT EARTH-MOVING EQUIPMENT).3.UNDERGROUND STORAGE CHAMBERS MUST BE INSPECTED AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR TO ENSURE THAT ADEQUATE STORAGE CAPACITY REMAINS.CAPACITY WILL BE CONSIDERED INADEQUATE IF SEDIMENT HAS DECREASED THE STORAGE VOLUME BY 50 PERCENT OF ITS ORIGINAL DESIGNVOLUME. ACCUMULATED DEBRIS AND SEDIMENT WILL BE REMOVED, AND INLET AND OUTLET STRUCTURES WILL BE CLEARED OF ANY FLOWIMPEDIMENTS. 768. 0' 408. 0 ' 240. 0 ' 528. 0' 120.0' 264. 0 ' 84. 0'84. 0'180. 0'180.0'35'BUILDINGSETBACKNOPARKING1 A PAINTED SHARED BIKE LANE SPECIAL PAVING AT PLAZA FOUNDATION PLANTINGS AT ENTIRE BUILDING PERIMETER; MIX OF SHRUBS, PERENNIALS, GROUNDCOVERS COLUMNAR TREES AT BUILDING WALL COLUMNAR TREES AT BUILDING WALL SPECIAL PAVING AT ENTRY PLAZA AND IN PARKING BAYS ENHANCED PLANTINGS AT ENTRY STAIR ORNAMENTAL TREES AT DRIVE EDGE SHRUB HEDGE AT DRIVE EDGE CANOPY TREES IN GRASS BOULEVARD ENHANCED PLANTINGS AT SITE ENTRY ENHANCED PLANTINGS AT SITE ENTRY COLUMNAR TREES AT BUILDING WALL SIDEWALK WITH DRIVEABLE CRUSHED STONE SHOULDERS FOR FIRE ACCESS ACCESSIBLE WALK CONNECTION TO PARK ASPEN BOSQUE BOSQUE OF COLUMNAR TREES PICKLEBALL COURT ACCESSIBLE WALK CONNECTION TO PARK HOT TUB SUN DECK LOUNGE SEATING AREAS TERRACING DOWN HILLSIDE STORMWATER FEATURE CASCADES DOWN THROUGH ENTIRE COURTYARD AMENITY DECK WITH GRILLS, BAR, SINK, FIRE PIT, LOUNGE FURNISHINGS DOG RUN WITH 4' TALL, BLACK VINYL-COATED CHAIN LINK FENCE AND DOGIPOT WASTE STATION PUBLIC TRAIL ACCESS TO PARK TRUE NORTH PLAN NORTH G Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture Engineering B K V R O U P 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2019 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CONSULTANTS N O T F O R C O N S T R U C T IO N CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_LAND_2021.rvt4/29/2021 6:55:31 PMBH BH 2395-03 L100 OVERALL SITE/LANDSCAPE PLAN PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION 04-30-2021 SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL 1" = 20'-0"L100 1 OVERALL SITE LANDSCAPE REFERENCE PLAN PROPOSED PLANT SCHEDULE: QTY SYM COMMON NAME SCIENTIFIC NAME PLANTING SIZE PERENNIALS/VINES/ANNUALS 1 ac MAGGIE DALEY ASTILBE Astilbe chinensis 'Maggie Daley' #1 CONT. 1 ca FEATHER REED GRASS Calamagrostis arundinacea var. brachtytricha #1 CONT. 1 hb BLUE ANGEL HOSTA Hosta 'Blue Angel'#1 CONT. 1 hh HAPPY RETURNS DAYLILY Hemerocallis 'Happy Returns' #1 CONT. 1 pa HAMELN FOUNTAIN GRASS Pennisetum alopecuroides 'Hameln' #1 CONT. 1 pt PACHYSANDRA 'Green Carpet' Pachysandra terminalis 'Green Carpet' #1 CONT. 1 pv NORTHWIND SWITCHGRASS Panicum virgatum 'Northwind' #1 CONT. 1 rh WALKER'S LOW CATMINT Nepeta x faassenii 'Walker's Low' #1 CONT. 1 sh PRAIRIE DROPSEED Sporobolus heterolepis #1 CONT. 1 ss LITTLE BLUESTEM 'Blue Heaven' Schizachyrium scoparium 'Minnblue A' (PP17, 310) #1 CONT. ORNAMENTAL TREES 7 AG AUTUMN BRILLIANCE SERVICEBERRY Amelanchir x grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance' 2" CAL. 2 BP WHITESPIRE BIRCH (CLUMP) Betula populifolia 'Whitespire' 2.5" CAL. 8 CC NORTHERN CLUMP REDBUD Cercis canadensis #20 CONT. 5 SR SUMMER STORM LILAC Syringa reticulata 'Summer Storm' (PPAF) 2" CAL. DECIDUOUS TREES 8 AS GREEN MOUNTAIN SUGAR MAPLE Acer saccharum 'Green Mountain' 2.5" CAL. 7 BN RIVER BIRCH Betula nigra 2.5" CAL. 6 BP DAKOTA PINNACLE BIRCH Betula platyphylla 'Fargo' 2.5" CAL. 3 GB AUTUMN GOLD GINKGO Ginkgo Biloba 'Autumn Gold' 2.5" CAL. 8 GT SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST Gleditsia triacanthos var. inermis 'Skycole' 2.5" CAL. 6 PT PRAIRIE GOLD ASPEN Populus tremuloides 'NEArb' 2.5" CAL. 8 QA QUAKING ASPEN Populous tremuloides #20 CONT. 7 QB SWAMP WHITE OAK Quercus bicolor 2.5" CAL. 5 QW KINDRED SPIRIT OAK Quercus x warei 'Nadler' 2.5" CAL. 5 TA AMERICAN SENTRY LINDEN Tilia americana 'MnKSentry' 2.5" CAL. DECIDUOUS SHRUBS 1 Bw NORTHERN CHARM BOXWOOD Buxus 'Wilson'#3 CONT. 1 Cc SUGARTINA CLETHRA Clethra alnifolia 'Crystalina' (PP21, 561) #2 CONT. 1 Cf ARCTIC FIRE DOGWOOD Cornus stolonifera 'Farrow' (PP18,523) #5 CONT. 1 Cs CARDINAL DOGWOOD Cornus sericea 'Cardinal' #5 CONT. 1 Ds BUTTERFLY BUSH HONEYSUCKLE Diervilla sessilifolia 'Butterfly' #5 CONT. 1 Dw DWARF WINGED EUONYMOU Euonymous alatus 'Compactus' #10 CONT. 1 Ra GRO LOW SUMAC Rhus aromatica 'Gro Low' #5 CONT. 1 Sm DWARF KOREAN LILAC Syringe meyeri 'Palibin' #5 CONT. 1 Sr RED ELDERBERRY Sambucus racemosa #5 CONT. 1 Ss SEM FALSE SPIREA Sorbaria sorbifolia 'Sem'(PP16,336) #2 CONT. CONIFEROUS TREES 1 JC SPARTAN JUNIPER Juniper chinensis 'Spartan' 6' B&B 12 PA NORWAY SPRUCE Picea abies 8' B&B 7 PS WHITE PINE Pinus Strobus 6' B&B CONIFEROUS SHRUBS 1 Cp KING'S GOLD CHAMAECYPARIS Chamaecyparis pisifera 'King's gold' #5 CONT. 1 Ct HEATHERBUN CHAMAECYPARIS Chamaecyparis thyoides 'Heather Bun' #5 CONT. 1 Jh BLUE CHIP JUNIPER Juniperus horizontalis 'Blue Chip' #5 CONT. 1 Jp SEA GREEN JUNIPER Juniperus x pfitseriana 'Sea Green' #5 CONT. 1 Js BLUE FOREST JUNIPER Juniperus sabina 'Blue Forest' #5 CONT. 1 Pb SCHOODIC PINE Pinus banksiana 'Schoodic' #3 CONT. 1 Tc TECHNITO ARBORVITAE Thuja occidentalis 'Bailjohn' (PP15, 850) 6' B&B *PLANT SCHEDULE FOR SPECIES REFERENCE ONLY, FINAL QUANTITIES TO BE DETERMINED IRRIGATION NOTE: ALL PLANTING BEDS TO RECEIVE DRIPLINE IRRIGATION, ALL TURF AREAS TO RECEIVE SPRAY NOZZLES RESIDENTIAL UNITS 7TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN STAIR ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW 5TH - 6TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN3RD - 4TH LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 2ND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN1ST LEVEL FLOOR PLANP1 LEVEL FLOOR PLAN FLOOR PLANS A2-0 ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW RESIDENTIAL UNITSRESIDENTIAL UNITS STAIRSTAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STOR.STOR.STOR.STOR.STOR.STOR. M T M T M TM T M T M T M TELEVATORSELEVATORSELEVATORS RESIDENTIAL UNITS PLAZA DECK PLAZA DECK PUB GUEST SUITE COWORKLOUNGELOUNGEOPEN TO BELOW CONF. FITNESS WEIGHT ROOM FITNESS YOGA GAME ROOM PLAZA DECK GARAGE ENTRY RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS RESIDENTIAL UNITS CLUB ROOM SAUNA POOL MECH RAMP DN.RAMP DN.RAMP UPMECH STOR. M TSTAIR HALF STORY USE TBD OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW MECH RESIDENTIAL UNITS MECH TRASH LOBBY LEASE MAIL PACK.TRASH BIKE CAFE 8% RAMP MECH RAMP UPREFLECTING POOLEXT. METAL GRATE STAIR AMENITY 0 40 80 N COLORED, PATTERNED ROCK BALLASTED ROOF 388'-8"184'-0"65'- 0"65'-0"65'-0"177'-0"402'-0"AMENITY 40'-0"131'-10"65'-0"86'-10"65'-0" STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIRSTAIR ELEVATORS ELEVATOR ELEVATORS201'-8"ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATOR ELEVATORS8'-0"22'-0"OPTIONAL PARKING AREA (BASED ON FEASIBILITY) BUILDING AREA:97,581 SF MEP STORAGE:950 SF TRASH/LOADING:969 SF AMENITY:1,786 SF LOBBY/LEASING:1,749 SF GROSS RES. AREA:12,222 SF CIRCULATION:1,155 SF NET RES. AREA:11,067 SF UNIT COUNT:16 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:79,905 SF 190-240 SPACES BASEMENT TOTAL PARKING: BUILDING AREA:92,387 SF MEP STORAGE:967 SF TRASH/LOADING:169 SF AMENITY:654 SF GROSS RES. AREA:24,842 SF CIRCULATION:2,113 SF NET RES. AREA:22,729 SF UNIT COUNT:32 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:65,755 SF 193 SPACESTOTAL PARKING: GROUND LEVEL BUILDING AREA:87,713 SF MEP STORAGE:1,174 SF TRASH/LOADING:162 SF AMENITY:12,966 SF GROSS RES. AREA:43,899 SF CIRCULATION:8,550 SF NET RES. AREA:35,349 SF UNIT COUNT:50 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:29,512 SF 87 SPACES LEVEL 2 TOTAL PARKING: BUILDING AREA:67,577 SF MEP STORAGE:816 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF GROSS RES. AREA:66,579 SF CIRCULATION:6,810 SF NET RES. AREA:59,769 SF UNIT COUNT:84 UNITS LEVELS 3-4 BUILDING AREA:39,144 SF MEP STORAGE:828 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF GROSS RES. AREA:38,134 SF CIRCULATION:3,847 SF NET RES. AREA:34,287 SF UNIT COUNT:48 UNITS LEVELS 5-6 BUILDING AREA:39,144 SF MEP STORAGE:828 SF TRASH/LOADING:182 SF AMENITY:733 SF GROSS RES. AREA:37,401 SF CIRCULATION:4,065 SF NET RES. AREA:33,336 SF UNIT COUNT:46 UNITS LEVEL 7 SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A3-0 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (825.2 ELEV)P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) ROOF 85'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.0 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.0 ELEV) 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (825.2 ELEV) ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES 1. P1 ELEVATION AT 823.0 BASED ON LOWEST ALLOWED ELEVATION PER FLOOD PLANE ELEVATION 2. LOWEST ALLOWED OPENINGS ON BUILDING TO BE AT 825.2 ELEVATION PER FLOOD PLANE ELEVATION 3. MAX BUILDING HEIGHT OF 85' BASED ON AVERAGE GRADE PLANE OF 829 4. COLORED ELEVATION SKIN KEYED BELOW - SEE ELEVATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES ELEVATION EXTERIOR SKIN KEY FACE BRICK PATTERNED PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL (NOTED ON ELEVS AT GARAGE AREAS ONLY) UTILITY FACE BRICK FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING VERTICAL METAL PANEL WALL MOUNTED BUILDING SIGNAGE TO BE SUBMITTED FOR PERMITTING BY LICENSED SIGN CONTRACTOR - SEE ELEVATIONS FOR POTENTIAL LOCATIONS - SIZE AND QUANTITY TBD PER ZONING CODE FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) FIBER CEMENT PANEL FACE BRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING PREFIN. ALUMINUM DECKS TYP. FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ ACCENT TRIM BANDING FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL 7TH FLOOR 74'-8" 6TH FLOOR 64'-0" 5TH FLOOR 53'-4" 4TH FLOOR 42'-8" 3RD FLOOR 32'-0" 2ND FLOOR 21'-4" 1ST FLOOR 10'-8" P1 FLOOR 0'-0" (823.00 ELEV) VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) FIBER CEMENT PANEL VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL FACE BRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING PREFIN. ALUMINUM DECKS TYP. INSULATED O.H. GARAGE DOOR FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL ELEVATOR OVERRUN ROOF PATIO ACCESS FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ TRIM ACCENT TRELLIS VERTICAL METAL PANEL FACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) PORTE COCHERE FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING COURTYARD ELEVATION (EAST FACING) NORTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION COURTYARD ELEVATION (WEST FACING) SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATIONTRELLIS & PERGOLA PORTE COCHERE POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATIONS POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATIONS POTENTIAL SIGNAGE LOCATION ENLARGED SIGNAGE ELEVATION ELEVATOR OVERRUN ROOF PATIO ACCESS FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDINGFACEBRICK PATTERNED PRECAST PANEL VERTICAL METAL PANEL FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING W/ TRIM ACCENT FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL FIBER CEMENT PANEL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING FIBER CEMENT TRIM BAY VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL VINYL WINDOWS TYPICAL (FIXED AND AWNING) VINYL SLIDING PATIO DOORS TYPICAL FACEBRICK W/ ACCENT BRICK BANDING TRELLIS & PERGOLA FIBER CEMENT PANEL SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500 Minneapolis, MN 55401 UTILITY BRICK VENEER FIBER CEMENT PANEL SIDING VERTICAL METAL PANEL VINYL WINDOW FIBER CEMENT LAP SIDING PRECAST PANEL BRICK PATTERN * VARIED COLOR EXPOSURE HUNG ALUMINUM BALCONY FIXED AWNING * TO MATCH UTILITY BRICK VENEER VINYL SLIDING DOOR Architecture Interior Design Landscape Architecture Engineering 222 North Second Street Long & Kees Bldg Suite 101 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CERTIFICATION BIM 360://2395-03 Pentagon Park/2395-03 Pentagon Park_DESIGN_2021.rvt4/26/2021 10:39:35 AMAuthor Checker 2395-03 EX-1 EXTERIOR MATERIALS PENTAGON PARK APARTMENTS ISSUE # DATE DESCRIPTION SOLHEM COMPANIES724 N 1st Street, Suite 500Minneapolis, MN 55401 A3-1 City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 1 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire The City of Edina has set ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the community. To help achieve these goals, developers seeking City approval must complete this form as part of their their zoning application. Upon receipt of this form, please email Sustainability Coordinator, Grace Hancock, GHancock@edinamn.gov, to set up a time to walk through the form and discuss sustainable building strategies. Please email the completed form to Cary Teague, CTeague@edinamn.gov, and copy Grace Hancock. Topics Answers Yes or No Brief Description Sustainable Design & Energy Consumption Will you utilize Xcel Energy’s Energy Design Assistance and/or Centerpoint Energy’s Builder and Developer programs for this development? Yes We have used this program on almost all of our projects and have achieved substantial savings beyond code on recent developments. Will the buildings meet SB2030 energy goals? Yes The building is expected to perform beyond code. Actual energy use will be determined through the EDA process mentioned above. Sustainable design is a key value we incorporate into all buildings that we build. Past residential projects have met LEED Gold Multifamily standards and we will use similar design principles for this project. Will the building be LEED certified? No However, the building will follow Gold LEED guidelines for multifamily housing. Will all appliances and equipment be Energy Star or EPA WaterSense certified? Yes All appliances that can be Energy Star cerified will be. Will different strategies to conserve energy (beyond those required by code) be included? If so, please describe Yes We will be assessing multiple strategies such as high efficiency HVAC equipment, water efficient fixtures, extra insulation, use of fans for ambient cooling, lighting control sytems, low-E argon filled windows, and LED lighting systems. Will there be renewable energy such as solar or wind be generated on site? Yes/No However, we will be planning portions of the main roof to be solar ready where feasible, and incorporating plantings and green roof elements within the center courtyard plaza and our City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 2 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire planned rooftop patio. Our windows will be maximized for solar thermal gain in winter months. Will the project include a geothermal system? No Not planned Will the completed project subscribe to a community solar program or other renewable energy program? No Not planned; however Solhem’s sister company Renew22 invests directly in solar gardens in MN to offset ALL electrical demand generated by this project. Will there be purchase of renewable energy credits (RECs)? No Not planned; however Solhem’s sister company Renew22 invests directly in solar gardens in MN to offset ALL electrical demand generated by this project. Comments: Managing Storm Water What percent of the property is pervious surface before the redevelopment? What is the percent post development? Yes 82% Existing Pervious Surface. The proposed new development will more than double the Pervious Surface area. What new surfaces will be pervious? (i.e. Sidewalks, driveways, overflow parking) TBD We are reviewing options for possible incorporation. Will a green roof be included on the new structure to assist in storm water retention? Yes Green roof elements within the center courtyard plaza and our planned rooftop patio. Will rain gardens or similar features be included on site to filter and retain the storm water? Yes This is a core principle of development for our buildings that also serves to enhance a healthy environment for humans. The exact percentage of landscape elements have not been determined at this time. Comments: Landscaping Features to Manage Air Quality and Heat Island Effect Will existing healthy trees be protected and saved? Yes We will preserve as many healthy trees as possible. What percent of the property is covered by tree canopy before redevelopment? What is the percent post development? The existing site has approximately 8% of tree canopy. The long term goal post developmet is 35% tree canopy. Will you be replanting/replacing trees at least four to five inches in diameter to positively impact the tree canopy (ordinance requirement is only 2.5 inches in diameter)? Yes Best planting practices for trees will be followed to insure a vibrant and healthy landscape. In our landscape design we aim City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 3 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire to protect as many mature trees on the site as possible and add bio-diversity and climate hardiness with tree selections. Will shade trees be provided along roadways, drives and surface parking areas beyond those required by code? Yes Almost all of our required parking is within a structured garage. We will meet the code for the few exterior spaces. Will native plantings be used in the landscaping? Yes The landscaping will have extensive use of climate hardy native plants and trees. Will landscaping include pollinator-friendly varieties? Yes We will use pollinator friendly plantings wherever possible. Will future owners and managers be trained in methods to avoid harmful chemicals being used on landscaping? Yes The goal is to eliminate the need for pesticides and other in landscaping. Comments: Managing Construction Waste Will demolition of existing structures meet LEED Green Building Demolition and/or B3 State of Minnesota Sustainable Building Guidelines? TBD To be determined pending an environmental analysis of the existing structures. Will existing building elements be salvaged for reuse? Example, timber, steel, asphalt, cabinets, etc. TBD Significant reuse and recycling has already occurred in the existing buildings. Further recycling to be determined pending an environmental analysis of the existing structures. As much material as possible will be recycled. Are scrap and excess construction materials being separated and recycled? Yes We will work with the General Contractor for execution. Are workers provided with separate recycling dumpsters and training in proper use? Yes We will work with the General Contractor for execution. Comments: Managing Operational Waste Will a recycling service be provided to those in the multifamily complex? To any businesses on site? Yes Recycling chutes are being provided on each floor. Will an organic recycling service be provided to those in the multifamily complex? To all businesses on site? Yes Organics recycling will be provided and encouraged. Will future users of the building be provided with education and training regarding proper recycling practices? Yes The owner has an active resident training agenda including manual that helps educate future tenants. Comments: Managing Water Consumption City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 4 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire Is the project including features to reduce water consumption beyond features required by code? Yes We will be using low flow plumbing fixtures and native plants to reduce irrigation. Is there a grey water system included to reuse water on site? Will future users of the building be provided with education and training regarding conservation of water? TBD This is something that is being strongly considered in capturing run off from the roof areas. Will outdoor landscaping watering system include a water sensor to automatically reduce watering in wet conditions? Yes Comments: Sustainable Transportation Features Is the site accessible by public transit within ½ mile? Yes There are bus routes along W.77th Street. Are site features included to make the use of public transit convenient and simple? Examples include sheltered waiting areas, paved sidewalks and clear site lines. Yes The project plans on sidewalks along W. 77th as well as waiting areas for riders. If there is no public transit within ½ mile, is the project providing features to help bridge the distance to allow flexibility to use public transit? NA Is bike Parking available near the main entrance for guests? Space in parking structure (e.g. bike corral, bike lockers) for residents’ bikes? Yes There will be several guest bike parking spots at various points on the site in addition to bike parking for each unit, with bike paths woven throughout the site landscaping that connect to the Nine Mile Creek Trail. We are aiming for a ratio of one bike stall per bedroom. Is bike parking and a shower facility provided for employees? Yes There is a planned a bike lounge for use by both employees and residents. Do you have EV Charging Stations for owners, guests or customers to use? Yes A substantial amount of EV garage parking stalls will be provided, and the electrical service will be set up to easily allow expansion as more of the vehicles in the garage convert to electric. We typically install about 5% of stalls with EV charging on new construction buildings Will there be parking spaces provided for car- sharing vehicles to reduce the overall number of cars? TBD To be determined. City of Edina – New Construction Sustainability Questionnaire Page 5 4660 West 77th Development Questionnaire Updated January 2021 File #227702810 May 20, 2021 Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 1800 Pioneer Creek Center Maple Plain, MN 55359 Phone: 7963-479-4200 Fax: 763-479-4242 Prepared for: City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Traffic and Parking Study for 4660 77th Street W in Edina, MN May 2021 i Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... I 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... 1-1 2.0 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND ........................................................... 2-1 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS .................................................................... 3-1 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTS ........................................................................ 4-1 5.0 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 5-1 6.0 PARKING ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 6-1 7.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................... 7-1 8.0 APPENDIX ........................................................................................ 8-1 FIGURES FIGURE 1 PROJECT LOCATION .................................................................. 2-2 FIGURE 2 SITE PLAN ................................................................................ 2-3 FIGURE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................. 3-3 FIGURE 4 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES ................................................ 4-3 FIGURE 5 WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR LOS RESULTS .......................................... 5-4 I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. __________________________________ DATE: May 20, 2021 Edward F. Terhaar License No. 24441 May 2021 1-1 1.0 Executive Summary The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed new residential building located at 4660 77th Street W. in Edina, MN. The project site is located on the north side of 77th Street east of Computer Drive. The proposed project location is currently occupied by an office building and parking lot. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street W./Computer Avenue • 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp • Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp • 77th Street W./development access The proposed project will involve removal of the existing building and constructing a new apartment building with 408 dwelling units. The project is expected to include between 470 and 520 parking stalls. As shown in the site plan, two access points are provided on 77th Street W. The project is expected to be completed in 2023. The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 21 net trips during the a.m. peak hour, 55 net trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 1,163 net trips daily. Net trips account for new trips generated by the development and trips eliminated by removal of the existing office space. • The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Due to the volume of traffic on 77th Street, left turns out of the development access are expected to operate at LOS E during the peak hours. During other times of the day the exiting movements will experience lower delays. • Traffic volume data collected for previous studies in this area was used at all intersections to avoid traffic volume reductions that have occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacts. This process resulted in reasonable estimates for the weekday peak hours that would occur under non-pandemic conditions. • Future plans for this area include a new primary sidewalk on 77th Street. Future plans for this area also include a conventional bike lane on 77th Street. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is encouraged to provide bicycle parking spaces to promote bicycle use by residents. Long-term spaces for residents within the building and May 2021 1-2 outside racks for short-term parking are recommended. The provision of a bicycle maintenance station will also help encourage bicycle use by residents. • The proposed 470 to 520 parking spaces are 14 to 64 spaces less than the expected peak parking demand based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data. Edina City code requires 1.75 parking spaces per unit, with 1.0 spaces per unit enclosed. This equates to 714 total spaces, with 408 enclosed spaces. • The project owner is encouraged to implement Travel Demand Management strategies for this site with the goal of reducing vehicular trips during peak hours and reducing carbon emissions from vehicles. Potential strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes, bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing charging stations for electric vehicles in the resident parking areas. o Providing long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces for apartment residents. o Offering a pre-paid Metro Transit Go-To Card to all new residents. May 2021 2-1 2.0 Purpose and Background The purpose of this Traffic and Parking Study is to evaluate the impacts of the proposed new residential building located at 4660 77th Street W. in Edina, MN. The project site is located on the north side of 77th Street east of Computer Drive. The proposed project location is currently occupied by an office building and parking lot. The project location is shown in Figure 1. This study examined weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic impacts of the proposed development at the following intersections: • 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street W./Computer Avenue • 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp • Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp • 77th Street W./development access Proposed Development Characteristics The proposed project will involve removal of the existing building and constructing a new apartment building with 408 dwelling units. The project is expected to include between 470 and 520 parking stalls. As shown in the site plan, two access points are provided on 77th Street W. The project is expected to be completed in 2023. The current site plan is shown in Figure 2. May 2021 2-2 May 2021 2-3 May 2021 3-1 3.0 Existing Conditions The proposed site is currently occupied by an office building with 108,528 square feet of office space. The site is bounded by 77th Street on the south, office uses on the east and west, and Fred Richards park on the north. Near the site location, 77th Street is a five-lane roadway with a center left turn lane. Computer Avenue and Parklawn Avenue are two-lane roadways. To the west of the site, 77th Street intersects with TH 100 at a full grade separated interchange. The speed limit on all local streets in the study area is 30 miles per hour. Existing conditions at the proposed project location are shown in Figure 3 and described below. 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides two left turn lanes and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn/through lane and two right turn lanes. The northbound approach provides one left turn/through/right turn lane. The south leg provides access a commercial use on the south side of 77th Street. 77th Street W./Computer Avenue This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, one left turn/through lane, and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides one left turn/through/right turn lane. The north leg provides access to an office use on the north side of 77th Street. 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides on left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one right turn lane. The northbound approach provides two left turn lanes and one through/right turn lane. The southbound approach provides two left turn lanes, one through lane, and one channelized right turn lane. Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp This four-way intersection is controlled with a traffic signal. The eastbound approach provides on left turn lane, one through lane, and one through/right turn lane. The westbound approach provides one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one channelized right turn lane. The northbound approach provides one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane. The southbound approach provides two left turn lanes, one through lane, and one right turn lane. May 2021 3-2 Traffic Volume Data Existing turn movement data previously collected for other studies in the area was obtained from City staff for the following intersections: • 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue • 77th Street W./Computer Avenue • 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp • Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp May 2021 3-3 May 2021 4-1 4.0 Traffic Forecasts Traffic Forecast Scenarios To adequately address the impacts of the proposed project, forecasts and analyses were completed for the year 2024. Specifically, weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic forecasts were completed for the following scenarios: • 2021 Existing. Existing volumes were determined through traffic counts at the subject intersections. The existing volume information includes trips generated by the uses near the project site. • 2024 No-Build. Existing volumes at the subject intersections were increased by 1.0 percent per year to determine 2024 No-Build volumes. The 1.0 percent per year growth rate was calculated based on both recent growth experienced near the site and projected growth due to additional development in the area. • 2024 Build. Trips generated by the proposed development were added to the 2024 No-Build volumes to determine 2024 Build volumes. Estimation of Existing Volumes Due to COVID-19 Impacts The impacts of COVID-19 have resulted in significant reductions in traffic volumes due to changes in work and travel habits. Traffic volume data collected for studies completed prior to the pandemic were used for the traffic forecasts presented in this report. Trip Generation for Proposed Project Weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour trip generation for the proposed development were calculated based on data presented in the tenth edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The resultant trip generation estimates are shown in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Trip Generation for Proposed Project and Existing Uses Land Use Size Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Weekday Daily In Out Total In Out Total Total Proposed use Apartments 408 DU 38 109 147 110 70 180 2220 Existing use to be removed Office 108,528 SF 108 18 126 20 105 125 1057 Total net trips -70 +91 +21 +90 -35 +55 +1163 DU=dwelling unit, SF=square feet As shown, the project adds 21 net trips during the a.m. peak hour, 55 net trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 1,163 net trips daily. May 2021 4-2 Trip Distribution Percentages Trip distribution percentages for the subject development trips were established based on the nearby roadway network, existing and expected future traffic patterns, and location of the subject development in relation to major attractions and population concentrations. The distribution percentages for trips generated by the proposed development are as follows: • 25 percent to/from the north on TH 100 • 25 percent to/from the south on TH 100 • 25 percent to/from the west on Edina Industrial Boulevard • 2 percent to/from the south on Computer Avenue • 11 percent to/from the north on Parklawn Avenue • 12 percent to/from the east on 77th Street Traffic Volumes Development trips were assigned to the surrounding roadway network using the preceding trip distribution percentages. Traffic volumes were established for all the forecasting scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The resultant traffic volumes are presented in Figure 4. May 2021 4-3 May 2021 5-1 5.0 Traffic Analysis Intersection Level of Service Analysis Traffic analyses were completed for the subject intersections for all scenarios described earlier during the weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours using Synchro software. Initial analysis was completed using existing geometrics and intersection control. Capacity analysis results are presented in terms of level of service (LOS), which is defined in terms of traffic delay at the intersection. LOS ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The following is a detailed description of the conditions described by each LOS designation: • Level of service A corresponds to a free flow condition with motorists virtually unaffected by the intersection control mechanism. For a signalized or an unsignalized intersection, the average delay per vehicle would be approximately 10 seconds or less. • Level of service B represents stable flow with a high degree of freedom, but with some influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. For a signalized intersection, the average delay ranges from 10 to 20 seconds. An unsignalized intersection would have delays ranging from 10 to 15 seconds for this level. • Level of service C depicts a restricted flow which remains stable, but with significant influence from the intersection control device and the traffic volumes. The general level of comfort and convenience changes noticeably at this level. The delay ranges from 20 to 35 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 15 to 25 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service D corresponds to high-density flow in which speed and freedom are significantly restricted. Though traffic flow remains stable, reductions in comfort and convenience are experienced. The control delay for this level is 35 to 55 seconds for a signalized intersection and 25 to 35 seconds for an unsignalized intersection. • Level of service E represents unstable flow of traffic at or near the capacity of the intersection with poor levels of comfort and convenience. The delay ranges from 55 to 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and from 35 to 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection at this level. • Level of service F represents forced flow in which the volume of traffic approaching the intersection exceeds the volume that can be served. Characteristics often experienced include long queues, stop-and-go waves, poor travel times, low comfort and convenience, and increased accident exposure. Delays over 80 seconds for a signalized intersection and over 50 seconds for an unsignalized intersection correspond to this level of service. May 2021 5-2 The LOS results for the study intersections are shown in Figure 5 and are discussed below. 77th Street W./Parklawn Avenue (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements at LOS B or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. 77th Street W./Computer Avenue (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. 77th Street W./TH 100 NB ramp (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS B for all scenarios. Edina Industrial Blvd/TH 100 SB ramp (traffic signal control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS C or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS D or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS C for all scenarios. 77th Street W./development access (minor street stop control) During the a.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. During the p.m. peak hour under 2021, 2024 No-Build, and 2024 Build conditions, all movements operate at LOS E or better. The overall intersection operates at LOS A for all scenarios. May 2021 5-3 Overall Traffic Impact The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. Due to the volume of traffic on 77th Street, left turns out of the development access are expected to operate at LOS E during the peak hours. During other times of the day the exiting movements will experience lower delays. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Under existing conditions, sidewalk is provided on the south side of 77th Street, the west side of Parklawn Avenue, and the west side of Computer Avenue. The Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail is located immediately north of the project site. All intersections in the study have crosswalks across all or a portion of the approaches. Bicycles are allowed on all the surrounding streets. Future plans for this area include a new primary sidewalk on 77th Street. Future plans for this area also include a conventional bike lane on 77th Street. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. The project owner is encouraged to provide bicycle parking spaces to promote bicycle use by residents. Long-term spaces for residents within the building and outside racks for short-term parking are recommended. The provision of a bicycle maintenance station will also help encourage bicycle use by residents. Transit Facilities The subject site presently is served by the Metro Transit bus routes 6 and 540. Bus stops exist on 77th Street at the development access. Potential Travel Demand Management Measures The project owner is encouraged to implement Travel Demand Management strategies for this site with the goal of reducing vehicular trips during peak hours and reducing carbon emissions from vehicles. Potential strategies for this site include: • Providing maps that show the area bus routes, light rail and bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. • Providing charging stations for electric vehicles in the resident parking areas. • Providing long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces for apartment residents. • Offering a pre-paid Metro Transit Go-To Card to all new residents. May 2021 5-4 May 2021 6-1 6.0 Parking Analysis As described earlier, is expected to include between 470 and 520 parking stalls. The proposed amount of parking was compared to industry standards to determine adequacy. Parking data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was used to determine the expected parking demand for the proposed land uses. Data provided in the ITE publication Parking Generation, 5th Edition, indicates the various proposed uses peak at different times during the day. The ITE data was adjusted to account for the expected modal split for the site. Based on the ITE data, the peak weekday parking demand for the overall site 534 spaces. The 470 to 520 spaces are 14 to 64 spaces less than the expected peak parking demand. Edina City code requires 1.75 parking spaces per unit, with 1.0 spaces per unit enclosed. This equates to 714 total spaces, with 408 enclosed spaces. May 2021 7-1 7.0 Conclusions and Recommendations The conclusions drawn from the information and analyses presented in this report are as follows: • The proposed development is expected to add 21 net trips during the a.m. peak hour, 55 net trips during the p.m. peak hour, and 1,163 net trips daily. Net trips account for new trips generated by the development and trips eliminated by removal of the existing office space. • The net trips added to the roadway system by the proposed development are expected to have minimal impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street system. No improvements are needed at the subject intersections to accommodate the proposed project. • Due to the volume of traffic on 77th Street, left turns out of the development access are expected to operate at LOS E during the peak hours. During other times of the day the exiting movements will experience lower delays. • Traffic volume data collected for previous studies in this area was used at all intersections to avoid traffic volume reductions that have occurred due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacts. This process resulted in reasonable estimates for the weekday peak hours that would occur under non-pandemic conditions. • Future plans for this area include a new primary sidewalk on 77th Street. Future plans for this area also include a conventional bike lane on 77th Street. The proposed project will benefit from the existing and proposed sidewalk and bicycle facilities in this area. • The project owner is encouraged to provide bicycle parking spaces to promote bicycle use by residents. Long-term spaces for residents within the building and outside racks for short-term parking are recommended. The provision of a bicycle maintenance station will also help encourage bicycle use by residents. • The proposed 470 to 520 parking spaces are 14 to 64 spaces less than the expected peak parking demand based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data. Edina City code requires 1.75 parking spaces per unit, with 1.0 spaces per unit enclosed. This equates to 714 total spaces, with 408 enclosed spaces. • The project owner is encouraged to implement Travel Demand Management strategies for this site with the goal of reducing vehicular trips during peak hours and reducing carbon emissions from vehicles. Potential strategies for this site include: o Providing maps that show the area bus routes, bus schedules, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. o Providing information on starting and joining commuter programs. o Providing charging stations for electric vehicles in the resident parking areas. o Providing long-term and short-term bicycle parking spaces for apartment residents. o Offering a pre-paid Metro Transit Go-To Card to all new residents. May 2021 8-1 8.0 Appendix • Level of Service Worksheets HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 97 555 18 63 480 57 30 28 218 650 75 337 Future Volume (veh/h) 97 555 18 63 480 57 30 28 218 650 75 337 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 102 584 19 66 505 0 32 29 229 684 79 355 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 492 1502 49 442 1480 411 700 593 952 700 593 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.43 0.39 0.06 0.42 0.00 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3512 114 1781 3647 0 954 1870 1585 2176 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 102 295 308 66 505 0 32 29 229 684 79 355 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 0 954 1870 1585 1088 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 10.3 10.3 1.8 8.7 0.0 2.0 0.9 9.5 26.2 2.5 16.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 10.3 10.3 1.8 8.7 0.0 4.5 0.9 9.5 27.1 2.5 16.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 492 760 791 442 1480 411 700 593 952 700 593 V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.39 0.39 0.15 0.34 0.08 0.04 0.39 0.72 0.11 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 514 760 791 465 1480 488 852 722 1130 852 722 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.3 17.7 17.8 13.6 17.9 0.0 19.9 17.9 20.6 26.5 18.4 22.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.5 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.3 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.1 4.4 4.6 0.7 3.5 0.0 0.4 0.4 3.4 6.7 1.1 5.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.4 19.2 19.2 13.7 18.0 0.0 19.9 17.9 20.8 27.8 18.4 23.1 LnGrp LOS B B B B B B B C C B C Approach Vol, veh/h 705 571 A 290 1118 Approach Delay, s/veh 18.3 17.5 20.4 25.7 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.8 42.5 37.7 10.8 41.5 37.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 27.0 39.0 6.0 26.0 39.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.8 12.3 29.1 4.8 10.7 11.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.2 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.4 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 173 1173 187 5 246 83 42 30 10 120 43 319 Future Volume (veh/h) 173 1173 187 5 246 83 42 30 10 120 43 319 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 182 1235 197 5 259 87 44 32 11 126 45 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 885 2073 329 469 2398 1070 404 152 52 404 213 Arrive On Green 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.67 0.67 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.11 0.11 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3072 487 1781 3554 1585 2640 1331 457 2645 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 182 711 721 5 259 87 44 0 43 126 45 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1783 1781 1777 1585 1320 0 1788 1323 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.3 1.7 1.4 0.0 2.0 4.1 2.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.3 1.7 3.3 0.0 2.0 6.1 2.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.26 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 885 1199 1203 469 2398 1070 404 0 204 404 213 V/C Ratio(X) 0.21 0.59 0.60 0.01 0.11 0.08 0.11 0.00 0.21 0.31 0.21 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 885 1199 1203 469 2398 1070 689 0 397 690 416 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 5.1 5.0 37.7 0.0 36.4 38.9 36.2 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.9 1.3 0.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 3.1 1.8 1.8 2.9 5.1 5.0 37.8 0.0 36.6 39.1 36.4 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A D A D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1614 351 87 171 A Approach Delay, s/veh 1.9 5.1 37.2 38.4 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 64.7 14.3 11.0 64.7 14.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 48.5 18.0 5.0 48.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 2.0 8.1 4.7 4.3 5.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.7 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.6 HCM 6th LOS A Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 55 968 109 63 480 57 30 28 218 1 0 1 Future Volume (veh/h) 55 968 109 63 480 57 30 28 218 1 0 1 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 58 1019 115 66 505 60 30 31 229 1 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 545 1363 586 387 1227 145 504 613 519 268 0 240 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 3200 379 1781 1870 1585 1119 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 58 1019 115 66 280 285 30 31 229 1 0 1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1802 1781 1870 1585 1120 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.2 18.0 3.6 1.4 8.4 8.5 0.9 0.8 8.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.2 18.0 3.6 1.4 8.4 8.5 0.9 0.8 8.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 545 1363 586 387 681 691 504 613 519 268 0 240 V/C Ratio(X) 0.11 0.75 0.20 0.17 0.41 0.41 0.06 0.05 0.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 668 1662 720 424 746 756 704 862 730 292 0 273 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.6 19.4 15.6 11.7 16.4 16.5 18.9 16.7 19.2 26.2 0.0 26.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.9 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 7.2 1.3 0.5 3.3 3.4 0.4 0.3 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.7 21.2 15.8 11.8 17.0 17.1 18.9 16.7 19.8 26.2 0.0 26.2 LnGrp LOS A C B B B B B B B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1192 631 290 2 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.1 16.5 19.4 26.2 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 31.9 27.8 13.0 31.9 12.8 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 20.0 10.3 3.2 10.5 2.9 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.9 1.1 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.0 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 am.syn Synchro 10 Report Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 348 476 1 0 140 30 0 0 0 22 1 280 Future Volume (veh/h) 348 476 1 0 140 30 0 0 0 22 1 280 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 366 501 1 0 147 32 0 0 0 23 0 296 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 964 1128 2 4 780 166 0 348 0 499 0 591 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.60 0.59 0.00 0.27 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1866 4 1781 2916 619 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 366 0 502 0 88 91 0 0 0 23 0 296 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 0 1870 1781 1777 1759 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.7 0.0 6.2 0.0 1.6 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.7 0.0 6.2 0.0 1.6 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 964 0 1130 4 475 470 0 348 0 499 0 591 V/C Ratio(X) 0.38 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.19 0.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.50 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1567 0 2043 331 1487 1472 0 1000 0 1120 0 1695 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.5 0.0 4.6 0.0 12.1 12.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.8 0.0 5.0 0.0 12.4 12.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 0.0 16.4 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 868 179 0 319 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.3 12.5 0.0 16.2 Approach LOS A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.0 12.0 15.5 15.5 12.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 7.5 * 47 22.0 17.5 34.5 22.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.2 5.6 5.7 3.7 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.0 1.4 1.7 0.9 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.7 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 588 19 65 508 73 31 29 225 686 77 347 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 588 19 65 508 73 31 29 225 686 77 347 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 105 619 20 68 535 0 33 31 237 722 81 365 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 461 1432 46 411 1405 425 735 623 985 735 623 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.41 0.37 0.07 0.40 0.00 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3513 113 1781 3647 0 944 1870 1585 2156 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 105 313 326 68 535 0 33 31 237 722 81 365 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 0 944 1870 1585 1078 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 11.4 11.4 2.0 9.6 0.0 2.1 0.9 9.6 28.0 2.5 16.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 11.4 11.4 2.0 9.6 0.0 4.5 0.9 9.6 28.9 2.5 16.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 461 724 754 411 1405 425 735 623 985 735 623 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.43 0.43 0.17 0.38 0.08 0.04 0.38 0.73 0.11 0.59 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 499 724 754 431 1405 484 852 722 1120 852 722 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.4 19.2 19.3 14.8 19.4 0.0 18.8 16.9 19.5 25.8 17.3 21.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.9 1.8 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 4.9 5.1 0.8 3.9 0.0 0.4 0.4 3.4 7.0 1.0 5.9 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.5 21.0 21.1 14.8 19.5 0.0 18.8 16.9 19.6 27.5 17.4 21.9 LnGrp LOS B C C B B B B B C B C Approach Vol, veh/h 744 603 A 301 1168 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.1 19.0 19.3 25.1 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 40.7 39.4 11.1 39.6 39.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 27.0 39.0 7.0 25.0 39.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.0 13.4 30.9 5.0 11.6 11.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.3 2.5 0.0 2.1 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.8 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 178 1241 193 5 280 99 43 31 10 140 44 329 Future Volume (veh/h) 178 1241 193 5 280 99 43 31 10 140 44 329 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 187 1306 203 5 295 104 45 33 11 147 46 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 840 2057 317 448 2369 1057 424 164 55 425 229 Arrive On Green 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.67 0.67 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3086 476 1781 3554 1585 2638 1342 447 2643 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 187 748 761 5 295 104 45 0 44 147 46 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1785 1781 1777 1585 1319 0 1790 1321 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7 2.1 1.4 0.0 2.0 4.8 2.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7 2.1 3.4 0.0 2.0 6.8 2.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 840 1184 1190 448 2369 1057 424 0 219 425 229 V/C Ratio(X) 0.22 0.63 0.64 0.01 0.12 0.10 0.11 0.00 0.20 0.35 0.20 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 840 1184 1190 448 2369 1057 688 0 398 689 416 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.2 0.0 0.0 3.1 5.5 5.4 37.1 0.0 35.8 38.6 35.5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 2.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.9 1.5 0.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 3.3 2.1 2.1 3.1 5.5 5.4 37.1 0.0 35.9 38.8 35.7 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A D A D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1696 404 89 193 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.2 5.4 36.5 38.0 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 64.0 15.0 11.0 64.0 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 48.5 18.0 5.0 48.5 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 2.0 8.8 4.9 4.7 5.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.9 HCM 6th LOS A Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 57 1009 112 65 510 59 31 29 225 1 0 1 Future Volume (veh/h) 57 1009 112 65 510 59 31 29 225 1 0 1 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 1062 118 68 537 62 32 32 237 1 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 532 1386 597 375 1252 144 504 611 518 262 0 235 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.39 0.38 0.12 0.39 0.38 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 3211 370 1781 1870 1585 1110 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 1062 118 68 296 303 32 32 237 1 0 1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1804 1781 1870 1585 1110 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.3 19.3 3.7 1.4 9.1 9.1 1.0 0.9 8.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.3 19.3 3.7 1.4 9.1 9.1 1.0 0.9 8.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 532 1386 597 375 693 703 504 611 518 262 0 235 V/C Ratio(X) 0.11 0.77 0.20 0.18 0.43 0.43 0.06 0.05 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 652 1629 705 411 731 742 690 845 716 284 0 267 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.8 19.7 15.6 12.1 16.6 16.7 19.3 17.1 19.8 26.9 0.0 26.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 7.8 1.3 0.5 3.6 3.7 0.4 0.4 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.8 21.9 15.8 12.2 17.2 17.3 19.3 17.1 20.4 26.9 0.0 26.9 LnGrp LOS A C B B B B B B C C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1240 667 301 2 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.7 16.7 19.9 26.9 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 32.9 28.2 13.0 32.9 13.2 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.4 21.3 10.8 3.3 11.1 3.0 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.6 1.1 0.1 3.8 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 365 496 1 0 152 31 0 0 0 23 1 295 Future Volume (veh/h) 365 496 1 0 152 31 0 0 0 23 1 295 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 384 522 1 0 160 33 0 0 0 24 0 312 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 960 1124 2 4 785 158 0 354 0 504 0 601 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.60 0.59 0.00 0.27 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1866 4 1781 2946 594 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 384 0 523 0 95 98 0 0 0 24 0 312 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 0 1870 1781 1777 1763 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 0.0 6.7 0.0 1.8 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 0.0 6.7 0.0 1.8 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.34 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 960 0 1126 4 473 470 0 354 0 504 0 601 V/C Ratio(X) 0.40 0.00 0.46 0.00 0.20 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.52 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1400 0 1862 495 1564 1552 0 866 0 992 0 1468 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.7 0.0 4.7 0.0 12.3 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 12.5 12.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 16.4 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 907 193 0 336 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.5 12.7 0.0 16.3 Approach LOS A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.0 12.2 15.5 15.5 12.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 43 19.0 15.5 36.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.7 5.8 5.9 3.9 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.2 1.4 1.6 1.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.9 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 100 570 19 65 531 95 31 29 225 669 77 347 Future Volume (veh/h) 100 570 19 65 531 95 31 29 225 669 77 347 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 105 600 20 68 559 0 33 31 237 704 81 365 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 460 1466 49 427 1443 415 716 607 963 716 607 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.42 0.38 0.07 0.41 0.00 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3509 117 1781 3647 0 944 1870 1585 2156 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 105 304 316 68 559 0 33 31 237 704 81 365 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 0 944 1870 1585 1078 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.0 10.8 10.8 1.9 10.0 0.0 2.1 0.9 9.8 27.4 2.5 16.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.0 10.8 10.8 1.9 10.0 0.0 4.6 0.9 9.8 28.3 2.5 16.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 460 742 773 427 1443 415 716 607 963 716 607 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.41 0.41 0.16 0.39 0.08 0.04 0.39 0.73 0.11 0.60 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 480 742 773 429 1443 463 810 687 1072 810 687 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.9 18.4 18.5 14.2 18.8 0.0 19.4 17.4 20.1 26.3 17.9 22.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.7 1.6 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.8 0.0 0.6 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 4.6 4.8 0.8 4.0 0.0 0.5 0.4 3.5 6.9 1.1 6.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.0 20.1 20.1 14.2 19.0 0.0 19.4 17.4 20.3 28.1 17.9 22.9 LnGrp LOS B C C B B B B C C B C Approach Vol, veh/h 725 627 A 301 1150 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.2 18.5 19.9 25.7 Approach LOS B B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.9 41.6 38.5 11.0 40.5 38.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 30.0 37.0 6.0 28.0 37.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.9 12.8 30.3 5.0 12.0 11.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.4 2.2 0.0 2.4 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.8 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 178 1206 193 5 325 121 43 31 10 123 44 329 Future Volume (veh/h) 178 1206 193 5 325 121 43 31 10 123 44 329 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 187 1269 203 5 342 127 45 33 11 129 46 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 804 2068 329 459 2393 1067 406 155 52 406 216 Arrive On Green 0.16 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.67 0.67 0.12 0.12 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3072 488 1781 3554 1585 2638 1342 447 2643 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 187 730 742 5 342 127 45 0 44 129 46 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1783 1781 1777 1585 1319 0 1790 1321 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.1 2.6 1.4 0.0 2.0 4.2 2.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 3.1 2.6 3.4 0.0 2.0 6.2 2.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.27 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 804 1197 1200 459 2393 1067 406 0 207 406 216 V/C Ratio(X) 0.23 0.61 0.62 0.01 0.14 0.12 0.11 0.00 0.21 0.32 0.21 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 823 1197 1200 459 2393 1067 629 0 358 629 374 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 3.1 0.0 0.0 2.9 5.3 5.2 37.6 0.0 36.3 38.9 36.1 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.0 1.0 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.9 1.4 0.9 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 3.2 1.9 1.9 2.9 5.3 5.2 37.7 0.0 36.5 39.1 36.3 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A D A D D D Approach Vol, veh/h 1659 474 89 175 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.1 5.3 37.1 38.3 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 64.6 14.4 11.0 64.6 14.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 50.5 16.0 6.0 49.5 16.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.1 2.0 8.2 4.8 5.1 5.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.8 0.2 0.1 0.9 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.6 HCM 6th LOS A Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 57 957 112 68 577 59 31 29 223 1 0 1 Future Volume (veh/h) 57 957 112 68 577 59 31 29 223 1 0 1 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 1007 118 72 607 62 32 32 235 1 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 501 1352 581 387 1238 126 511 620 525 267 0 239 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.12 0.38 0.37 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 3255 332 1781 1870 1585 1112 0 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 1007 118 72 331 338 32 32 235 1 0 1 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1811 1781 1870 1585 1112 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.3 17.9 3.7 1.5 10.3 10.4 0.9 0.8 8.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.3 17.9 3.7 1.5 10.3 10.4 0.9 0.8 8.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.18 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 501 1352 581 387 676 689 511 620 525 267 0 239 V/C Ratio(X) 0.12 0.74 0.20 0.19 0.49 0.49 0.06 0.05 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 624 1658 718 423 744 758 703 860 729 290 0 272 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.1 19.5 15.8 11.9 17.2 17.3 18.7 16.6 19.1 26.3 0.0 26.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.8 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 7.1 1.3 0.5 4.1 4.2 0.4 0.4 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.1 21.3 16.1 12.0 18.0 18.1 18.8 16.6 19.7 26.3 0.0 26.3 LnGrp LOS B C B B B B B B B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1185 741 299 2 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.2 17.5 19.3 26.3 Approach LOS C B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 31.7 28.2 13.0 31.7 13.2 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 19.9 10.5 3.3 12.4 2.9 2.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 6.9 1.1 0.1 4.2 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.2 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 375 507 1 0 144 31 0 0 0 23 1 287 Future Volume (veh/h) 375 507 1 0 144 31 0 0 0 23 1 287 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 395 534 1 0 152 33 0 0 0 24 0 303 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 964 1128 2 4 780 165 0 349 0 499 0 591 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.60 0.59 0.00 0.27 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1866 3 1781 2918 618 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 395 0 535 0 91 94 0 0 0 24 0 303 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 0 1870 1781 1777 1759 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 1.7 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 1.7 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 3.7 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.35 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 964 0 1130 4 475 470 0 349 0 499 0 591 V/C Ratio(X) 0.41 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.19 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.51 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1406 0 1869 497 1569 1554 0 870 0 995 0 1474 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.6 0.0 4.7 0.0 12.2 12.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 15.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.0 0.0 5.2 0.0 12.4 12.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.5 0.0 16.4 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 930 185 0 327 Approach Delay, s/veh 8.5 12.6 0.0 16.3 Approach LOS A B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.0 12.0 15.5 15.5 12.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 43 19.0 15.5 36.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.8 5.7 6.0 3.8 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.3 1.3 1.6 1.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.8 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th TWSC 05/18/2021 14: W. 77th St & access T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 am b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 29 1235 633 9 25 84 Future Vol, veh/h 29 1235 633 9 25 84 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 200 - - - 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 31 1300 666 9 26 88 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 675 0 - 0 1383 338 Stage 1 - - - - 671 - Stage 2 - - - - 712 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 912 - - - 135 658 Stage 1 - - - - 470 - Stage 2 - - - - 447 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 912 - - - 130 658 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 130 - Stage 1 - - - - 454 - Stage 2 - - - - 447 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.2 0 17.8 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 912 - - - 130 658 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.033 - - - 0.202 0.134 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.1 - - - 39.6 11.3 HCM Lane LOS A - - - E B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - - 0.7 0.5 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 361 783 27 77 271 419 18 83 337 269 41 141 Future Volume (veh/h) 361 783 27 77 271 419 18 83 337 269 41 141 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 380 824 28 81 285 0 19 87 355 283 43 148 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 786 1935 66 440 1611 368 485 411 570 485 411 Arrive On Green 0.15 0.55 0.52 0.06 0.45 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3507 119 1781 3647 0 1192 1870 1585 1838 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 380 417 435 81 285 0 19 87 355 283 43 148 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 0 1192 1870 1585 919 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.3 12.4 12.4 2.2 4.3 0.0 1.1 3.3 19.2 12.7 1.6 6.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.3 12.4 12.4 2.2 4.3 0.0 2.7 3.3 19.2 16.0 1.6 6.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 786 980 1020 440 1611 368 485 411 570 485 411 V/C Ratio(X) 0.48 0.43 0.43 0.18 0.18 0.05 0.18 0.86 0.50 0.09 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1046 980 1020 440 1611 377 499 423 584 499 423 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.96 0.96 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 8.7 11.8 11.9 12.0 14.6 0.0 26.3 25.9 31.8 32.1 25.3 27.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.4 1.3 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 15.6 0.2 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.2 4.9 5.1 0.8 1.7 0.0 0.3 1.4 8.9 2.8 0.7 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 8.8 13.2 13.2 12.0 14.7 0.0 26.3 26.0 47.4 32.3 25.3 27.4 LnGrp LOS A B B B B C C D C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1232 366 A 461 474 Approach Delay, s/veh 11.8 14.1 42.5 30.2 Approach LOS B B D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 53.7 27.3 17.8 44.8 27.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 3.0 46.0 22.0 25.0 24.0 22.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 14.4 18.0 11.3 6.3 21.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.9 0.6 0.5 1.1 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.2 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 305 903 138 10 461 329 218 163 11 48 38 95 Future Volume (veh/h) 305 903 138 10 461 329 218 163 11 48 38 95 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 321 951 145 11 485 346 229 172 12 51 40 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 638 1947 297 517 2078 927 533 275 19 314 298 Arrive On Green 0.25 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.58 0.58 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3091 471 1781 3554 1585 2652 1728 121 2328 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 321 546 550 11 485 346 229 0 184 51 40 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1786 1781 1777 1585 1326 0 1849 1164 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.9 10.4 7.3 0.0 8.4 1.9 1.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 5.9 10.4 9.0 0.0 8.4 10.3 1.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.26 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 638 1119 1124 517 2078 927 533 0 294 314 298 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.49 0.49 0.02 0.23 0.37 0.43 0.00 0.63 0.16 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 855 1119 1124 517 2078 927 730 0 431 487 436 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.2 0.0 0.0 5.3 9.0 9.9 36.4 0.0 35.4 40.1 32.5 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 1.3 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 2.1 3.3 2.3 0.0 3.8 0.5 0.7 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 4.7 1.3 1.3 5.3 9.0 10.0 36.6 0.0 36.2 40.2 32.6 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A B D A D D C Approach Vol, veh/h 1417 842 413 91 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.1 9.4 36.4 36.9 Approach LOS A A D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 60.7 18.3 15.0 56.6 18.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 47.5 19.0 20.0 32.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.0 12.3 8.0 12.4 11.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.8 0.1 1.0 1.6 0.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.6 HCM 6th LOS B Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 814 43 127 434 130 21 84 314 17 6 54 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 814 43 127 434 130 21 84 314 17 6 54 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 857 45 134 457 137 22 88 331 18 6 57 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 528 1240 529 440 942 280 478 623 528 225 62 264 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.35 0.33 0.14 0.35 0.33 0.09 0.33 0.33 0.17 0.17 0.17 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 2700 803 1781 1870 1585 775 372 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 857 45 134 300 294 22 88 331 24 0 57 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1726 1781 1870 1585 1147 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 13.7 1.3 2.8 8.7 8.9 0.6 2.2 11.6 0.1 0.0 2.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 13.7 1.3 2.8 8.7 8.9 0.6 2.2 11.6 0.7 0.0 2.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 528 1240 529 440 620 602 478 623 528 287 0 264 V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.69 0.09 0.30 0.48 0.49 0.05 0.14 0.63 0.08 0.00 0.22 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 663 1804 780 494 821 797 749 949 804 312 0 300 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.4 18.4 15.1 11.3 16.8 17.1 17.0 15.4 18.6 23.2 0.0 23.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.1 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 5.3 0.4 1.0 3.4 3.4 0.2 0.9 4.1 0.3 0.0 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.4 19.5 15.2 11.4 17.7 18.0 17.1 15.5 19.8 23.3 0.0 24.2 LnGrp LOS A B B B B B B B B C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 910 728 441 81 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.2 16.7 18.8 23.9 Approach LOS B B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 27.0 26.0 13.0 27.0 11.0 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 32.5 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 15.7 13.6 2.2 10.9 2.6 4.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.4 1.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2021 pm.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 500 427 0 0 355 47 0 0 0 41 0 374 Future Volume (veh/h) 500 427 0 0 355 47 0 0 0 41 0 374 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 526 449 0 0 374 49 0 0 0 43 0 394 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 955 1090 0 4 796 104 0 411 0 549 0 697 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1870 0 1781 3162 411 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 526 449 0 0 209 214 0 0 0 43 0 394 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1870 0 1781 1777 1796 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.9 6.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.9 6.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 955 1090 0 4 448 452 0 411 0 549 0 697 V/C Ratio(X) 0.55 0.41 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.57 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1703 1597 0 468 1128 1141 0 983 0 1094 0 1666 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.1 5.2 0.0 0.0 14.5 14.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 15.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.7 5.6 0.0 0.0 15.5 15.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 16.6 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 975 423 0 437 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.5 15.6 0.0 16.4 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 31.6 14.0 16.1 15.5 14.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 39 23.0 20.5 27.5 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.0 7.1 7.9 6.6 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.4 2.0 2.7 2.2 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.1 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 372 825 28 79 290 443 19 86 347 295 42 145 Future Volume (veh/h) 372 825 28 79 290 443 19 86 347 295 42 145 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 392 868 29 83 305 0 20 91 365 311 44 153 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 770 1874 63 428 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.53 0.50 0.07 0.44 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3509 117 1781 3647 0 1186 1870 1585 1814 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 392 440 457 83 305 0 20 91 365 311 44 153 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1849 1781 1777 0 1186 1870 1585 907 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.9 13.8 13.8 2.2 4.7 0.0 1.2 3.4 19.8 14.4 1.6 7.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.9 13.8 13.8 2.2 4.7 0.0 2.8 3.4 19.8 17.7 1.6 7.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 770 949 988 428 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.46 0.46 0.19 0.19 0.05 0.18 0.87 0.54 0.09 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1000 949 988 428 1567 388 520 440 596 520 440 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.1 13.0 13.0 12.2 15.4 0.0 25.9 25.5 31.5 32.3 24.8 26.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.6 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 15.1 0.4 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.5 5.5 5.8 0.9 1.9 0.0 0.3 1.5 9.1 3.1 0.7 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.3 14.6 14.6 12.2 15.4 0.0 25.9 25.6 46.6 32.8 24.9 27.0 LnGrp LOS A B B B B C C D C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1289 388 A 476 508 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.0 14.8 41.7 30.4 Approach LOS B B D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 52.1 27.9 18.4 43.7 27.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 44.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 15.8 19.7 11.9 6.7 21.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.1 0.6 0.5 1.2 0.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.7 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 314 966 142 10 497 350 225 168 11 67 39 98 Future Volume (veh/h) 314 966 142 10 497 350 225 168 11 67 39 98 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 331 1017 149 11 523 368 237 177 12 71 41 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 614 1927 282 490 2020 901 560 293 20 333 317 Arrive On Green 0.26 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.57 0.57 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3110 455 1781 3554 1585 2650 1732 117 2317 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 331 581 585 11 523 368 237 0 189 71 41 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1788 1781 1777 1585 1325 0 1849 1158 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.7 11.7 7.5 0.0 8.5 2.6 1.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.7 11.7 9.2 0.0 8.5 11.1 1.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.25 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 614 1101 1108 490 2020 901 560 0 313 333 317 V/C Ratio(X) 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.02 0.26 0.41 0.42 0.00 0.60 0.21 0.13 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 840 1101 1108 490 2020 901 758 0 452 507 457 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.6 0.0 0.0 5.8 9.8 10.9 35.6 0.0 34.6 39.7 31.7 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 1.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 2.4 3.8 2.4 0.0 3.8 0.7 0.8 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 5.2 1.5 1.5 5.9 9.8 11.0 35.8 0.0 35.3 39.9 31.8 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A B D A D D C Approach Vol, veh/h 1497 902 426 112 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.3 10.3 35.6 36.9 Approach LOS A B D D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 59.8 19.2 15.6 55.2 19.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 46.5 20.0 21.0 30.5 20.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.0 13.1 8.5 13.7 11.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.0 0.1 1.1 1.7 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.9 HCM 6th LOS B Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 849 44 131 463 134 22 87 324 18 6 56 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 849 44 131 463 134 22 87 324 18 6 56 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 894 46 138 487 141 23 92 341 19 6 59 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 517 1269 542 429 972 280 474 619 524 221 58 259 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.36 0.34 0.13 0.36 0.34 0.09 0.33 0.33 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 2723 783 1781 1870 1585 775 352 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 894 46 138 317 311 23 92 341 25 0 59 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1729 1781 1870 1585 1128 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 14.5 1.3 2.9 9.4 9.5 0.6 2.3 12.3 0.2 0.0 2.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 14.5 1.3 2.9 9.4 9.5 0.6 2.3 12.3 0.9 0.0 2.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.45 1.00 1.00 0.76 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 517 1269 542 429 634 617 474 619 524 279 0 259 V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.70 0.08 0.32 0.50 0.50 0.05 0.15 0.65 0.09 0.00 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 649 1770 766 482 806 784 732 932 790 303 0 295 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.4 18.6 15.0 11.5 16.9 17.1 17.4 15.8 19.2 23.9 0.0 24.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.1 1.4 0.1 0.0 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 5.7 0.5 1.0 3.7 3.7 0.2 0.9 4.4 0.3 0.0 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.4 19.7 15.1 11.7 17.8 18.1 17.5 16.0 20.6 24.0 0.0 24.9 LnGrp LOS A B B B B B B B C C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 948 766 456 84 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.4 16.8 19.5 24.6 Approach LOS B B B C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 28.0 26.2 13.0 28.0 11.2 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 10.0 32.5 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.9 16.5 14.3 2.2 11.5 2.6 4.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.5 1.8 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.7 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm nb.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 520 445 0 0 374 48 0 0 0 42 0 393 Future Volume (veh/h) 520 445 0 0 374 48 0 0 0 42 0 393 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 547 468 0 0 394 51 0 0 0 44 0 414 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 970 1087 0 4 782 101 0 422 0 556 0 715 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1870 0 1781 3167 407 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 547 468 0 0 220 225 0 0 0 44 0 414 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1870 0 1781 1777 1797 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 970 1087 0 4 439 444 0 422 0 556 0 715 V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1670 1567 0 459 1107 1119 0 964 0 1073 0 1634 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.3 5.4 0.0 0.0 15.1 15.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 16.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.0 5.9 0.0 0.0 16.2 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 16.8 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 1015 445 0 458 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.8 16.3 0.0 16.6 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 32.1 14.5 16.6 15.5 14.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 39 23.0 20.5 27.5 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.5 7.4 8.3 7.0 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.6 2.1 2.8 2.3 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 1: Normandale Blvd/SB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 372 847 28 79 281 434 19 86 347 318 42 145 Future Volume (veh/h) 372 847 28 79 281 434 19 86 347 318 42 145 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 392 892 29 83 296 0 20 91 365 335 44 153 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 775 1876 61 420 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.53 0.50 0.07 0.44 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3512 114 1781 3647 0 1186 1870 1585 1814 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 392 451 470 83 296 0 20 91 365 335 44 153 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1850 1781 1777 0 1186 1870 1585 907 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.9 14.3 14.3 2.2 4.6 0.0 1.2 3.4 19.8 15.7 1.6 7.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.9 14.3 14.3 2.2 4.6 0.0 2.8 3.4 19.8 19.1 1.6 7.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 775 949 988 420 1567 374 497 421 574 497 421 V/C Ratio(X) 0.51 0.48 0.48 0.20 0.19 0.05 0.18 0.87 0.58 0.09 0.36 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1005 949 988 420 1567 388 520 440 596 520 440 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.1 13.1 13.2 12.2 15.3 0.0 25.9 25.5 31.5 32.9 24.8 26.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 1.7 1.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 15.1 0.8 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.5 5.8 6.0 0.9 1.8 0.0 0.3 1.5 9.1 3.4 0.7 2.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.3 14.8 14.8 12.3 15.4 0.0 25.9 25.6 46.6 33.7 24.9 27.0 LnGrp LOS A B B B B C C D C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 1313 379 A 476 532 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.1 14.7 41.7 31.1 Approach LOS B B D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.0 52.1 27.9 18.4 43.7 27.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 7.0 6.0 6.0 7.0 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 4.0 44.0 23.0 24.0 24.0 23.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.2 16.3 21.1 11.9 6.6 21.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.2 0.4 0.5 1.2 0.2 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.9 HCM 6th LOS C Notes Unsignalized Delay for [WBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 2: Frontage Road/NB TH 100 Ramps & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 314 1011 142 10 479 342 225 168 11 90 39 98 Future Volume (veh/h) 314 1011 142 10 479 342 225 168 11 90 39 98 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 331 1064 149 11 504 360 237 177 12 95 41 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 618 1911 267 473 1985 885 584 309 21 356 334 Arrive On Green 0.26 1.00 1.00 0.08 0.56 0.56 0.18 0.18 0.16 0.18 0.18 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3131 438 1781 3554 1585 2650 1732 117 2317 1870 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 331 603 610 11 504 360 237 0 189 95 41 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1792 1781 1777 1585 1325 0 1849 1158 1870 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.6 11.7 7.4 0.0 8.4 3.5 1.7 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.2 6.6 11.7 9.1 0.0 8.4 11.9 1.7 0.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 618 1085 1094 473 1985 885 584 0 330 356 334 V/C Ratio(X) 0.54 0.56 0.56 0.02 0.25 0.41 0.41 0.00 0.57 0.27 0.12 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 803 1085 1094 473 1985 885 730 0 431 484 436 HCM Platoon Ratio 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 4.8 0.0 0.0 6.2 10.2 11.3 34.9 0.0 33.9 39.3 31.1 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.6 1.7 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.6 0.5 0.5 0.1 2.4 3.8 2.4 0.0 3.8 1.0 0.7 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 5.4 1.7 1.7 6.2 10.2 11.5 35.0 0.0 34.5 39.5 31.1 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A B B D A C D C Approach Vol, veh/h 1544 875 426 136 A Approach Delay, s/veh 2.5 10.7 34.8 36.9 Approach LOS A B C D Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.0 58.9 20.1 15.7 54.3 20.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.0 6.5 6.0 6.0 6.5 6.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 5.0 47.5 19.0 19.0 33.5 19.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.2 2.0 13.9 8.7 13.7 11.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.1 0.1 1.0 1.7 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.1 HCM 6th LOS B Notes Unsignalized Delay for [SBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 4: Computer Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 8 917 44 129 437 134 22 87 326 18 6 56 Future Volume (veh/h) 8 917 44 129 437 134 22 87 326 18 6 56 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 8 965 46 136 460 141 23 92 343 19 6 59 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 534 1328 570 414 1003 305 462 604 512 214 56 252 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.37 0.36 0.13 0.37 0.36 0.09 0.32 0.32 0.16 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1585 1781 2684 816 1781 1870 1585 774 352 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 8 965 46 136 303 298 23 92 343 25 0 59 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1585 1781 1777 1723 1781 1870 1585 1126 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 16.2 1.3 2.8 8.9 9.1 0.7 2.4 12.9 0.3 0.0 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 16.2 1.3 2.8 8.9 9.1 0.7 2.4 12.9 0.9 0.0 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.76 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 534 1328 570 414 664 644 462 604 512 270 0 252 V/C Ratio(X) 0.01 0.73 0.08 0.33 0.46 0.46 0.05 0.15 0.67 0.09 0.00 0.23 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 662 1745 755 452 783 759 710 905 767 294 0 286 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 9.2 18.6 14.6 11.7 16.4 16.6 18.3 16.7 20.3 24.8 0.0 25.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.4 0.1 0.2 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.1 1.5 0.1 0.0 0.5 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 6.3 0.5 1.0 3.5 3.5 0.3 1.0 4.7 0.3 0.0 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 9.2 20.1 14.7 11.9 17.1 17.4 18.3 16.8 21.8 25.0 0.0 25.9 LnGrp LOS A C B B B B B B C C A C Approach Vol, veh/h 1019 737 458 84 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.7 16.3 20.6 25.6 Approach LOS B B C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.0 29.9 26.4 13.0 29.9 11.4 15.0 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 6.0 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 9.5 33.0 32.5 13.0 29.5 15.0 11.5 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 18.2 14.9 2.2 11.1 2.7 4.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 6.7 1.8 0.0 3.9 0.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.0 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 05/18/2021 5: Parklawn Ave & W. 77th St T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 516 442 0 0 384 48 0 0 0 42 0 403 Future Volume (veh/h) 516 442 0 0 384 48 0 0 0 42 0 403 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 543 465 0 0 404 51 0 0 0 44 0 424 Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Cap, veh/h 963 1081 0 4 781 98 0 429 0 563 0 728 Arrive On Green 0.28 0.58 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 3456 1870 0 1781 3177 399 0 1870 0 1781 0 3170 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 543 465 0 0 225 230 0 0 0 44 0 424 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1728 1870 0 1781 1777 1799 0 1870 0 1781 0 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.1 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.3 6.5 0.0 0.0 5.1 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 5.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.22 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 963 1081 0 4 437 442 0 429 0 563 0 728 V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.58 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1662 1519 0 457 1064 1077 0 1000 0 1106 0 1694 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.4 5.5 0.0 0.0 15.2 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.2 0.0 16.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.7 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 1.7 0.0 0.0 1.9 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.1 6.0 0.0 0.0 16.4 16.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 16.8 LnGrp LOS B A A A B B A A A B A B Approach Vol, veh/h 1008 455 0 468 Approach Delay, s/veh 10.9 16.5 0.0 16.5 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 0.0 32.0 14.7 16.5 15.5 14.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 * 5.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 5.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 11.5 * 38 24.0 20.5 26.5 24.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 8.5 7.6 8.3 7.2 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.5 2.2 2.7 2.4 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.6 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. HCM 6th TWSC 05/18/2021 14: W. 77th St & access T:\3022 City of Edina\21-507\synchro\2024 pm b.syn Synchro 10 Report Page 1 Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 85 1190 667 25 17 53 Future Vol, veh/h 85 1190 667 25 17 53 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 200 - - - 50 - Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 0 - Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 95 95 95 95 95 95 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 89 1253 702 26 18 56 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 728 0 - 0 1520 364 Stage 1 - - - - 715 - Stage 2 - - - - 805 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 - - - - 5.84 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 - - - - 5.84 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 871 - - - 109 633 Stage 1 - - - - 446 - Stage 2 - - - - 400 - Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 871 - - - 98 633 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver - - - - 98 - Stage 1 - - - - 401 - Stage 2 - - - - 400 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s 0.6 0 20.6 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2 Capacity (veh/h) 871 - - - 98 633 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.103 - - - 0.183 0.088 HCM Control Delay (s) 9.6 - - - 49.8 11.2 HCM Lane LOS A - - - E B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.3 - - - 0.6 0.3 EDINA, Minnesota Entitlements Package DEC 31, 2020 PENTAGON PARK PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 EDINA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PROJECT DISTRICT OVERVIEW GREATER SOUTHDALE DISTRICT PLAN CONCEPT ILLUSTRATING POTENTIAL PUBLIC AMENITIES AND MOBILITY HUBS 01 Greater Southdale District Plan – Adopt Greater Southdale District Plan – Adopted Decemb A tremendously successful suburban center, the Greater Southdale District plays a unique role in the City of Edina and Twin Cities region: Greater Southdale District Plan – Adopted December 18, 2018 Page v its inception. It has more capacity for growth and change than many other areas of the city. The resident population of the Greater Southdale District is approximately 7,500. The daytime population in 2018 is estimated at over 26,000, including both residents and workers. those choices based on a shared community vision for the District’s evolution. Greater Southdale District Plan will manage change and de growth over the next ten years, and beyond, to build a ng and resilient community for present and future nerations. is Plan builds on the district’s assets while charting a more ban and connected vision to create a more livable, even more prosperous, mixed-use district in which to live, work, The Greater Southdale District is generally bounded by Highway 62, about one block west of France Avenue, Minnesota Drive, and Xerxes Avenue. The study area was expanded to include the 76th Street/77th Street corridor westward to Highway 100. SITESITE SITESITE The Greater Southdale District is generally bounded by Highway 62, about one block west of France Avenue, Minnehaha Drive, and Xerxes Avenue. The study area was expanded to include the 76th Street/77th Street corridor westward to Highway 100. As it has in the past, the 750-acre Greater Southdale District will continue to play a significant and pivotal role in Edina’s DISTRICT GOALS The guid stro gen Unique Experiences Economic Vitality Goal #1: Offer unique experiences for living, playing, working, and learning, and memorable public places for civic and social gathering for multiple generations and diverse populations.ge Th urb Pattern and Connectivity Urban Design Goal #1: Support a vibrant public realm, foster a connected and accessible network for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit patrons, and encourage investment resulting in innovative and enduring development patterns, buildings, and public and private spaces. m Scale and Form Urban Design Goal #2: Utilize appropriately-scaled development and built form that adds vitality and activity to the District to create inviting and comfortable human experiences, enduring buildings and spaces, and a fitting sense of place. Placemaking Urban Design Goal #3: Offer thoughtful and intentional public spaces oriented to gathering and resulting in a unique signature for the District and community. Connectivity, Accessibility, and Mobility Urban Design Goal #4: Offer connectivity and accessibility that promotes health and active living and supports multimodal transportation choices. Access vs Mobility Urban Design Goal #5: Embrace major streets as community and gateway corridors, shifting from through-vehicle dominance toward balancing the needs of all right-of-way users. Sustainability and Resilience Urban Design Goal #6: Espouse sustainable, resilient, and innovative public spaces and private development, adapting over time including the ability for adaptive reuse over time. Overall Land Use Goal #1: Facilitate the evolution of this regional destination into a higher density, sustainable, mixed-use area for “shop, live, work, play, learn, interact” with a distinctive and definable identity as “Edina’s Living Room.”District Services, Arts, and Culture Land Use Goal #7: Accommodate public, institutional, arts, and cultural elements that are needed to create a complete and livable community. SITE GOALS Incorporate elements of pedestrian connection with a landscaped green buffer from W 77th Street through a landscaped pathway that ribbons through to a new public connection to the park - visible access to the park with the ribbon artery and pedestrian friendly path. Intent is to promote movement (walking, skating, biking, etc.) for health and the creation of pedestrian presence Connected Integrated storm water that is filtered and mitigated with landscaping to create a riparian zone with pollinator and rain gardens with native plantings. Every space within the site has an integrated and intentional purpose. Integrated Pedestrian Friendly In scale, perception of safety, and comfort barriers between high-traffic areas. Amenities include: wide sidewalks, path and street-lined trees, lighting, and furnishes (benches, trash receptacles, art, etc.) Concentration of jobs, residences, medical services, traffic, and activity. Attracting residents, workers, customers, patients, visitors, and others from throughout the region, Greater Southdale District is a major destination. Role as economic engine for the city and region. The economic impact of this area is significant, particularly in terms of sustaining the tax base for the City of Edina. Meeting diverse housing needs of the population. Greater Southdale District has a variety of diverse housing types that meet the needs of Edina residents, and are not generally available in many areas of the city. Retail and services hub for the community. In addition to its role in the regional economy, Greater Southdale District meets the needs of the community for retail and services, with the capacity to evolve for changing preferences. Capacity for growth and change. The Greater Southdale District has been an evolving area will continue to play a significant and pivotal role in Edina’s future. Building that future means making choices, sustainable choices to meet the needs of today without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. Comprehensive Plan, provides a framework for making since its inception. It has more capacity for growth and change than many other areas of the city. The Greater Southdale District Plan, part of the Edina 2018 PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 SITE ZONING INFORMATION Page 1 2395.03 Zoning Memo.xlsx ALTERNATE CALC METHOD BELOW: Allowable Density 42 units Proposed Density 148 units Allowable Density 42 unitsProposed Density 148 units Proposed Denity Increase 106 units 252%02 EXISTING COMMERCIAL SITE - 24% PERMEABLE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SITE - 45% PERMEABLE ELEMENT Current Zoning Proposed Reference Notes Site Data Site Area (SF)236,950 236,950 Site Area (acres)5.44 5.44 District MDD-6 Mixed Use (PUD-17 Pentagon Park South) MDD-6 Mixed Use (PUD-17 Pentagon Park South)Section 36-510 Area per unit MDD-6 (3300 sf)MDD-6 (3300 sf)Section 36-552 Units /Acre 20-75 (109-408)74 (404)2040 Edina Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use FAR 1.5 (355,427 SF)1.5 (355,262 SF)Section 36-510 Max Building Coverage 30% (71,085 SF)34% (80,476 SF)Section 36-510 Area includes enclosed garage parking area Height 12 stories 144 feet 7 Stories, 70-74'-8" depending on average grade plane Section 36-510 Average grade plane to be determined Permeable/Impermeable 56,198 sf Perm/180,752 sf Imperm = 24% Permeable 105,831 sf Perm/131,119 sf Imperm = 45% Permeable See Diagrams Below Setbacks Front Street (ft) ( W 77th)15 70 Section 36-510 Side Street (ft)35 NA Section 36-553 Interior Side Yard (ft)20 25 Section 36-553 Rear Yard (ft)35 38 Section 36-553 Required Parking 1 enclosed + .75 exposed (1.75 per unit) 700 Required Max 20% Compact Stalls Allowed 1.27 enclosed + 20 spaces exposed = 533 Provided 19.8% Compact Stalls Provided Section 36-1311 Visitor Parking No Standard No Standard 90 degree Parking 8'-6" x 18'-0"8'-6" x 18'-0"Section 36-1317 Compact 7'-6" x 16'-0"7'-6" x 16'-0"Section 36-1317 Drive Aisle 24'-0"24'-0"Section 36-1317 Accessilble Parking State Code State Code Section 36-1317 Bumper Overhangs 1'-6"1'-6"Section 36-1317 Parking Setbacks Front Street (ft)20 50 Side Street (ft)No Standard No Standard Section 36-1317 Zoning Summary for West 77th Street Edina ( Pentagon Park ) PID 3102824340007 PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 CONTEXT SITE PLAN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODSINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT I-494I-494 AMERICAN BLVD W-76TH ST W-77TH ST LAKE LAKE EDINAEDINA WILLIAMWILLIAMWARDWELLWARDWELLLEWIS PARKLEWIS PARK CENNTINIAL CENNTINIAL LAKELAKE ADAMS ADAMS HILL HILL PARKPARK NORMANDALE NORMANDALE LAKE PARKLAKE PARK PAULYS PAULYS POND POND PARKPARK LAKELAKEGIRARD GIRARD PARKPARK HAEGHAEGPARKPARK EDINA INDUSTRIAL BLVD MINNESOTA DRI-100I-100I-100I-100FRANCE AVE SFRANCE AVE SPENN AVE SPENN AVE SYORK AVE SE BUSH LAKE RDSITESITE 03 PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 LOCAL CONNECTIONS AND DESIGN CONCEPTS 04 THE FRED FORMER FRED RICHARDS GOLF COURSE (CITY PARK) LAKE EDINA SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PENTAGON VILLAGE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT PENTAGON VILLAGEMIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIALCOMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL W 77TH STREET EXIST.TRAILSYSTEM EXIST. TRAIL SYSTEM PROPOSEDSITE PROPOSED SITE SITE DESIGN CONCEPT SKETCHGREENWAY LINKEXPAND THE PARKINTO THE SITE EXPAND THE PARKINTO THE SITE ACTIVATE 77TH STREETACTIVATE 77TH STREET LINK 77TH STREETWITH THE PARK LINK 77TH STREETWITH THE PARK COMMERCIAL/OFFICECOMMERCIAL/OFFICE OFFICEOFFICE PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 SITE VISION 05 TRAILS, PLACEMAKING, EXPANDING THE PARK SPORT COURTS, PLAZAS, PERMEABILITY, WHIMSY POOLS, CABANAS, RESORT PLAZA/FORMAL RAISED ENTRY DRIVE - ACTIVATE 77TH STREET RIPARIAN GARDENS, CONNECTIONS, ACCESS DOG RUN, FAMILY, VITALITY PROMENADE, LINKING 77TH WITH THE PARK GREEN INFRASTRUCURE, CREATIVE STORM WATER TREATMENT, NATIVE HABITAT, POLLINATORS PROMENADE, LINKING 77TH WITH THE PARK PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 AXON VIEWS NORTHEAST AXON VIEW NORTHWEST AXON VIEW SOUTHEAST AXON VIEW SOUTHWEST AXON VIEW SOUTHEAST AXON VIEW SOUTHEAST AXON VIEW 06 PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 ELEVATORS STAIR M M RAMPUPM PARKING 187 STALLS STAIR FLOOR PLANS 07 BUILDING AREA:71,915 SF MEP STORAGE:848 SF TRASH/LOADING:- SF PARKING/ SERVICES:71,067 SF 231 SPACES 187 SPACES 44 SPACES BASEMENT TOTAL PARKING: STANDARD PARKING COMPACT PARKING PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 T M ELEVATOR ELEVATORS STAIR STAIR M M RAMPDNGARAGE ENTRY RAMPUPM STAIR RESIDENTIAL UNITS T PARKING 187 STALLS FLOOR PLANS 08 BUILDING AREA:80,476 SF MEP STORAGE:948 SF TRASH/LOADING:747 SF GROSS RES. AREA:15,240 SF CIRCULATION:1,510 SF NET RES. AREA:13,730 SF UNIT COUNT:19 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:63,541 SF 187 SPACES 142 SPACES 45 SPACES GROUND LEVEL TOTAL PARKING: STANDARD PARKING COMPACT PARKING PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ELEVATOR M T MMELEVATOR ELEVATORS STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR M M SPEED RAMPDNPARKING 95 STALLS CLUB ROOM CO- WORK FITNESS MAIL LOBBY/ LEASING COVERED ENTRY PORTE COCHERE RESIDENTIAL UNITS FLOOR PLANS 09 LEVEL 3-4 BUILDING AREA: 5,787 SF AMENITY: 4,444 SF BUILDING AREA:87,432 SF MEP STORAGE:656 SF TRASH/LOADING:105 SF AMENITY:5,080 SF CO-WORK:1,660 SF LOBBY/LEASING:2,580 SF GROSS RES. AREA:41,658 SF CIRCULATION:5,749 SF NET RES. AREA:35,909 SF UNIT COUNT:48 UNITS PARKING/ SERVICES:35,693 SF 95 SPACES 82 SPACES 13 SPACES LEVEL 2 TOTAL PARKING: STANDARD PARKING COMPACT PARKING PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ELEVATOR MMTT MMELEVATOR ELEVATORS STAIR STAIR STAIR STAIR FLOOR PLANS 10 BUILDING AREA:64,157 SF MEP STORAGE:980 SF TRASH/LOADING:210 SF GROSS RES. AREA:62,967 SF CIRCULATION:6,833 SF NET RES. AREA:56,134 SF UNIT COUNT:76 UNITS LEVELS 3-5 PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ELEVATOR MMTT MMELEVATOR ELEVATORS ROOF DECK BELOW ROOF DECK BELOW STAIR STAIR STAIR FLOOR PLANS 11 BUILDING AREA:60,452 SF MEP STORAGE:980 SF TRASH/LOADING:210 SF GROSS RES. AREA:59,262 SF CIRCULATION:6,553 SF NET RES. AREA:52,709 SF UNIT COUNT:71 UNITS LEVEL 6 PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 RESIDENTIAL UNITS AMENITY ELEVATORS MMTT STAIR STAIR ROOF BELOW ROOF BELOW FLOOR PLANS 12 BUILDING AREA:32,817 SF MEP STORAGE:780 SF TRASH/LOADING:210 SF AMENITY:900 SF GROSS RES. AREA:30,927 SF CIRCULATION:2,853 SF NET RES. AREA:28,074 SF UNIT COUNT:38 UNITS LEVEL 7 PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 SECTIONS PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.22.2020 SECTIONS PROPERTYLINE820835 884 873'-4" 894'-8"PROPERTYLINEDISTANCE CONDENSED BY HALF FOR CLARITY (5) LEVELS OF TYPE III CONSTRUCTION OVER (2) LEVELS OF TYPE I PODIUM CONSTRUCTION OVER (1) LEVEL OF TYPE 1 BELOW GRADE GARAGE -TYP. TYPE III FLOOR 10'-8" -TYP. TYPE I FLOOR 10'-0" -TOTAL HEIGHT NOT INCLUDING BELOW GRADE GARAGE = 74'-8" MAXIMUM (AVERAGE GRADE PLANE TBD) -MAX BUILDING CODE HEIGHT FOR TYPE III IS 85'-0" (4) LEVELS OF TYPE V CONSTRUCTION OVER (1) LEVEL OF TYPE I CONSTRUCTION -TYP. TYPE V FLOOR 10'-8" -TYP. TYPE I FLOOR 10'-0" -TOTAL HEIGHT 53'-4" (5) LEVELS OF TYPE III CONSTRUCTION OVER (1) LEVEL OF TYPE I CONSTRUCTION -TYP. TYPE V FLOOR 10'-8" -TYP. TYPE I FLOOR 10'-0" -TOTAL HEIGHT 64'-0" BUILDING SECTION DIAGRAM (CUT EAST TO WEST) BUILDING SECTION DIAGRAM(CUT NORTH TO SOUTH) SITE SECTION(CUT NORTH TO SOUTH) 13 77TH STREETPARK SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PENTAGON PARK - EDINA, MN | BKV 2395.03 | 12.31.2020 PROJECT DATA Edina - Pentagon Park 12/22/2020 Unit Type Total AB Lobby/Leasing Co-work Amenity MEP & Services Loading& Trash Parking Area Parking Count Gross Building Area GRSF NRSF Efficiency Area (SF)(NRSF / (GROSS BLDG − PARKING)) 0 848 0 71,067 231 71,915 19 948 747 63,541 187 80,476 15,240 13,730 81.07% 48 2,580 1,660 5,080 656 105 35,693 95 87,432 41,658 35,909 69.40% 3 76 980 210 64,157 62,967 56,134 87.49% 71 980 210 60,452 59,262 52,709 87.19% 38 900 780 210 32,817 30,927 28,074 85.55% TBD TBD 404 2,580 1,660 5,980 7,152 1,902 170,301 513 525,563 335,988 298,824 84.1% 1.00 Per Unit 2.00 Per Unit 340 Area/space Stalls Stalls TBD 1.27 Parking Ratio 533 (Per unit) 513 20 Total Unit 404 236,950 Site Area 5.44 Acres Bed Count 74.3 Density =Total units / Acreage NRSF by Type 298,824 0.34 Lot Coverage =Ground Floor/Site Area NRSF Ave. unit 740 355,262 GFA =Gross Bldg Area - Parking Area Unit Mix 1.50 FAR =GFA / Site Area Unit per Type Parking Ratio Parking Required Surface parking Total Parking Provided Tabulations B Level 1 BEDROOM 2 BEDROOMS Amenities & Support G 2 Parking Garage 6 3-5 7 14 1 2200 Zane Ave N | Minneapolis, MN 55422 www.archfieldoffice.com Cary: Per your request, we reviewed Solhem’s proposal for the Pentagon Park redevelopment on West 77th Street based on our experience working with the Greater Southdale Work Group to craft a physical vision for the future district, translating their guiding principles to the built environment. The resulting vision for development in the Greater Southdale District is to create an enhanced human experience along existing major and new connector streets, with overall experience shaped via landscape setbacks, building step backs, a hierarchy of street typologies, transparency at street level, a minimized impact of the car, and managing storm water as an amenity. The outcome of our collaborations with the Work Group is described in the urban design chapter of the Greater Southdale District Plan and resulted in the Greater Southdale District Design Experience Guidelines. Fred Richards Park is one of the most valuable assets in the southwestern quadrant of the Greater Southdale District. With Pentagon Park offering ample opportunity for redevelopment, the potential addition of housing would dramatically transform West 77th Street, and add new public life to Fred Richards. Because of the scale and quality of the park, it is poised to be considered as cultural destination within the district, with opportunities for park venues to share in and support the quality of life in the neighborhood. To that end is important all new development, especially housing, embrace the park, with edges that are integral with the park. Water is already present in the park, and each new development should positively contribute to both the natural water conditions and water management at the southern edge of the park. It is a unique opportunity in creating a more ecological framework for how the district will continue to develop. In addition, it is important to provide welcoming, inclusive, and shared outdoor places within new developments. Providing continuity between parkland and new development will enhance the social connections between neighbors, especially those who live on the park edges. The need for healthy neighborhoods and healthy ecosystems is a shared responsibility and should be reflected in how new and existing landscape work together for the health of both made and natural systems. This proposal adds significant green space along the edge of the park and increases the site’s permeability, which should mitigate storm water run-off. We look forward to seeing how the integration and connections between the northern edge of the proposed development and Fred Richards Park are resolved in further iterations of the design. To City of Edina Cary Teague, Community Development Director 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 From Mic Johnson, FAIA Date January 20, 2021 2 Concerns for the scale of buildings along the park should be noted in terms of an already measurable distance between the northern edges of the park where single family residents will have a direct view across the park to new development along West 77th Street. In general, buildings with expansive walls parallel to the park should minimized. This U-shaped footprint is a good model for consideration for future developments along West 77th Street at the edge of the park. Similar to the Cornelia transition zone, this proposal has reasonable building heights that step back as a transition in height relative to other residential buildings surrounding the park. It also introduces appropriate building form perpendicular to the park, which should minimize the intrusion from any building appearing too massive. The building facade along West 77th Street is different than that facing Fred Richards Park in its relationship to the street. As noted in the Experience Guidelines, the quality of the street wall is vital to pedestrian continuity of the public realm. Building scale and massing along the street carries with it a measure in how the building mass is seen as part of the pedestrian experience. The Guidelines recommend that buildings do not exceed 200 feet in length without significant change in the direction of the building wall. In the current proposal, the building is over 420 feet in length. It does have significant changes in the building at both ends from base to top but the center section is only marked by the entry canopy. It is suggested that the architects introduce a bottom-to-top expression that beaks up the length of the façade in the center of the south elevation along West 77th Street. In addition, the transition between West 77th and the drop-off canopy seems disconnected in elevation. The fundamental idea of a street room is easy access to the main entry of buildings, and a sense of transparency of the building wall. The grades along West 77th need to be carefully delineated to understand what the experience for pedestrians will be; that is not entirely clear in the submitted package. It should also be noted that West 77th is a major district street, similar to France Avenue. In the general setbacks for these major streets, the expectation is that there would be a double row of street trees that would mark a more formal approach to the overall street landscape. The east and west sides of the proposed development will eventually become part of a larger and connected place, when considered along with future neighbors. Thinking about and anticipating how the proposal can align with these future adjacent developments should be a consideration of the development team. As an example, the guest parking located on the west side of the property is currently shown as up against the building and the adjacent property line. This area could be developed as a Woonerf, a combined/shared street to include a pedestrian-friendly walkway and parking area, and then extended to the north without cars as a pedestrian and bike connection as the “Greenway Link” to Fred Richards Park. This would create a purposeful pedestrian street and can be a local connection that will evolve in new ways over time with the adjacent buildings. The west connection should be addressed as a pedestrian walkway with appropriate landscaping on both sides, and not located immediately next to the property line as currently depicted. It must be noted that the most important aspect of this project is the achieved density, and the integration of open landscape space with the park, without which, the effort to conceal all parking below grade would not have worked as well. Thank you for the opportunity to review. Please let me know if you have any questions. Mic Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.C. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Cary Teague, Community Development Director Item Activity: Subject:Ordinance No. 2021-07: Amending Chapter 36 Off- Street Parking Regulations Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Ordinance No. 2021-07 amending Chapter 36 Off-Street Parking Regulations, and grant first reading. Staff further recommends that first reading would include the edits of the city attorney. INTRODUCTION: In 2020, the Edina City Council requested that the Planning Commission evaluate the appropriateness of the City’s Off-Street Parking Regulations. The City’s current regulations have not been revised since 1992. Many of the current standards have not been amended since 1970. Over the past nine months, the Planning Commission has been considering revisions to the off-street parking regulations. The city attorney has reviewed the proposed ordinance and made edits to clarify the draft ordinance. The edits are highlighted in green in the attached document labeled "Ordinance No. 2021-07 - Draft Ordinance with edits from the city attorney." Staff has put together a table (see attached) that compares recent projects in Edina, to the current ordinance and proposed ordinance. It shows the number of parking spaces that the proposed ordinance would have required, compared to the current ordinance, and the number of stalls that were built or will be built. Note that variances would not have been required in most instances, which demonstrates the ordinance is in line with what developers are building within their projects. ATTACHMENTS: Description Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report 7-12-21 Noon Staff Report to Planning Commission Staff Report, April 28 Ordinance No. 2021-07: Draft Ordinance Recommended by the Planning Commission Ordinance No. 2021-07: Draft Ordinance with edits from the city attorney Staff Presentation Recent Edina Project Comparison to the Draft Ordinance Comparison of Other Cities Parking Regulations Parking Regulations from Similar Cities Comparison of City Regulations - main areas of study Presentation by Nelson Nygaard Recommendations from Nelson Nygaard Staff Presentation Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 12 July 2021 Public Hearing Comments Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Parking Ordinance Amendments VISITORS 76 CONTRIBUTORS 31 RESPONSES 31 4 Registered 1 Unverified 26 Anonymous 4 Registered 1 Unverified 26 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 19, 2021 13:03:47 pm Last Seen:Mar 19, 2021 13:03:47 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name RuthAnn Metzger Q2.Address 5600 Dale Ave Q3.Comment Since we are in a pandemic right now, I think these changes are not needed. People are not using public transportation like before the pandemic & now crime is increasing to unacceptable rates. We should be focusing on making people feel safe instead of trying to reduce development costs when development is already out of control. People who are single seniors or who have kids in multiple activities are not going to give up their cars so making fewer parking places is just creating more problems. Who is looking at the big picture? Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 19, 2021 13:06:42 pm Last Seen:Mar 19, 2021 13:06:42 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Joshua Root Q2.Address 6721 Sioux Trl. Q3.Comment Edina was built in an era when car travel was an expected experience. Changes to the parking requirements without understanding the realities the city was built under will result in residents in the vast majority of the city losing access to the businesses and residents being built today. If we change the parking requirements then we need to actually capture the potential benefits of green space etc. to justify the determinant of the car dependent. Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 19, 2021 13:15:50 pm Last Seen:Mar 19, 2021 13:15:50 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ann Swenson Q2.Address 6021 Concord ave Q3.Comment I have a friend who moved three years ago into the apartments next to Byerlys in the greater Southdale area. The complex has underground stalls but now charges for them. The two building complex has about 18 spots designated for its building outside.These are hardly ever available. Think Bank has a big “we will tow you “ sign along with the two retail lots that are connected to the apartment buildings. Byerlys also says their lot is only for customers. The front office of the apartment tells its renters if needing outdoor parking to park in the Macy’s home store lot. Their guest parking is more than inadequate and if Macy’s redevelops will be even worse. Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 19, 2021 14:18:41 pm Last Seen:Mar 19, 2021 14:18:41 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sherry Hottinger Q2.Address 405 Harrison Ave S, Edina, MN Q3.Comment Reduced parking is all well and good, all reasons cited are valid reasons to consider. The reality however is that mass transit is abysmal and walking/biking is only an option for a limited part of our annual season. Walking and biking in winter, especially while shopping, can be difficult or impossible for many people. Inadequate parking forces cars further into neighborhoods which is also not desirable. I'm not going to fight for parking near my destination. I will shop elsewhere because for me it's the only way to do what I need to do. I will happily take transit if it was available, nearby, clean and safe. The demographics around younger generations are promising for reduced cars and environmental thoughtfulness, but to reduce parking without having the alternatives in place is not a great idea. If the city truly addresses these issues by creating transit which is workable for people by all means, reduce parking. Respondent No:5 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 19, 2021 16:16:02 pm Last Seen:Mar 19, 2021 16:16:02 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name James L Wotipka Q2.Address 7710 Gleason Road Q3.Comment This sounds like another attempt to force people out of their cars. We do not need to win the title for most bicycle metro in the country. Our weather does not allow for practical use of bicycles all year long. As far as public transportation goes, getting to a bus requires long walks which are certainly not safe in our winters. If a residential development has x number of units than at a minimum it should have x number of parking spaces. Respondent No:6 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 19, 2021 17:05:15 pm Last Seen:Mar 19, 2021 17:05:15 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name mary everett Q2.Address 5600 park place Q3.Comment The reality is: we live in MINNESOTA, we have a hard WINTER, we do NOT choose to take a bus or taxi, we pay HUGE property taxes and want to have 2-3 cars. We have children that have sports activities ALL over the cities and we are not putting our 5-18 year olds on a bus. What is with all these appointed liberals with these CRAZy ideas. We want cars, we want to drive. I feel as though the people with this agenda are appointed people, not people that are current residents or elected people? Maybe I am wrong and out of touch?. I don't know who comes up with these ideas but I believe that most residents, who have children as well as those of us that are older, have no interest in public transportation for our everyday transportation. Although it is great to walk to 50th and France I need my car and always will. I think Edina really needs to start listening to the people that live here, not appointed reps from outside our city. Respondent No:7 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 20, 2021 04:44:59 am Last Seen:Mar 20, 2021 04:44:59 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Ann Makres Q2.Address 4912 69th Street Q3.Comment We should not reduce the number of parking spaces required for projects. There must be a minimum of 1 parking space per unit and a percentage ( the larger units) must be be required to allow two spaces Respondent No:8 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 20, 2021 09:29:32 am Last Seen:Mar 20, 2021 09:29:32 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Aimee Makres Q2.Address 6450 York Ave S, #314 Edina, MN 65435 Q3.Comment I think there should be 2 spots for each livable unit built. In my condo there is only 1 parking spot per unit, yet two people live in a unit and each person has a car. There is not enough parking for everyone in my building and many use the adjacent office buildings parking lot. It takes 2 incomes to live in these condo buildings in Edina and we need 1 parking spot for each person. Respondent No:9 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 20, 2021 11:30:16 am Last Seen:Mar 20, 2021 11:30:16 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mary Landberg Q2.Address 5408 Creek View Lane Q3.Comment Changing to less parking required by builders will result in more parking on the street. I don't think this is a good idea. Look at the newest completed buildings. There is less space on the street no place for delivery trucks, trash removal trucks, etc. to park while they're completing their tasks. Bad, bad idea. Respondent No:10 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 21, 2021 10:21:39 am Last Seen:Mar 21, 2021 10:21:39 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Liberta Ledder Q2.Address 6709 Cheyenne Trail Q3.Comment The city has moved to increase density over the past 15 years. We are now at a point of being overcrowded. Reducing parking would only exasperate the problems we have in the city with too much traffic, no availability parking, and high if not out of control density. Please do NOT change our parking ordinances. Please listen to the people of this community and not the developers. We pay your salary and are not happy with the growth we have seen. PLEASE LISTEN!!!! Respondent No:11 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 21, 2021 11:33:15 am Last Seen:Mar 21, 2021 11:33:15 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Heather Tietz Q2.Address 6404 Glacier Place Q3.Comment Would expect the City to NOT allow changes that would drive increased street parking in residential neighborhoods. A huge part of the quality of life of a neighborhood is whether kids/families can safely bike and participate in other outdoor activities. High level of on-street parking makes those activities less safe. Parking requirements in higher density or commercial areas impact what a buyer (housing or commercial) is willing to pay which ultimately impacts long term tax revenues from the property. Hope the City factors that into the analysis; otherwise, may have short term gain and long term pain. Respondent No:12 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 23, 2021 14:08:17 pm Last Seen:Mar 23, 2021 14:08:17 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Lucia Copland Q2.Address 4805 Hibiscus Ave, Edina MN 55435 Q3.Comment I am not in favor or reducing minimum parking requirements, for the following reasons: Winter weather makes commuting by any other than motorized transportation (a) extremely difficult and (b) unlikely to occur. Winter weather is a likelihood for this area at least 5 months of the year, if not 6. Reduced parking hurts the disabled and the elderly disproportionately. Many seniors travel only by car for health reasons while not qualifying for handicapped parking spaces (for example, because of lowered immunity, back aches, high blood pressure). Edina should be a handicapped and senior citizen friendly community. COVID-19 has shown us the negative consequences of increasing the numbers of people who use public transportation. Pandemics are not going to end after this one. Reduced parking benefits developers FAR more than the community. Respondent No:13 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 24, 2021 07:03:06 am Last Seen:Mar 24, 2021 07:03:06 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kirk Aadalen Q2.Address 4800 Hilltop Lane Q3.Comment I am against reducing the number of parking spots required for new construction projects. There will be people that own cars moving into these new condos and apartments. Those cars need to go somewhere. Please do not lower the required number of spots for new commercial/residential projects in Edina. Respondent No:14 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 25, 2021 10:56:07 am Last Seen:Mar 25, 2021 10:56:07 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Sandy Simmons Q2.Address 5038 Bruce Place Q3.Comment Reducing the number of minimum parking spots going forward sounds very 'green' but in fact completely ignores reality. We live in a winter climate with snow, rain, ice. People are not going to bike in the winter. Parents aren't going to carpool on bikes. Couples don't go out for dinner on bikes. Handicaps and age make biking difficult. Cars are here to stay and with increasing population and density, decreasing space for cars makes no sense at all. Our community is 'locked in' to its existing space. With the city continually approving increased density it needs to recognize decreasing parking will effect everyone's quality of life in Edina. Respondent No:15 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 25, 2021 13:42:48 pm Last Seen:Mar 25, 2021 13:42:48 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Dorothy Lodahl Q2.Address 5201 Richwood Drive Q3.Comment The premise to encourage walking, mass transit is fine - but mobility and age issues can prohibit using these amenities. If there are not enough parking spaces available - where will people park? In the street and during the winter plowing - I lived in Minneapolis for many many years - I appreciate the clear roads. Respondent No:16 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 25, 2021 14:06:01 pm Last Seen:Mar 25, 2021 14:06:01 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Kevin Newman Q2.Address 7408 Shannon Drive Q3.Comment I am against reducing the concept or proposal to reduce the minimum parking requirements. I believe the number of parking spots should at a minimum of two parking spot per unit. The city posting lists the “benefits” of reducing the minimum parking requirements, but the downside includes • Less desirable living units. o In today’s world, most families, especially those looking for affordable housing, have two working individuals. In most cases, they need two vehicles to get to work. • Crowded street parking with the overflow of tenant vehicles. • An increased risk of auto vandalism or theft. o The TWC is seeing a record number of car and catalytic converter theft. Local news recommends parking your car in a garage of secure lot. Specific to parking requirements, developers should build units based on today’s consumer wants and needs, not projected trends that rarely come true. If the trends come true and everyone takes mass transit in the future, parking lots can be redeveloped into green space. Respondent No:17 Login:Lynn Hechanova Email:Lhechanova@comcast.net Responded At:Mar 25, 2021 16:12:06 pm Last Seen:Mar 25, 2021 22:58:26 pm IP Address:66.182.125.93 Q1.First and Last Name Lynn Hechanova Q2.Address 5601 Dewey Hill Road #302 Q3.Comment Setting a maximum number of parking spots for residential units at 1.5 is overreacting. Many senior couples who would like to downsize their single family home, or who have a second home, still both drive. They may both still be working. Limiting their option to have 2 parking spots available discourages them from giving up their single family home making less room for younger families to move into Edina. We would not have considered moving from our single family home in Edina to a condominium that didn’t have 2 spaces available and we are in a designated senior condo in Edina. Respondent No:18 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Mar 26, 2021 18:40:14 pm Last Seen:Mar 26, 2021 18:40:14 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Bill Noonan Q2.Address 6204 Chowen Ave S Q3.Comment I’m not in favor of reducing the number of parking stalls for buildings. Look at density housing in Minneapolis and you’ll notice that people park in the streets, a real mess in the winter. Mpls has had bike lanes for many years and they’re hardly used between October and April. Sure, a few diehards use bikes all year. Edina already created a two messes. One mess is the building on France where Stripes and others share a dinky parking lot, and a parking ramp with a very steep access. Another mess is the new apartment or condo complex that faces the post office on 49th. I don’t know why anyone would want to rent a condo/apartment that looks at a parking ramp facing north that may have one week of sunshine in a year. I think it is a mistake to allow a structure like this so we get more tax revenue. The idea that someone from out of state would come here to tell us about national trends in parking is a waste of time and money. Does the person lives in our latitude, a very severe cold climate with snow and ice for six months each year? The City of Edina is trying to be a leader in green space, vehicle emissions, narrowed streets, reduced speed limits, and seems to push theory’s that in 40 years everyone will be driving tiny electric cars, riding bicycles, taking busses, and walking to small neighborhood stores, recycling food scraps, etc. Some people may like this life style, but I for one don’t want it forced upon me. I also don’t think we should spend our tax revenue trying to convince people like me that this is the right plan. Respondent No:19 Login:lewi0392 Email:lewi0392@gmail.com Responded At:Mar 27, 2021 14:54:14 pm Last Seen:Mar 27, 2021 21:29:01 pm IP Address:74.81.184.6 Q1.First and Last Name Andrew Lewis Q2.Address 6117 St Johns Ave, Edina, MN 55424 Q3.Comment This is a timely and worthwhile effort on the part of the city to reconsider parking in the context of climate change, transportation patterns, and current development trends. Mandating parking when market forces do not demand it drives up the cost of housing and business development in a time in which both are acute issues. I support these efforts and hope that the project team can come up with an approach that considers the costs and benefits of parking more equally than they have been to this point. Respondent No:20 Login:modern dad Email:tcarlson@carlsonpartnersllc. com Responded At:Apr 06, 2021 07:23:17 am Last Seen:Jul 12, 2021 14:42:55 pm IP Address:96.67.189.61 Q1.First and Last Name Ted Carlson Q2.Address 5516 Knoll Drive Q3.Comment As a 20 year resident and local developer, I am excited that Edina is updating a code that is 50 years old. Focus on transit, ride-share, bikes and pedestrians is very important! Let's figure out how to get rid of huge parking lots that are misaligned with market demands. Respondent No:21 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Apr 10, 2021 12:39:40 pm Last Seen:Apr 10, 2021 12:39:40 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Chris Brown Q2.Address 4504 West 70th Street Q3.Comment This is definitely a step in the right direction! Unfortunately, this feels like a small step instead of broader change. Especially if we hope to create meaningful change regarding how residents, employees, and visitors travel throughout Edina. The E Line, Green Line extension, and improved bike/ped connections, as well as more mixed-use and dense development planned for parts of the City could all create significant opportunity for parking space reductions. I urge you to consider going further with this in mind. I'm not advocating for removing minimums altogether (at least not right now), but continuing to require 1:1 minimum ratios coupled with minor increases in square footage requirements feels like this opportunity is missing the mark. Edina is not an exurb. It's a first ring suburb with significant built environment benefits that provide a foundation for greater mode shift away from single family vehicles. Key items for your consideration: Sec 1.b: 1.25 space min. for multi-family housing, especially when most of that will be in transit-served areas seems unnecessarily high. Could we consider a 1:1 at the very least? Sec 1.g: Why require two spaces per classroom when students cannot drive anyway? I understand parent or volunteer activities but as an advocate for safe routes to school, let's think bigger. Sec 1.h, k, m, and v: All of these have minimal increases in square footage. Can't we do more? I'm not a parking expert but increasing by 50 sq ft seems paltry. Sec 1.w: This is probably the biggest disappointment. 1:1 for a mixed-use development when this development is likely located near the most desirable multimodal connections? Couldn't we at least try 0.8 minimum and 1.25 maximum? Do we really need three spaces for every two units? I've parked in the Westin's parking garage and it's an excellent example of wasted space (and money). Sec 2 (all): Three of the four PCDs will be served by the E Line. All of these represent the greatest opportunity for Edina to aggressively promote mode shift away from SOVs. In addition to reducing the minimum, these areas would be great locations to promote affordable housing via reduced parking costs. Sec 3: Could a provision to promote affordable housing be included? This policy seems like an excellent opportunity to provide developers with the tools to incentivize inclusion of affordable dwelling units within a broader project or fully- affordable buildings. There are examples of other municipalities using parking policy to accomplish this, so I strongly recommend your review and consideration. We are in the midst of an affordable housing crisis and as a City with many food service, retail, and other traditionally low-wage industries, wouldn't it be great to have these workers have at least the option to live closer to where they work? Parking costs a lot to build, and that cost usually ends up raising tenant rents. $5,000: Cost per surface space $25,000: Cost per above-ground garage space $35,000: Cost per below-ground garage space $142: The typical cost renters pay per month for parking +17%: Additional cost of a unit's rent attributed to parking Thank you for your consideration of my comments! I'm pleased to see the City considering this step in the right direction but I know we can do more! Respondent No:22 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Apr 13, 2021 07:30:00 am Last Seen:Apr 13, 2021 07:30:00 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name your mom Q2.Address your mom Q3.Comment your mom Respondent No:23 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Apr 13, 2021 07:33:28 am Last Seen:Apr 13, 2021 07:33:28 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Your mom Q2.Address The DEEZ NUTS Rood Q3.Comment its free real estate Respondent No:24 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Apr 15, 2021 06:55:42 am Last Seen:Apr 15, 2021 06:55:42 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Thomas Hoegh Q2.Address 4407 Grimes Ave. S Q3.Comment "If you don't build it, they will still come." - this should be the city's motto regarding parking. The city's 'logic' to reduce parking is reductive. In other words, there is a desire to reduce parking space so they spin explanations and scavenge for data to support that position. This is really, really sad that idealogues are driving public policy. Respondent No:25 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Apr 20, 2021 12:43:53 pm Last Seen:Apr 20, 2021 12:43:53 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Mic O’Brien Q2.Address 4052 Sunnyside Rd Q3.Comment This sure feels to me like a developer who knowingly built his new building (The Lorient) with insufficient parking, with the knowledge that he would eventually get his way. His subsequent variance request was (somewhat, surprisingly) turned down; however, his new angle is to just get the rules changed. That way, he gets the rent from the large restaurant that he always planned on, the city gets the tax revenue and the surrounding neighborhood takes the brunt of the street-parked cars. Some of my neighbors warned me that this was inevitable — they’ve given up the fight. I guess the city & developer “win”? Respondent No:26 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Apr 22, 2021 09:45:57 am Last Seen:Apr 22, 2021 09:45:57 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Roberta Castellano Q2.Address 4854 France Ave S Q3.Comment I object to any plan that will increase the likelihood of commercial district parking spilling out into the surrounding neighborhoods, reducing the neighbors’ quality of life, and fundamentally and detrimentally altering the character of the surrounding neighborhoods, while simultaneously reducing developers’ required investments into projects. This plan appears to be consistent with City efforts to expand commercial areas into surrounding neighborhoods. At 50th & France, it was discovered during the 50th & France Small Area Planning, that the City had been intending to utilize Eminent Domain, and the City was subsequently found to have inserted into the 50th & France Small Area Plan, an extortion scheme to extract property holdings from Maple Road neighbors, in order to further enable Lunds to redevelop the US Bank site to a greater extent than otherwise possible. This was in addition to multiple underhanded attempts to increase the permitted housing unit density within the district. Respondent No:27 Login:jjan Email:jjanovy@outlook.com Responded At:May 20, 2021 11:26:21 am Last Seen:May 20, 2021 11:26:21 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Jennifer Janovy Q2.Address 4016 Inglewood Avenue Q3.Comment Here are initial comments: -- I have submitted questions asking where standards can be found for electric vehicle chargers and parking design. -- What is the thinking behind parking maximums? Is this to prevent the city from imposing more parking than needed or to prevent developers from proposing more parking than the city wants the development to have, even though a developer is unlikely to propose any more than it needs? --The code revision allows a 10% reduction in parking if the development is within one quarter mile of a transit stop. I live within one quarter of a mile of qualified transit stops, but still need a place to store my car. If there is local data to establish a finding that when people live or work within a quarter mile of a qualified transit stop they will not own or use a car but will take transit instead, then fine. If this idea is derived from experiences in much denser urban areas or if it stems from a belief that we can get people to drive less or take transit more if we undersupply parking in our community, then no. --The revision allows for up to a 5% reduction in spaces "for any development that provides reserved parking for use by car-share vehicles." How many reserved parking spaces for car-share vehicles? Is it one-for-one? The code doesn't make that clear. There are no Zipcar or Hourcar locations in Edina (based on google search). Let's think about this. If it's a commercial space, customers are coming and going. It makes no difference whether the vehicle they use is their personal vehicle or rented. Parking needs don't change. If it's a multifamily use, the rented vehicle may be a second or third vehicle for the tenants. They still need their regular space(s). --The revisions allows up to a 10% reduction in parking requirements if the parking area uses pervious pavement or provides a storm water facility. It allows up to 20% reduction if the design allows for retaining trees or native landscaping. What do either of these provisions have to do with parking utilization? Is the assumption that the code minimums in other sections still require too much parking and so it can be reduced another 10-20%? Do trees and stormwater facilities mean fewer people will need to park their cars? There are tree, landscaping, and stormwater requirements in other sections of the code. If these are not adequate, make them better. Put the "park" in parking lot (surface lots should be green) as a mandate. --Parking stalls are for storing vehicles when they are not in use. Although parking areas are not typically designed very thoughtfully for pedestrians, they are as much pedestrian environments as they are vehicle environments. The number of stalls is only one aspect of parking area design. Other areas include stall size, drive aisles, car, pedestrian and bike circulation, lighting, and other functions that might be served by a parking area, such as idling areas for delivery vehicles and ride share pickup/drop off, electric vehicle charging, waste storage and collection, and snow storage. How well a parking area functions depends on the whole picture, not only the number of stalls. Does the code address the whole picture? If yes, we should review the code revisions within this larger context. --A parking area that functions poorly can have a negative impact on adjacent streets and other properties. Trucks double parking for deliveries or waste removal, vehicles circling the block or hovering to find a parking spot, commercial or multifamily residential parking intruding on R-1 neighborhoods. People tend to look at parking areas as wasted space. It costs a lot and is not revenue generating (for the most part). But providing adequate space within parking areas is absolutely necessary to reduce spillover impacts. --I chose my neighborhood because of its proximity to stores, restaurants and services that I can walk to. For over 20 years I regularly took trips on foot, walking to the grocery store, restaurant or Target. Then I fell on the ice three times in the winter even though I was wearing spikes. Last winter I broke my ankle and couldn't walk (or drive) until late May. Not everybody can walk or bike or easily take transit, for a lot of reasons. Some community design ideals are about taking away choice. If you make it difficult to find a parking space by reducing parking requirements, more people will walk, bike or take transit. That is creating one hardship to create another. For many people, having to walk, bike or take transit is a hardship. For me, it was (and is) a lifestyle choice, but not all the time. My time on the transportation commission and Bike Edina, spearheading the France Avenue pedestrian project, Living Streets policy and pedestrian plan, was about expanding people's transportation choices. I believed there was an unmet need for sidewalks and safe crossings. Uber/Lyft have shown there is a need for ride share services. Tesla, Volvo, Ford and other car companies are leading the way on electric vehicles. If we listen, people tell us how they want to live. Other than ideologues and cost-wary developers, I don't hear anyone saying they want less, or less convenient parking, in new developments. Crowded, inadequate parking areas don't add to anyone's quality of life. So, please, think carefully about the beliefs or assumptions underlying some of these parking code changes. --Thank you for considering. Jennifer Janovy Respondent No:28 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jun 07, 2021 17:53:28 pm Last Seen:Jun 07, 2021 17:53:28 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Paul Thompson Q2.Address 4244 Crocker Ave Q3.Comment do everything you can to increase walking, bike parking and getting people out of cars and using public transportation or biking and walking.....thanks for your attention to this climate solution. Respondent No:29 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jul 07, 2021 21:43:00 pm Last Seen:Jul 07, 2021 21:43:00 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name K Curtin Q2.Address 5525 Code Ave Q3.Comment The majority of residents use cars to get around and having adequate parking both on city streets and businesses is vital to continued long term success of the city. If you leave it up to developers they will lie and exaggerate to maximize profits and say parking should be reduced. We NEED to continue to have adequate parking to continue our quality of life and for ongoing access for our residents. Failure to have adequate parking will drive away businesses who can't turn a profit due to no parking for customers and drive away older residents who cannot get to needed businesses when both vital to our community. Please do NOT reduce our parking requirements in the city of Edina. Respondent No:30 Login:rodscholl Email:rod.scholl@gmail.com Responded At:Jul 09, 2021 08:08:11 am Last Seen:Jul 09, 2021 15:05:52 pm IP Address:68.54.106.88 Q1.First and Last Name Rod Scholl Q2.Address 4217 W. 42nd St. Q3.Comment This is a giveaway to the wealthy; a wolf in green sheep’s clothing. The day the city lowers the parking requirements commercial land values will pop up like, let’s say 15% because the potential for the property is much greater now that the city is giving them our streets for their parking lots. It’s true the tax revenue now goes up, let’s say like 1%... and the wealthy get a lot, and residents get a few crumbs. Of course, those numbers are total guesses because the city is not providing that analysis on BetterTogether. The lack of discussion of the actual motivation makes this seem like an attempted sleight of hand. And the winner will be the developers and commercial property owners… and we residents will have a little more enjoyability and ease of life chipped away from us so that they can turn bigger profits. I’m not much of a historian, but even I can see the pattern here from leadership.***************** It remains unanswered how much a typical residential property tax would be reduced in exchange for this parking deal (or what services could be added). If you saved me $5,000 a year in property taxes, then maybe it’s worth the hassle of fighting like vultures for parking. If you save me only $5 a year in property taxes – I’d rather pay the $5 and not be circling in my car creating pollution/emissions while looking for spots in winter’s slush, and trudging along streets with no sidewalks. ************** Also missing is an assessment of whether we have excess parking now. If that is a known fact, publish the data of lot usage. It seems like every category had decreased parking requirements, perhaps excepting restaurant parking. **************** It’s audacious to claim this is a green approach, while the commercial land owners get a lowly taxed windfall to produce more stuff and waste and energy use. Using inconvenience to discourage driving is akin to scattering nails in the roadways -- which might be supported by tire manufacturers, just as this proposal is supported by developers. ************* Would we be better served to reduce the parking, and put a large tax on that change for associated commercial property value increases… and that tax is used to subsidize better car sharing options, mass transit, electric vehicle subsidies, etc? Why is the strategy to give away money to commercial land owners and developers so that we get a few scraps in exchange? ************** If we are desperate for the tax revenue – where is that analysis and discussion? If you came up to my property and said you wanted to have the option to park your cars on it permanently – I would of course ask how much you’re going to give me for that in exchange. And it would depend on how often that spot would be filled. Are we talking a Red Cow situation, or is this just less blacktop sitting unused that we may as well get rid of? And if it is indeed a current excess in parking, why would parking requirements be so much less in Edina than all the surrounding areas? Edina currently has typical parking requirements compared to the 24 surrounding areas, and looks like the new ordinance roughly cuts the requirement in half (once you add in modifiers for bus lines and bike racks, etc.) **************** If one reviews the provided “Parking Regulations for Municipalities within the Twin Cities” it’s clear Edina is proposed to have quite a bit less parking than neighboring cities (other than restaurant parking). If you add in 10% decrease for being near a bus line, (not even counting the additional 10% decrease for merely having a bike rack) it’s clear that Edina will have the least amount of parking compared to the 24 other cities listed in nearly every category. Note the lists shows current, not proposed requirements. And also not shown is the decreasing modifiers for bus lines and bike racks which could be another 20% or even more reduction in parking requirements). When I do that comparison, Edina is *dead last* in most categories for amount of parking required. For example, the summary in the February 24th memo shows that the typical decrease is going from 1/200 to 1/350. If you include the 10% modifier for bus lines, and 10% modifier for a bike rack, we’re up to 1 spot per 424, which is less than half the original ordinance. Therefore, the “half the parking” assessment seems fair. (Again, excepting restaurant parking, which is hard to evaluate given the change in metrics, but still looks typical-ish.) ******************** A tally was done by the city as requested by MNA which proves this “half the parking” assessment out (see here http://www.edinamorningside.org/news on July 7). Note this tally doesn’t include the many possible modifiers that *further* reduce parking requirements. ********************* Looking outside the region, the comparison cities provided by Nelson Nygaard seem cherry picked. No justification for their selection is given. Why demonstrate that we’d be similar to Charlotte, NC which has 15X the population of Edina, a skyscraper-filled skyline and a 75,000-seat stadium? And Highland Park, IL used for comparison is a beach community, and we all know what parking is typically like near the beach given the different land value. The other two cities, Dublin and Birmingham, seem like better comparisons; and I note on a quick review they seem to have almost twice the parking in most categories compared to the 2-24 draft regulations for Edina. Is the point of these comparisons to illuminate that Edina will feel like trying to park in a downtown, or beach community, as opposed to a typical suburb? Again, there is no analysis or conclusions -- just photocopies from four cities ordinances without justification for their inclusion, or why Edina should have parking like downtown Charlotte (or even *less* parking than Charlotte in many categories, actually.) ***************** The arguments for "potential" benefits are listed -- so why not list the many “potential” drawbacks as well? No analysis is given on whether those potential benefits will come to fruition. My economic theory says that existing land values will immediately pop-up after the passing of this ordinance, because builders can put more on them. That windfall never makes it to the affordable housing category. Land is worth more, builders make more, and tax revenues go up – why would that result in lower cost per unit? With the complexity of economics related to affordable housing, we need more than a list of benefits it “may” include. Your new car “may” get great gas mileage… but shouldn’t an estimate of the mileage be listed on the window when you’re shopping?**************** We can agree that too much parking wastes land, and too little parking creates congestion, and is undesirable to those currently living nearby (e.g. Red Cow). Yet, the provided information does not aid the decision or demonstrate the wisdom of the proposal. Looking closely, it seems to actually refute the change in ordinance given that comparative cities have will have twice the parking as Edina. The inflammatory language, and reactionary graphics in the presentation is noted, and given the lack of data or logical arguments, I fear we have paid for propaganda. Worse I fear the motivations of those who have selected that vendor. And even worse, having received the product, I fear those that subsequently approved it as a helpful tool in this discussion and decision making. ************************* For example, on Page 3 – Nygaard argues that, like free pizza, demand for parking is endless -- a false equivalency (and a poor one, because actually people do get full on pizza eventually!). And on Page 6 -- some random city chosen without explanation... no source of the data -- and only concluding that Portsmouth, NH might not know how much parking they have. Are they suggesting every other city also doesn’t know how much parking they have, and so should have less? And we must also be in that same boat? Better, would be an assessment of whether or not there is a unused parking in Edina, and if so at what types of establishments. If that data exists, it is a major oversight to not have published it. ********************* Or, how about data on impacts in municipalities before and after parking ordinance changes – such as associated change in value of nearby residential property values – and increased or decreased commerce and revenues? Or data on whether housing/space was actually made more affordable, or if merely more units were added to increase builder/land owner profits. Also, cruising for parking creates *more* congestion and pollution and is hard to estimate but could be 15%-30% https://www.parkingtoday.com/articledetails.php?id=2624&t=is-30-percent-of-traffic-cruising-for-parking). What are parking needs compared to supply currently in Edina, and what would it be 20 years after the proposed changes? How can our leaders make this decision if the advisors are propagandists -- and how can you expect the public to support it, when they are presented with biased and poorly argued information? ******************** This proposal is basically selling our city streets for future parking usage, so the developers can make more dollars when they develop existing land. It will be gradual, and it's true that the city gets a cut, eventually, via tax revenue on the increased land use. And maybe we need the money for services, and this is the best way to get it at the least inconvenience to we residents. But no such argument is made. Therefore, given complete avoidance of the issue of parking vs. developer profits which historically seem to drive Edina city decisions… and also it strangely leaves obscure the dramatic *decrease* in proposed amount of parking relative to neighboring cities… it sure sounds to me like something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Respondent No:31 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Jul 12, 2021 09:49:53 am Last Seen:Jul 12, 2021 09:49:53 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Roberta Castellano Q2.Address 4854 France Ave S Q3.Comment Monday, July 12, 2021. The City of Edina proposes to reduce required parking at 50th & France in spite of the current conditions. I believe that this is wrong-headed, and that the proposed changes have the potential to further erode the qualities of 50th & France that have made it so unique and appealing for so many years. Nolan Mains was for the most part completed in 2019. Yet, the retail is only about half leased, if that, including the North Ramp commercial. And it is my understanding that at least some of those vacancies have been filled through lease concessions. There remain long- standing vacancies on 50th Street. The Edina Theatre has now closed for good. At the 5000 France building, the corner anchor is gone, accompanied by vacancies at 5014 and 5018 France. How is reducing the available parking going to help the commercial district? How are you going to bring people back to 50th & France? Maybe you don’t want those people. Make it more urban, stuff it with residential, attract a different crowd, more like Uptown, or Downtown? Yes, you can do that, and that is the direction the City has been going in. But that is already making for a very different 50th & France, more like an appendage of Minneapolis. Why come to 50th & France? Nolan Mains is a very attractive building at ground level. But together with the North Ramp, the Market Street redevelopment was a game-changer for 50th & France, as it has changed the character of the area by urbanizing it. How to describe? Narrow, close, keep moving, dark, secreted, a plaza in a pit, ultra-urbanized, hidden, reduced availability of quick parking. A couple of waiting spots is all people get. The first time I checked out the parking underground at Nolan Mains, I saw a smashed window on a vehicle, and the driver on her cell phone (She said she was ok.) The interior of the North Ramp is dark. The new green wall grill on the face of the North Ramp is rusting, and the greenery looks like a few weeds in a vacant parking lot, only on a vertical plane, instead of horizontal. Market Street looks like it is in a downward spiral. How is reducing required parking going to fix that? The Market Street redevelopment established precedents for Lunds to insert high density buildings, and push even further with height, in advance of the long-since-announced intent to redevelop the US Bank Site and US Post Office. According to a traffic study that the City hid from the public-- never publicly vetted--and then snuck into the Comp Plan decennial Update submittal to the Met Council on 12-31-2019, the City has been considering at least another 200 housing units on these sites. And that would be in addition to the grocery store relocating to this area from south of 50th Street. Is the City seriously intending to rid 50th & France of a full-service US Post Office and send even more people to St. Louis Park? The City also secreted into the 50th & France Small Area Plan (2018-2019), an attempt to evade Minnesota statutory prohibitions on the use of Eminent Domain, through the use of an extortion scheme to wrest property from Maple Road homeowners along the perimeter of the US Bank Site, in order to enable Lunds to construct a larger development than would otherwise be possible. The City further expressed interest in making people pay to park! Another nail in the coffin, please? Let us not forget, the City has considered using Eminent Domain to bust the boundaries of the 50th & France Commercial District into the surrounding White Oaks neighborhood. This was verified through a public data request under Minnesota Statutes! And then there is TIF. The costs to redo the public parking in the Market Street project are being borne by the taxpayers through TIF. In the 50th & France Small Area Plan, it was stated that the City might rebuild the South Ramp parking with even more public support, and is even eyeballing nearby residential (much of which was misrepresented, by the way, along with numerous other misrepresentations in the 50th & France Small Area Plan). That sounds to me like even more intent to use Eminent Domain! Through the proposed amendment to the zoning code, the City of Edina wants to reduce the burden on commercial even further, and reduce number of parking spaces required to be provided by businesses. There is nothing that says that the City must revise and reduce parking requirements now at 50th & France. The most likely but unstated reason seems to me to be that it is another preparatory step that the City wants to implement now, in advance of a formal submittal by Lunds for the redevelopment of its property holdings at 50th & France, and not just the US Bank and US Post Office sites. Nevertheless, any code reductions would apply to all businesses, isn’t that correct? Relegate much of the public parking to the surrounding neighborhood streets, right? It is my opinion that the proposed reductions at 50th & France are a bad idea, and I hope that the City Council will vote it down. Thank you. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 City Hall • Phone 952-927-8861 Fax 952-826-0389 • www.CityofEdina.com Date: April 28, 2021 To: Planning Commission From: Cary Teague, Community Development Director Re: Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Off-Street Parking Regulations. In 2020, the Edina City Council requested that the Planning Commission evaluate the appropriateness of the City’s Off-Street Parking Regulations. The City’s current regulations have not been revised since 1992. Many of the current standards have not been amended since 1970. Over the past nine months the Planning Commission has been considering revisions to the off-street parking regulations. Parking requirements often arise when new developments are proposed. Developers sometimes seek to have more or fewer parking spaces than guided by Edina’s Parking Regulations, and residents are sometimes concerned about proposed developments that are perceived to potentially include too much or too little parking. Goals and factors considered during the evaluation of the parking regulations include: trends nationally and around the Twin Cities metropolitan area regarding parking requirements; usage of decades-old parking lots within Edina; current and projected quantities and availability of mass transit; differing needs for different areas of Edina, such as locations where the City has provided mass parking facilities; creating incentives for reduced parking, including sustainability incentives, increasing greenspace, and enhancing mass transit and other forms of multi-modal transportation, such as bike/pedestrian connectivity; climate change and equity; reducing surface parking lots; and previous approvals or rejections of requested variances to Edina’s parking regulations. The Planning Commission recognizes the continued need to consider district parking structures, multi-modal options, and a robust mass transit system. Benefits of reducing minimum parking requirements may include: • Lowering cost for building projects could reduce rents for multi-family residential. Potential to provide more affordable housing. • Reduction in car emissions (if more people use transit, walk or bike). • Potential for more green space and landscaping and potentially public realm/public space. • Less surface parking creates more land available for development which increases tax base, which helps keep residential taxes lower. The following has been considered in the analysis: • Parking regulations for municipalities within the Twin Cities. (see attached comparison table) City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 • Parking regulations for similar and recommended municipalities within the United States. (see attached) • Presentation by Nelson Nygard (parking consultant) with a national perspective regarding parking. (see attached PowerPoint from Nelson Nygard) • Recommendations from Nelson Nygard. (see attached) The Planning Commission is asked to conduct a public hearing and consider the attached Draft Parking Ordinance Amendment. Highlights of the Ordinance Amendment include: Adding incentives for developers to reduce parking including shared parking, bike parking. sustainability and location near transit stops. Adding maximum limits on parking spaces. Having separate regulations within the City’s commercial nodes. Generally reducing the number of parking stalls required. Staff has put together a table (see attached) that compares recent projects in Edina, to the current ordinance and proposed ordinance. It shows the number of parking spaces that that the proposed ordinance would have required, compared to the current ordinance and the number of stalls that were built or will be built. Note that variances would not have been required in most instances, which demonstrates the ordinance is in line with what developers are building within their projects. The following provides some background on the draft ordinance and the changes recommended: Section 1. General Reduction in parking requirement. Uses may be allowed further reductions if located within a transit service area. Some of the more significant changes are as follows: • Apartments – Reduced from 2 spaces per unit to 1.25 minimum and 1.75 maximum spaces per unit. The requirement for 1.25 spaces is consistent with most recent requests for new apartments within Edina. • Medical or dental offices, clinics and animal hospitals – Reduced from one space per 200 square feet to one space per 300 square feet. • Hospitals – Reduced from one space per bed to one space for each two patent beds. • Restaurants – Changed from one-third the seating capacity to one space for each 100 square feet of floor area. • Offices, medical and dental – Requirements are amended from a formula calculation (generally one space per 200 square feet) to one space per 300 square feet, with a maximum of one space per 200 square feet. • Mixed Development District – Uses are amended to be consistent with specific use requirements. Residential reduced from 1.75 spaces per unit to 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.75 spaces per unit. Additional incentives are provided for shared use. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Section 2 – Planned Commercial Districts. This establishes separate regulations for the City’s Commercial Nodes (44th and France, 70th and Cahill, Valley View and Wooddale, 50th and France, Southdale and Grandview). Section 3 – Parking Space Reductions. Reduction/incentive provisions are added for ridesharing, environmental sustainability, and bike parking. A ten (10%) reduction is allowed if a use is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop; to qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. Section 4. Additional Regulations. Additional regulations cover shared parking, proof-of-parking, and prevent two abutting off-street parking facilities next to each other. The following highlights the reductions made to the draft ordinance and the current draft: Use Current Ordinance 1-27 Draft Regulation Proposed Ordinance Apartments 2.0 spaces per unit 1.25 spaces per unit minimum 1.25 spaces per unit minimum with a 1.75 space per unit maximum Nursing Home One space per 4 patients or residents One space per 4 patients or residents One space per 5 patients or residents Community Center One space per 200 s.f. One space per 200 s.f. One space per 250 s.f. Medical, dental, clinic & animal hospital One space per 200 s.f. One space per 250 s.f. One space per 300 s.f. Restaurant 1 space per 3 seats One space per 100 s.f. plus one space per 150 s.f of outdoor space One space per 100 s.f. no requirement for outside seating Office Formula based on size (generally one space per 200 s.f. One space per 250 s.f. One space per 300 s.f. with a max of one space per 200 s.f. Residential use in a Mixed Development District 1.75 spaces per unit 1.25 spaces per unit minimum 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Residential use in a Planned Commercial District 1-1.5 spaces per unit depending on unit size 1.0 spaces per unit minimum 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Office use in a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f. One space per 300 s.f. One space per 350 s.f. with a maximum of one space per 200 s.f. Shopping Center within a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f. One space per 300 s.f. One space per 350 s.f. First Reading – City Council on July 21, 2021 Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX DRAFT - ORDINANCE NO. 2021-07 - DRAFT AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Sec. 36-1311 – Minimum number required. Shall be amended as follows: (a) Single dwelling units, double dwelling units and residential townhouses. One fully enclosed space per dwelling unit. (b) Apartment buildings in the PRD district. (1) 1.25 1.25 spaces per dwelling unit minimum and a maximum of 1.75 spaces per dwelling unit. At least one fully enclosed space per unit required. (c) Senior citizen dwelling unit buildings in the PSR-4 and PSR-5 subdistricts. (1) 0.5 exposed spaces and 0.25 enclosed spaces per senior citizen dwelling unit. (2) In addition to subsection (c)(1) of this section, the following spaces are required: a. One completely enclosed and one exposed space for each non senior citizen dwelling unit located in a building in the Planned Senior Residence District. b. One completely enclosed space per vehicle owned by the building's management and stored on the property; and c. One exposed space for each employee who is not a resident of the building. 0.75 spaces per bedroom, plus one space per employee on a maximum shift, plus one space per vehicle owned by the building's management (d) Nursing, convalescent and rest homes. One space for every four five patients or residents based on the maximum capacity of the building, plus one space per employee on the major shift, plus one space per vehicle owned by the building's management. (e) Day care, nurseries and preschools (principal use). One space per teacher or employee, plus one space per 20 individuals (or major fraction) receiving care. (f) Public or private senior high schools and seminaries. One space per classroom plus one space per ten students, or spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, whichever is greater. (g) Public or private elementary or junior high schools. Two spaces per classroom, or spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, whichever is greater. (h) Community centers. Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, or one space for each 200 250 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 2 (i) Churches and other religious institutions. Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, plus spaces for other church facilities which are used concurrently with the largest place of assembly, the number of which shall be determined by the council in connection with the granting of a conditional use permit. (j) Theaters (except within shopping centers), stadiums, auditoriums, arenas, lodge halls, mortuaries, and clubhouses. Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, plus one space for each employee on the major shift. (k) Governmental administration, public service, post office. The greater of one space: (1) Per employee on the major shift, plus one space per government-owned vehicle, plus ten visitor spaces; or (2) For each 200 250 square feet of gross floor area. (l) Libraries, art galleries. Ten spaces, plus one space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area. (m) Medical or dental offices, clinics and animal hospitals. One space for each 200 300 square feet of gross floor area, plus one space per physician, dentist or veterinarian. (n) Hospitals. One space per bed for each two patient beds, plus one space per employee or volunteer on the major shift. (o) Athletic, health and weight reduction facilities. (1) Six Four spaces per court for handball, racquetball, and tennis courts. (2) One space per 200 400 square feet of gross floor area for all other uses. (p) Restaurants (except within shopping centers). Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, One space for each 100 square feet of indoor floor area, plus one space for each employee on the major shift and one space for each loading dock. (q) Carwashes. One space per employee on the major shift, plus five spaces for each wash lane, plus stacking spaces in accordance with section 36-1264. (r) Accessory carwashes. Two parking spaces, plus stacking spaces in accordance with section 36-1264. (s) Gas stations. One space per employee on the major shift, plus one space for each 100 300 square feet of accessory retail uses in excess of 500 square feet exclusive of restrooms, storage areas and mechanical equipment. (t) Automobile service centers. Three parking spaces per service bay, plus one space per employee on the major shift, plus one space for each 100 300 square feet of accessory Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 3 retail uses in excess of 500 square feet exclusive of restrooms, storage areas and mechanical equipment. (u) Bowling alleys. Five spaces per lane. (v) Offices, medical and dental laboratories, business or professional offices, financial institutions, employment agencies and travel bureaus. Gross Floor Area (GFA) (in square feet) Number of Spaces 0—20,000 GFA/200 20,001—220,000 GFA/[(0.00025*GFA)+195] Over 220,000 GFA/250 One space per 300 square feet plus one space for a loading zone dock minimum with a maximum of one space per 200 square feet. (w) Mixed Development District. (1) Residential. One enclosed space, plus 0.75 exposed space, per dwelling unit. 1.0spaces per dwelling unit minimum with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit. (2) Nonresidential. Excluding publicly owned facilities and uses accessory to residential uses: Shall be regulated per Section 36-1311 above. Gross Floor Area (GFA) (in square feet) Number of Spaces 0—20,000 GFA/200 20,001—220,000 GFA/[(0.0005*GFA)+190] Over 220,000 GFA/300 (3) Where there is combined within a single building an office use and a commercial restaurant, up to 30% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the commercial restaurant. (4) Where there is combined within a single building an office use and a residential use, up to 40% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the residential use, provided Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 4 that the number of spaces required for residential parking shall never be less than one (1) parking space per dwelling unit. (5) Where there is combined within a single building an office use, a residential use, and a commercial restaurant, up to 40% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the residential use, provided that the number of spaces required for residential parking shall never be less than one (1) parking space per dwelling unit, and up to 30% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the commercial restaurant. (x) Multitenant industrial buildings. One space for each 400 500 square feet of gross floor area, or the sum of the component gross floor areas as follows, whichever is greater: (1) One space for each 200 300 square feet of office space. (2) One space for each 2,000 square feet of warehouse space. (3) One space for each 300 square feet of manufacturing, processing, packaging, treatment and assembly space. (4) One space for each 500 square feet of space containing machines and equipment for conducting scientific research, testing or experimentation. (5) One space for each 200 400 square feet of facilities for athletic, health and weight reduction purposes; six spaces per court for handball, racquetball or tennis. (y) Automobile and boat sales, new or used. One space per 250 square feet of gross floor area, including showrooms, sales space and offices, but excluding service areas, plus three spaces for each service bay. Required parking spaces shall not be used for the storage or display of vehicles, boats or other products. (z) Furniture and major appliance sales. (1) Over 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. One space per 400 square feet of gross floor area. (2) Under 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. One space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. (aa) Hotels and motels. One space per guest unit, plus one space for each employee on the major shift. (bb) Taproom and cocktail room. One space per 40 square feet of gross floor area. (cc) Brewery, winery and distillery without on-site sales. One space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. (dd) Brewpub, brewery, winery and distillery with on-site sales. One space per 1,000 gross square feet of production floor area, and spaces equal in number to one-third the Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 5 maximum seating capacity, plus one space for each employee on the major shift for the restaurant. (ee) Uses not Specified. Where ambiguity exists in the application of off-street parking requirements, or where the parking requirements for a use are not specifically defined herein, the parking requirements for such use shall be determined by the city planner or the city planner designee and such determination shall be based upon the requirements for the most comparable use specified in this chapter. Section 2 Sec. 36-1312. - Planned Commercial District. Shall be amended as follows: For uses allowed in the Planned Commercial District, except uses for which a parking quantity is otherwise specified, the minimum spaces are as follows: (1) Planned Commercial District – 1 (PCD-1) (Areas include: 70th and Cahill, ValleyView/Wooddale, 44th and France) Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. One (1) space per 250 square feet. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Office. One space per 350 square feet plus one space for a loading zone dock minimum with a maximum of one space per 200 square feet. (2) Planned Commercial District – 2 (PCD-2) (50th and France, area defined in the 50th and France small area plan) Parking for uses in the 50th and France commercial node may rely on the City Parking Ramps with a floor area ratio up to 1.0. Uses exceeding 1.0 must provide additional off- street parking spaces for the square footage above 1.0. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 6 spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. (3) Planned Commercial District – 2 (PCD-2) (Grandview, area defined in the Grandview Development Framework) Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. One (1) space per 250 square feet. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Office. One space per 350 square feet plus one space for a loading zone dock minimum with a maximum of one space per 200 square feet. (4) Planned Commercial District – 3 (PCD-3) (Property zoned PCD-3 within the Greater Southdale area as defined in the Southdale District Plan) Shopping centers (6+ businesses and at least 25,000 s.f.). One space per 200 350 square feet of gross floor area (including theaters and restaurants), plus one additional space for each ten seats in a restaurant, theater or other place of assembly. Atrium areas and mall areas, not used for retail sales purposes, shall be excluded from gross floor area calculations. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. One (1) space per 250 square feet. Section 3 Sec. 36-1324. Parking Space Reductions Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 7 Section 36-1324 is amended to add the following: Reductions. The following off-street parking reductions may be utilized jointly or separately except as indicated otherwise: (1) The required aggregate number of spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent (10%) if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop; to qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (2) Car-share Parking. A reduction of up to one space or five percent of the overall number of required parking spaces, whichever is greater, may be granted for any development that provides reserved parking for use by car-share vehicles. Parking for car-share vehicles may be provided in any required or non-required off-street parking space. (3) Environmental Sustainability. With the consent of the city planner or the planner’s designee upon review of potential adverse impacts, a reduction of up to ten percent (10%) in parking requirements may be approved for parking areas composed of pervious pavement or where the reduced parking area is used for a low impact development storm water facility; and a reduction of up to twenty percent (20%) in parking requirements may be approved for clustered site design where the reduced parking area is used for tree retention or native landscaping. (4) A 10 percent reduction in parking provided if the following is provided for the following: (a) 1 covered, long-term bike space per 3 dwelling units. (b) 1 covered, long-term bike space per 5,000 s.f. of retail/service uses. (c) 1 short-term bike space per 5,000 s.f. of retail/services uses. In order to qualify for this reduction, the long-term bicycle parking must: (a) Be protected from weather and from access by unauthorized persons; (b) Consist of bike racks or lockers anchored so that they cannot be easily removed; (c) Allow both the bicycle frame and the wheels to be locked with the bicycle in an upright position using a standard U-lock; Section 4 Sec. 36-1325. Additional Parking Regulations. Section 36-1325 is amended to add the following: (1) Shared Parking. Shared off-street parking facilities are allowed to collectively provide parking in any district for more than one structure or use, subject to the following conditions: Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 8 (a) The applicant(s) must provide evidence that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the buildings or uses for which the joint use of off-street parking facilities is proposed. For purposes of this subsection, no substantial conflict shall mean: (a) up to 75 percent of the required parking for daytime use may be provided in the parking facilities of a nighttime or weekend use; or (b) up to 75 percent of the required parking for a nighttime or weekend use may be provided in the parking facilities of a daytime use. A parking plan shall address the hours, size and mode of operation of the respective uses. Within the Planned Commercial District, an applicant shall document proposed joint-use parking proposals through the use of the Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Model (ULI Shared Parking, Second Edition). (b) The minimum spaces required under a shared parking agreement shall be based on the number of spaces required for the use that requires the most parking. (c) Shared parking facilities shall be protected by an irrevocable legal agreement running with the land and recorded with the county in a form approved by the city attorney. A certified copy of the recorded document shall be provided to the city planner within 60 days after approval of the agreement by the city council. (d) To qualify, parking must be supplied within 300 feet of the main entrance to the parcel and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the principal structure and all parking spaces. (2) Proof of parking measures. An applicant may be eligible for a reduction in the required number of off-street parking spaces where the applicant can demonstrate there is lesser need for the required number of off-street parking spaces, and/or there is a space set aside for code complying off-site parking spaces to be constructed if a need is later indicated by the city issuing authority, provided: (a) Where the applicant is seeking a reduction in the total number of required constructed parking spaces, the lesser number of constructed spaces may be allowed, provided: (i) The city would require a parking study conducted in accordance with accepted methodology approved by the city issuing authority, prepared by an independent traffic engineering professional under the supervision of the city and paid for by the applicant, demonstrating that there is not a present need for the portion of parking for which the applicant is requesting proof of parking flexibility. (ii) Where a site plan is approved with proof of parking measures, a properly drawn legal instrument, memorializing the parking measures drafted and executed by the parties concerned, must be filed with the records for that Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 9 property in the Registrar of Titles’ or Recorder’s office of the county with proof thereof presented to the issuing authority. (b) Suitability of deferred spaces. The applicant must not assign deferred parking spaces to areas required for landscaping, required buffer zones, setbacks, fire lanes, drive aisles or areas that would otherwise be unsuitable for parking spaces because of the physical characteristics of the land or other requirements of this code. (c) Conversion of deferred spaces by applicant. The applicant may at any time request that the issuing authority approve a revised site plan to allow conversion of deferred spaces to operable parking spaces. (3) The placement of two (2) abutting off-street parking facilities with continuous street frontage shall not be permitted. Section 5. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage. First Reading: July 21, 2021 Second Reading: Published: Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor First Reading – City Council on July 21, 2021 Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX DRAFT - ORDINANCE NO. 2021-07 - DRAFT AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Sec. 36-1311 – Minimum number required. Shall be amended as follows: (a) Single dwelling units, double dwelling units and residential townhouses. One fully enclosed space per dwelling unit. (b) Apartment buildings in the PRD district. (1) 1.25 At least 1.25 spaces per dwelling unit but no more than 1.75 spaces per dwelling unit. At least one fully enclosed space per unit required. (c) Senior citizen dwelling unit buildings in the PSR-4 and PSR-5 subdistricts. (1) 0.5 exposed spaces and 0.25 enclosed spaces per senior citizen dwelling unit. (2) In addition to subsection (c)(1) of this section, the following spaces are required: a. One completely enclosed and one exposed space for each non senior citizen dwelling unit located in a building in the Planned Senior Residence District. b. One completely enclosed space per vehicle owned by the building's management and stored on the property; and c. One exposed space for each employee who is not a resident of the building. At least 0.75 spaces per bedroom, plus one space per employee on a maximum shift, plus one space per vehicle owned by the building's management (d) Nursing, convalescent and rest homes. At least one space for every four five patients or residents based on the maximum capacity of the building, plus one space per employee on the major shift, plus one space per vehicle owned by the building's management. (e) Day care, nurseries and preschools (principal use). At least one space per teacher or employee, plus one space per 20 individuals (or major fraction) receiving care. (f) Public or private senior high schools and seminaries. At least one space per classroom plus one space per ten students, or spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, whichever is greater. (g) Public or private elementary or junior high schools. At least two spaces per classroom, or spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, whichever is greater. (h) Community centers. At least as many spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, or one space for each 200 250 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 2 (i) Churches and other religious institutions. At least as many spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, plus spaces for other church facilities which are used concurrently with the largest place of assembly, the number of which shall be determined by the council in connection with the granting of a conditional use permit. (j) Theaters (except within shopping centers), stadiums, auditoriums, arenas, lodge halls, mortuaries, and clubhouses. At least as many spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, plus one space for each employee on the major shift. (k) Governmental administration, public service, post office. At least the greater of one space: (1) Per employee on the major shift, plus one space per government-owned vehicle, plus ten visitor spaces; or (2) For each 200 250 square feet of gross floor area. (l) Libraries, art galleries. Ten spaces, plus one space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area. (m) Medical or dental offices, clinics and animal hospitals. At least one space for each 200 300 square feet of gross floor area, plus one space per physician, dentist or veterinarian. (n) Hospitals. At least one space per bed for each two patient beds, plus one space per employee or volunteer on the major shift. (o) Athletic, health and weight reduction facilities. (1) Six At least four spaces per court for handball, racquetball, and tennis courts. (2) At least one space per 200 400 square feet of gross floor area for all other uses. (p) Restaurants (except within shopping centers). Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, At least one space for each 100 square feet of indoor floor area, plus one space for each employee on the major shift and one space for each loading dock. (q) Carwashes. At least one space per employee on the major shift, plus five spaces for each wash lane, plus stacking spaces in accordance with section 36-1264. (r) Accessory carwashes. At least two parking spaces, plus stacking spaces in accordance with section 36-1264. (s) Gas stations. At least one space per employee on the major shift, plus one space for each 100 300 square feet of accessory retail uses in excess of 500 square feet exclusive of restrooms, storage areas and mechanical equipment. (t) Automobile service centers. At least three parking spaces per service bay, plus one space per employee on the major shift, plus one space for each 100 300 square feet of Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 3 accessory retail uses in excess of 500 square feet exclusive of restrooms, storage areas and mechanical equipment. (u) Bowling alleys. At least five spaces per lane. (v) Offices, medical and dental laboratories, business or professional offices, financial institutions, employment agencies and travel bureaus. Gross Floor Area (GFA) (in square feet) Number of Spaces 0—20,000 GFA/200 20,001—220,000 GFA/[(0.00025*GFA)+195] Over 220,000 GFA/250 At least one space per 300 square feet plus one space for a loading zone dock minimum with a maximum of one space per 200 square feet. (w) Mixed Development District. (1) Residential. One enclosed space, plus 0.75 exposed space, per dwelling unit. At least one space per dwelling unit but no more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit. (2) Nonresidential. Excluding publicly owned facilities and uses accessory to residential uses: Shall be regulated per Section 36-1311 above. Gross Floor Area (GFA) (in square feet) Number of Spaces 0—20,000 GFA/200 20,001—220,000 GFA/[(0.0005*GFA)+190] Over 220,000 GFA/300 (3) Where a single building contains there is combined within a single building an office use and a commercial restaurant use, up to 30% of the required office use parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet satisfy the restaurant parking requirement. for the commercial restaurant. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 4 (4) Where there is combined within a single building contains an office use and a residential use, up to 40% of the required office use parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the satisfy the residential use parking requirements for the residential use, provided that the number of residential parking spaces required for residential parking shall never be less than one (1) parking space per dwelling unit. (5) Where there is combined within a single building contains an office use, a residential use, and a commercial restaurant, up to 40% of the required office use parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the satisfy the residential use parking requirements for the residential use, provided that the number of spaces required for residential parking shall never be less than one (1) parking space per dwelling unit, and up to 30% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the commercial restaurant. (x) Multitenant industrial buildings. At least one space for each 400 500 square feet of gross floor area, or the sum of the component gross floor areas as follows, whichever is greater: (1) One space for each 200 300 square feet of office space. (2) One space for each 2,000 square feet of warehouse space. (3) One space for each 300 square feet of manufacturing, processing, packaging, treatment and assembly space. (4) One space for each 500 square feet of space containing machines and equipment for conducting scientific research, testing or experimentation. (5) One space for each 200 400 square feet of facilities for athletic, health and weight reduction purposes; six spaces per court for handball, racquetball or tennis. (y) Automobile and boat sales, new or used. At least one space per 250 square feet of gross floor area, including showrooms, sales space and offices, but excluding service areas, plus three spaces for each service bay. Required parking spaces shall not be used for the storage or display of vehicles, boats, or other products. (z) Furniture and major appliance sales. (1) Over 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. At least one space per 400 square feet of gross floor area. (2) Under 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. At least one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. (aa) Hotels and motels. At least one space per guest unit, plus one space for each employee on the major shift. (bb) Taproom and cocktail room. At least one space per 40 square feet of gross floor area. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 5 (cc) Brewery, winery and distillery without on-site sales. At least one space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. (dd) Brewpub, brewery, winery and distillery with on-site sales. At least one space per 1,000 gross square feet of production floor area, and spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, plus one space for each employee on the major shift for the restaurant. (ee) Uses not Specified. Where ambiguity exists in the application of off-street parking requirements, or where the parking requirements for a use are not specifically defined herein, the parking requirements for such use shall be determined by the city planner or the city planner’s designee and such determination shall be based upon the requirements for the most comparable use specified in this chapter. Section 2 Sec. 36-1312. - Planned Commercial District. Shall be amended as follows: For uses allowed in the Planned Commercial District, except uses for which a parking quantity is otherwise specified, the following applies minimum spaces are as follows: (1) Planned Commercial District – 1 (PCD-1) (Areas include: 70th and Cahill, ValleyView/Wooddale, 44th and France) Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. At least one (1) space per 250 square feet. Multiresidential uses. At least one fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum of but no more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Office. At least one space per 350 square feet plus one space for a loading zone dock minimum with a maximum of one space per 200 square feet. (2) Planned Commercial District – 2 (PCD-2) (50th and France, area defined in the 50th and France small area plan) Parking for uses in the 50th and France commercial node may rely on the City Parking Ramps with a floor area ratio up to 1.0 as defined in Section 36-10. Uses exceeding 1.0 must provide additional off-street parking spaces for the square footage above 1.0. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 6 Multiresidential uses. At least one fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum of but no more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. (3) Planned Commercial District – 2 (PCD-2) (Grandview, area defined in the Grandview Development Framework) Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. At least one (1) space per 250 square feet. Multiresidential uses. At least one fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum of but no more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Office. At least one space per 350 square feet plus one space for a loading zone dock, minimum with a maximum of but no more than one space per 200 square feet. (4) Planned Commercial District – 3 (PCD-3) (Property zoned PCD-3 within the Greater Southdale area as defined in the Southdale District Plan) Shopping centers (6+ businesses and at least 25,000 square feet.). At least one space per 200 350 square feet of gross floor area (including theaters and restaurants), plus one additional space for each ten seats in a restaurant, theater or other place of assembly. Atrium areas and mall areas, not used for retail sales purposes, shall be excluded from gross floor area calculations. Multiresidential uses. At least one fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit minimum, with a maximum but no more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. If a conditional use permit is required, the council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 7 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. At least one (1) space per 250 square feet. Section 3 Sec. 36-1324. Parking Space Reductions Section 36-1324 is amended to add the following: Reductions. The following off-street parking reductions may be utilized jointly or separately except as indicated otherwise: (1) Transit. The required aggregate number of spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent 10% if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop; to qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (2) Car-share Parking. A reduction of up to one space per reserved parking space for car share vehicles or 5% of the overall number of required parking spaces, whichever is greater, may be granted for any development that provides reserved parking for use by car-share vehicles. Reserved parking spaces Parking for car-share vehicles may be provided in any required or non-required off-street parking space. (3) Environmental Sustainability. With the consent of the city planner or the city planner’s designee upon review of potential adverse impacts, a maximum reduction of up to ten percent 10% reduction in the number of required parking spaces in parking requirements may be approved in the following circumstances: for parking areas composed of pervious pavement or where the reduced parking area is used for a low impact development storm water facility; and a A reduction up to 20% of the number of required parking spaces requirements may be approved by the city planner or the city planner’s designee for clustered site design where if the reduced parking area is used for tree retention or native landscaping. The area which would have been occupied by the eliminated parking spaces must be devoted to pervious surfaces, storm water facilities, tree retention, and native landscaping as directed by the city planner. (4) A 10% reduction in parking may be approved by the city planner or the city planner’s designee provided that one of the following conditions are met is provided for the following: (a) If a residential use: 1 covered, long-term bicycle parking space per 3 dwelling units. (b) If a retail or service use: 1 covered, long-term bicycle parking space per 5,000 square feet of retail or service uses. (c) 1 short-term bike space per 5,000 s.f. of retail/services uses. In order to qualify for this reduction, the long-term bicycle parking must: (a) Be protected from weather and from access by unauthorized persons; Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 8 (b) Consist of bike racks or lockers anchored so that they cannot be easily removed; and (c) Allow both the bicycle frame and the wheels to be locked with the bicycle in an upright position using a standard U-lock; Section 4 Sec. 36-1325. Additional Parking Regulations. Section 36-1325 is amended to add the following: (1) Shared Parking. The following criteria are guidelines for negotiating private agreements for shared parking. Applicants wishing to deviate from parking regulations must apply to the City for a variance from parking requirements. Situations not covered by 36-1311 (w) and (x), may apply to shared off-street parking facilities with other uses, even if the uses are in different structures are allowed to collectively provide parking in any district for more than one structure or use, subject to the following criteria conditions: (a) The applicant(s) must provide evidence that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the buildings or uses for which the proposed shared joint use of off-street parking facilities. is proposed. For purposes of this subsection, no substantial conflict shall mean either: (a) up to 75 % of the required parking for daytime use may be provided in the parking facilities of a nighttime or weekend use; or (b) up to 75% of the required parking for a nighttime or weekend use may be provided in the parking facilities of a daytime use. The application must include a parking plan shall that address the hours, size, and mode of operation of the respective uses. Within the Planned Commercial District, an applicant shall document proposed joint-use shared parking proposals through the use of via the Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Model (ULI Shared Parking, Second Edition). (b) The minimum spaces required under a shared parking agreement shall be based on the number of spaces required for the use that requires the most parking. (c) A form agreement for shared parking facilities shall be developed by the city attorney. shall be protected by an irrevocable legal agreement The agreement must running with the land. After the city council approves the agreement then it must be and recorded with the county in a form approved by the city attorney. A certified copy of the recorded document shall be provided to the city planner within 60 days after council approval of the agreement by the city council. A certified copy of the recorded document shall be provided to the city planner within 60 days of recording. (d) To qualify, the application must show that all parking addressed by the application is located must be supplied within 300 feet of the benefitted Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 9 structure’s main entrance. Additionally, adequate pedestrian access must be available between the benefitted principal structure and all parking spaces. (2) Proof of parking measures. An applicant may Applicants who do not utilize other parking reduction sections of this chapter may still receive a reduction of required parking spaces in one of two ways. The first is to demonstrate a lack of need for some spaces via a parking study. The second is to defer space that is set aside for the required amount of parking spaces which may be converted to parking later. be eligible for a reduction in the required number of off-street parking spaces where the applicant can demonstrate there is lesser need for the required number of off-street parking spaces, and/or there is a space set aside for code complying off-site parking spaces to be constructed if a need is later indicated by the city issuing authority, provided: (a) Where the applicant is seeking a reduction in the total number of required constructed parking spaces, the lesser number of constructed spaces may be allowed, provided: (a) Parking Study. The applicant must conduct a parking study as follows: (i) The city would require a parking study must be conducted in accordance with city-approved methodologies. (ii) The study must be prepared by an independent traffic engineering professional under the supervision of the city and paid for by the applicant. (iii) In order to reduce the number of required spaces, the study must demonstrate that there is not a present need for the portion of parking for which the applicant is requesting proof of parking flexibility. (ii) The city planner or the city planner’s designee shall review the parking study. Upon finding that the study sufficiently demonstrates a lack of demand the City shall approve of the reduced number of parking spaces. Where a site plan is approved with proof of parking measures, a properly drawn legal instrument, memorializing the parking measures drafted and executed by the parties concerned, must be filed with the records for that property in the Registrar of Titles’ or Recorder’s office of the county with proof thereof presented to the issuing authority. (b) Suitability of Deferred Spaces. (i) The applicant must not assign deferred parking spaces to areas required for landscaping, required buffer zones, setbacks, fire lanes, drive aisles or areas that would otherwise be unsuitable for parking spaces because of the physical characteristics of the land or other requirements of this code. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX City Attorney Revisions - XXX 10 (ii) Conversion of deferred spaces by applicant. The applicant may at any time request that the issuing authority city approve a revised site plan to allow conversion of deferred spaces to operable parking spaces. (iii) The city planner or the city planner’s designee may at any time determine that the deferred space be converted into operable parking spaces. (3) The placement of two (2) abutting off-street parking facilities with continuous street frontage shall not be permitted. Section 5. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage. First Reading: July 21, 2021 Second Reading: Published: Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor The CITY of EDINA Zoning Ordinance Amendment –Off-Street Parking Regulations The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 2 Use Current Ordinance 1-27 Draft Regulation Proposed Ordinance Apartments 2.0 spaces per unit 1.25 spaces per unit minimum 1.25 spaces per unit minimum with a 1.75 space per unit maximum Nursing Home One space per 4 patients or residents One space per 4 patients or residents One space per 5 patients or residents Community Center One space per 200 s.f.One space per 200 s.f.One space per 250 s.f. Medical, dental, clinic & animal hospital One space per 200 s.f.One space per 250 s.f.One space per 300 s.f. Restaurant 1 space per 3 seats One space per 100 s.f. plus one space per 150 s.f of outdoor space One space per 100 s.f. no requirement for outside seating Office Formula based on size (generally one space per 200 s.f. One space per 250 s.f.One space per 300 s.f. with a max of one space per 200 s.f. Residential use in a Mixed Development District 1.75 spaces per unit 1.25 spaces per unit minimum 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Residential use in a Planned Commercial District 1-1.5 spaces per unit depending on unit size 1.0 spaces per unit minimum 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Office use in a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f.One space per 300 s.f.One space per 350 s.f. with a maximum of one space per 200 s.f. Shopping Center within a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f.One space per 300 s.f.One space per 350 s.f. The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 3 Project Examples Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance 4500 France Restaurant Examples are based on the square footage of the space available. 100 seat restaurant (3,700 s.f.) = requires 43 spaces required 3,700 s.f. restaurant = 42 spaces required (using the 10% reduction - transit stop) Avenue on France (project denied by City Council) Mixed Use District Nonresidential = 1/300 s.f. (708,348 s.f.) 2,361 spaces required Residential = 1 enclosed space/unit (239) + .75 spaces exposed per unit (179) 418 spaces required 2,779 total spaces required Mixed Use District Nonresidential = 1/300 s.f. (708,348 s.f.)(10% reduction –bus stop) 2,125 spaces required Residential = 1 enclosed space/unit (239) 215 spaces required (Council could add spaces if necessary) 2,340 total spaces required 70th and France (project received preliminary approval) Retail (50,000 s.f) & Office (140,000 s.f.) = 1,006 spaces Residential = 379 enclosed spaces 1,385 spaces total required Retail (50,000 s.f) & Office (140,000 s.f.) = 702 spaces Residential = 341 enclosed spaces 1,043 spaces total required (1,170 stalls are proposed) The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 4 Project Examples Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance 6950 France (New Furniture Store) 10,000 s.f. of retail = 62 spaces required 10,000 s.f. of retail = 40 spaces required (51 spaces were installed) Amundson Flats (70th and Cahill/Amundson) 62-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 124 total required (77 enclosed) 62-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 77 total required (62 enclosed) (94 stalls total, 62 enclosed approved) Aeon Housing Project (76th Street) 70-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 140 total required (70 enclosed) 70-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 87 total required (70 enclosed) (87 stalls total, 64 enclosed approved) Hazelton Apartments 185-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 370 total required (185 enclosed) 185-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 231 total required (185 enclosed) (277 stalls enclosed approved) 7200-7250 France Development 309-unit apts.-2 space per unit (1.25 enclosed = 618 spaces 30,000 s.f. retail/office = 146 spaces Total Required = 764 spaces 309-unit apt.-1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) = 386 total required (309 enclosed) 30,000 s.f. retail/office = 120 spaces Total Required = 506 spaces (590 stalls approved –540 underground) The CITY of EDINABetter Together EdinaMN.gov 5 The CITY of EDINAOptions EdinaMN.gov 6 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 7 8 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 8 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 9 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 10 8 Project Examples Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance 4500 France Restaurant Examples are based on the square footage of the space available. 100 seat restaurant (3,700 s.f.) = requires 43 spaces required 3,700 s.f. restaurant = 42 spaces required (using the 10% reduction - transit stop) Avenue on France (project denied by City Council) Mixed Use District Nonresidential = 1/300 s.f. (708,348 s.f.) 2,361 spaces required Residential = 1 enclosed space/unit (239) + .75 spaces exposed per unit (179) 418 spaces required 2,779 total spaces required Mixed Use District Nonresidential = 1/300 s.f. (708,348 s.f.)(10% reduction – bus stop) 2,125 spaces required Residential = 1 enclosed space/unit (239) 215 spaces required (Council could add spaces if necessary) 2,340 total spaces required 70th and France (project received preliminary approval) Retail (50,000 s.f) & Office (140,000 s.f.) = 1,006 spaces Residential = 379 enclosed spaces 1,385 spaces total required Retail (50,000 s.f) & Office (140,000 s.f.) = 702 spaces Residential = 341 enclosed spaces 1,043 spaces total required (1,170 stalls are proposed) 6950 France (New Furniture Store) 10,000 s.f. of retail = 62 spaces required 10,000 s.f. of retail = 40 spaces required (51 spaces were installed) Amundson Flats (70th and Cahill/Amundson) 62-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 124 total required (77 enclosed) 62-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 77 total required (62 enclosed) (94 stalls total, 62 enclosed approved) Aeon Housing Project (76th Street) 70-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 140 total required (70 enclosed) 70-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 70 total required (70 enclosed) (87 stalls total, 64 enclosed approved) Hazelton Apartments 185-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 370 total required (185 enclosed) 185-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 231 total required (185 enclosed) (277 stalls enclosed approved) 7200-7250 France Development 309-unit apts.-2 space per unit (1.25 enclosed = 618 spaces 30,000 s.f. retail/office = 146 spaces Total Required = 764 spaces 309-unit apt.-1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) = 386 total required (309 enclosed) 30,000 s.f. retail/office = 120 spaces Total Required = 506 spaces (590 stalls approved – 540 underground) Land Uses Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance Nursing Home One space per 4 patients or residents One space per 5 patients or residents Community Center One space per 200 s.f. One space per 250 s.f. Medical, dental, clinic & animal hospital One space per 200 s.f. One space per 300 s.f. Restaurant 1 space per 3 seats One space per 100 s.f. Office Formula based on size (generally one space per 200 s.f. One space per 300 s.f. with a max of one space per 200 s.f. Residential use in a Mixed Development District 1.75 spaces per unit 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Residential use in a Planned Commercial District 1-1.5 spaces per unit depending on unit size 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Office use in a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f. One space per 350 s.f. with a maximum of one space per 200 s.f. Shopping Center within a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f. One space per 350 s.f. City OfficeMedical OfficeRetailShopping CenterRestaurants Fast food Mixed Use Apartments Sr Apartments Churches Government Day Care Gas Station/Convenience Gas Auto Service Station Hospitals Health Club Theater Community Center LibraryEdina1/200‐1/250 1/200 1/167‐ 1/2001/200+1/10 seats1/3 seats + employ1/3 s+empl .75/1/200 2/unit .75+employ 1/3 seats 1/200 1/per empl + 1/20 1 per empl + 1/100 sq ft1 per bay + 1 per empl + 1per 100 sq ft1 per bed + 1 per empl 6 per court + 1 per 200 sq ft 1/3 seats+ 1per employee 1/220 ‐300 sq ft/seats 10+ 1/per 300 sq ftEden Prairie1/200‐333 max1/200‐ 333 max1/200‐ 1/3331/200‐ 1/333 max1/3‐1/2max1/3‐1/2 maxby use/TBD 1/unit TBD TBD TBD1 per empl + 1 per 6 students1 per empl + 1 per pump + 1 /200 10+ spaces where cars are serviced TBD TBD 1/3 seats 5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. 5/1,000 sq. ft. G.F.A.Minnetonka1/2501/175‐ 20 min1/250 1/250 1/2.5 seats 1/60 sq ft by use/TBD 2/unit 1/unit 1/ 2.5 seats 10+1/500 1/per 6 children 4+3 per stall+ 1per 250 sq ft 4+3 per stall+ 1per 250 sq ft 1/2 per bed + empl 1/225 sq ft 1/3 seats/1/4 seats 4.5 per 1,00010 plus 1 per 500 square Ft + 1 per vehicle kept on the premises;Saint Louis Park1/200‐250 max1/200‐250 max1/250‐ 1/150 max 1/250 1/60 sq ft 1/60 sq ft by use/TBD 1/bed 1/unit 1 / 3 seats by useTBD 1/per 2 empl +1/10 children3 + 4 per service bay 3 + 4 per service bay 1 per 350 sq ft1 per 200 sq. ft. non‐court area. Two spaces per tennis/racquetball court. One space per each 50 sq. ft. deck area for a swimming pool. 1 per each four seats 28" Based on uses 1 per 300 ssq ftRichfield1/275‐ 350 max1/200‐ 250 max1/200‐1/285 1/250 1/100 sq ft 1/60 sq ft by use /TBD 2/unit/1.25TBD TBD 1/ 3 seats TBD 1/per 5 children 4+2 per bay +1 per 150 sq ft 4+2 per bay +1 per 150 sq ft not listed 1 per 225 sq ft 1 per 3 seats 1.25 if stand alone not listed not listedBloomington1/285 1/285 1/180‐ 1/220 460+1/285 1/ 3 seats 1/180 sq ft by use /TBD 1.8/1 bed‐.75 1.5/unit 1/3 seats TBD1.2 per 10 child + 1 per empl1/200 sq ft +.5 per pump 1/300 sq ft + 3 per bay not listed 1/250 qsft + 1/500 sq ft pool + 2 per court 1/3 seat capacity 1/3 capacity 1/3 capacityGolden Valley1/250 1/200 1/250 1/200 1/60‐100 sq ft 1/40 sq ft by use/TBD 1.5/unit .5/1/unit 1/3 seats 1/200‐300 1/per 5 children 4 per stall 4 per stall 1/350 sq ft 1/200 sq ft + 2 per court + .5 pool deck sq ft 1/4 seats 1/300 sq ft 1/300 sq ftEagan1/150 1/150 1/200 1/250‐300 1/3 seats 1/60 sq ft by use/TBD 1.5/unit 1/unit 1/3 seats TBD 10 + 1 per 500 sq ft 4 + 2 per bay 1/800 sq ft + 1 per empl 1 per 3 occupants 1 per 3 seats 1 per 3 occupants 1 per 3 occupantsApple Valley1/150‐200 1/150 1/150 1/200 1/2.5 seats 1/3 seats by use/TBD 1.5/unit 1.5 TBD 1/3.5 seats TBDTen spaces, plus one space for each 500 square feet in the principal structure.Four off‐street parking spaces, plus two off‐street parking spaces for each service stall if any.Ten customer parking spaces, plus one additional customer space for each 800 square feet of floor area over 1,000 square feet, plus oneadditional space for every two employees.One and one‐half parking spaces for each three patient beds, plus one space for each two employees, plus one space for each staff doctor.Four off‐street parking spaces, plus two off‐street parking spaces for each service stall if any.. One parking space for each three seats.. One parking space for each 3½ seats based on the design capacity of the main assembly hall.One parking space for each 150 square feet of floor space.Crystal4+1/200‐500 4+1/200‐500 4+1/250 4+1/500 4+1/100 sq ft 4+1/60 sq ft by use/TBD 2/per unit 2/unit 4+1/3 seats TBD TBD4 spaces, plus 2 spaces per service or repair stall if applicable, plus no less than 1 space per 300 square feet of building area used for the sale of goods or services TBDNumber of spaces as required per a parking study 4 spaces, plus no less than 300 square feet of gross floor area, not including court, gym or pool area, plus 4 spaces per basketball court, plus 2 spaces pertennis or racquetball court, plus 1 space per 50 square feet of deck area for a swimming pool.4 spaces, plus no less than 1 space per 4 seats based on the cumulative design capacity of the assembly room or spaces4 spaces, plus no less than 1 space per 3 seats based on the cumulative design capacity of the assembly room or spaces 4 spaces, plus no less than 1 space per 400 square feet of gross floor area 4 spaces, plus no more than 1 space per 200 square feet of gross floor area Plymouth1/250 ‐ 300 1/200 1/200 1/200‐300 1/40+1/80 kit 1/2.5 seats by use/TBD 2/per unit 1.5/unit 1/3 seats 1/300 sq ftOne space for each employee, plus one space for each six individuals of licensed capacity. Four spaces plus two spaces for each service stall. Those facilities designed for sale of other items than strictly automobile products, parts or service shall be required to provide additional parking in compliance with other applicable sections of this Chapter. Four spaces plus two spaces for each service stall. Those facilities designed for sale of other items than strictly automobile products, parts or service shall be required to provide additional parking in compliance with other applicable sections of this Chapter. TBD One space for each 300 square feet of floor area. One space for each three permanent seats basedon the design capacity of the main assembly hall.Facilities as may be provided in conjunction with such buildings or uses shall be subject to additional requirements which are imposed by this Chapter. One space for each 300 square feet of floor area. One space for each 300 square feet of floor area. New Hope1/300 1/300 1/200 1/200 1/40+1/80 kit 1/40+1/80 ki by use/TBD 2.25 unit 1/unit+employ 1/3 seats 1/300 sq ft TBDAt least five off‐street parking spaces plus three off‐street parking spaces for each service stall. Those facilities designed for sale of other items than strictly automotive products, parts or service shall be required to provide additional parking in compliance with other applicable sections of this CodeAt least five off‐street parking spaces plus three off‐street parking spaces for each service stall. Those facilities designed for sale of other items than strictly automotive products, parts or service shall be required to provide additional parking in compliance with other applicable sections of this CodeTBD TBDAt least one parking space for each three seats based on the design capacity of the main assembly hall. Facilities as may be provided in conjunction with such buildings or uses shall be subject to additional requirements which are imposed by this Code.. One parking space for each 300 square feet of floor area.. One parking space for each 300 square feet of floor area.Maple Grove1/250 1/150 1/200 1/250 1/40+/80 kit 1/150 sq ft by use/TBD 2/unit 1/unit 1/3 seats TBD TBDAt least four off‐street parking spaces plus two off‐street parking spaces for each service stall. The requirement of at least four off‐street parking spaces may be waived for those facilities designed for sale of items other than strictly automotive products, parts or service, although such facilities shall be required to provide additional parking in compliance with other applicable sections of this article, such as, but not limited to, the requirements of subsections (a)(12) and (a)(16) of this section. Eight off‐street parking spaces, plus one additional space for each 800 square feet of floor area over 1,000 square feet. Two spaces per each bed. Private racquetball, handball and tennis courts: Not less than six spaces per each court. (29) Other uses: Requirements for other uses not specifically mentioned in this section shall be determined on an individual basis by the city council. Factors to be considered in such determination shall include, without limitation, size of building, type of use, number of employees, expected volume and turnover of customer traffic and expected frequency and number of delivery or service vehicles. At least one parking space for each three seats based on the design capacity of the main assembly hall. Facilities as may be provided in conjunction with such buildings or uses shall be subject to additional requirements which are imposed by this article. Ten spaces plus one for each 150 square feet in excess of 2,000 square feet of floor area in the principal structure. Ten spaces plus one for each 150 square feet in excess of 2,000 square feet of floor area in the principal structure. Brooklyn Park1/181/200 1/150+Dr. 1/200 1/200‐240 1/40+1/80 kit 1/40+1/80 ki by use/TBD 2/unit+.5 outside .5/unit 1/2.5 seats 1/200‐285No additional spaces required if located in a single dwelling or one unit in a multiple dwelling structure 1 space per employee plusone space per 7 children of licensed capacity of the facility4 spaces plus 3 spaces for each enclosed service stall plus parking figured separately for retail or office space.3 for each bay plus 1 for each employee on peak work shift2 spaces for each patient bed1 space per 300 square feet of floor area, plus 1 space per employee on the largest work shift1 space for each 3.5 seats of design capacity1 space for each 2.5 seats (one seat equals 22 inches of pew or bench space)based on the design capacity in the main assembly area, plus parking figured separately for additional gymnasiums, banquet rooms, meeting rooms, offices, and other multi‐use spacesTBDArden Hills1/250 1/250 1/150 1/150 1/2 seats 1/2 seats by use/TBD 1.1‐2.2 per unit TBD 1/3 seats TBD1 for each teacher or employee plus 1 for each 5 individuals receiving care (design capacity)3 for each enclosed bay plus 1 for each employee on peak work shift3 for each enclosed bay plus 1 for each employee on peak work shiftAs determined by City Council after recommendation by Planning Commission.1 for each 1.5 persons at design capacity 1 for every 3 seats (based on design capacity)1 for every 3 seats (based on design capacity)As determined by City Council after recommendation by Planning Commission.Shoreview1/200 1/200 1/181 1/181 1/3 seats 1/5 seats/15 by use /TBD 1.5 ‐ 2per unit TBD 1/3 seats TBD TBD Fuel Stations. 4 plus 1/150 sq. ft. floor space devoted to retail sales Vehicle & Equipment Sales and Rental. 8 + 1/800 sq. ft. floor area over 1,000 .1.2/bed Commercial Recreation. 10 + 1/300 sq. ft. of floor area 1/3 seats based on max. design capacity 10 + 1/300 sq. ft. of floor area TBDRoseville1/275‐1/325 1/250 1/325 1/3251/3 seats 1/employ11/60 sq ft by use/TBD 1.25/unit 1.25 unit 1/4 seats TBD1 per 10 = 1 per employee3spaces 4 per bay TBD 1/200, 2 per court,,1 per 50sq ft pool deck 1/4 seats TBD/uses 1/300 sq ftMaplewood1/200 1/200 1/200 1/200 1/50 sq ft 1/50 sq ft by use/TBD 2/1 encl 2/per unit 1/4 seats TBD1 per 4 seats 1 per 4 seatsOakdale1/166 ‐ 200 6/Dr. 1/empl 1/200 1/2001/3 seats1/2em 1/table1/per table by use/TBD 1.5 ‐ 2.5 unit .5‐1/unit 1/4 seats TBD TBD 4 + 2 per stall 4 + 2 per stall TBD 3 per court 1/3 cap TBD TBDBurnsville1/666 ‐ 200 3/Dr. 1/empl 1/150 ‐ 1/200 1/2001/3 seats1/2em 1/table1/3 seats+em by use/TBD 1,5 ‐ 2.5 unit .5/unit 1/3 seats TBD 1/empl + 1/6 students 1/200 sq ft + 1 per pump 1/200 sq ft +3/bay + 1per empl 2 per 3 beds 1 per empl 1/2 space per occ, 1/500 sq ft + 1 per empl 1 per 4 seats + 1 empl1per 3 patrons +1 per vehicle + 1 per empl1/250 sq ft + 1/empl + 1/4 seats City OfficeMedical OfficeRetailShopping CenterRestaurants Fast food Mixed Use Apartments Sr Apartments Churches Government Day Care Gas Station/Convenience Gas Auto Service Station Hospitals Health Club Theater Community Center LibraryMpls2/1000‐1/200 2/1000 2/1000‐1/200 1/2002/1000‐1/75 qs ft1/75 sq ft by use TBD 1/unit 1/unit 10% capacit 1/2001 space per 500 sq. ft. of GFA + 2 drop off spaces (either off‐street or on‐street by permission of the city engineer) 1 space per 200 sq. ft. of GFA + up to 4 drop off spaces (either off‐street or on‐street by permission of the city engineer) 1 space per 500 sq. Ō. of GFA 1 space per 200 sq. Ō. of GFA 1 Pump islands shall not be counted as parking spaces 1 space per 500 sq. ft. of GFA excluding service bays + 2 spaces per service bay 1 space per 200 sq. Ō. of GFA+ 2 spaces per service bay As approved by C.U.P. based on a parking study of the institution, but not less than 1 space per 3 beds As approved by C.U.P. based on a parking study of the institution, but not more than 1 space per 2 beds 1 space per 500 sq. ft. of GFA + as required by this chapter for applicable indoor recreaƟon areas 1 space per 200 sq. ft. of GFA Parking equal to 20% of the capacity of persons in the auditorium Parking equal to 40% of the capacity of persons in the auditorium TBD1 space per 500 sq. ft. of GFA in excess of 4,000 sq. ftHighland Park*Office sites in Commercial Districts sites <15,000 sf: 2.5/1,000 >15,000 sf: 0 for first 2,000 sf, then 2.5/1000 additional sf >15,000 sf: 0 for first 2,000 sf, then 2.5/1000 additional sf4.11 spaces per 1000 sfDevelopment site <15000: 2.5/1000sf >15000: none for first 2000 sf then 2.5 spaces per 1000 sf20 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA for kitchen area, serving counter and waiting area, plus 0.5 spaces per seat 20 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA for kitchen area, serving counter and waiting area, plus 0.5 spaces per seat See attached word docNursing Facility: .33 space per resident.25 spaces per person in permitted occupancyAs determined by zoning administrator 2.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of GFA interior sales space plus 1.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of external display (does not include stock areas closed to the public) plus 3 spaces per service bay2.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of GFA plus 3 spaces per service bay0.33 space per person in permitted occupancy 0.25 space per person in permitted occupancy0.25 space per person in permitted occupancy0.25 space per person in permitted occupancyPortland*1 per 500sf of net bu8ilding area 1 per 500 sq. ft. of net building area Medical Center 1 per 500 sf 1 per 330 sq. ft. of net building area 1 per 4 seats or 1 per 6 feet of bench area 1 per 500 sfDurham, NC* 1/250 1/2501/200 for first 50000 sf of leaseable area and 1/250 sf leaseable area after that1/100 sf 1/100 sf 2/unit .6/unit1/28 sf of avaiable seating in assembly area1/300 sf + 1 per 3 employees1 per employee + 1 per each 10 attendees1 per 2 beds + 1 per doctor and nurse + 1 per 4 employees1/100 sf1 per 200 SF floor area available for seating in places of assembly, minimum 20 spacesDenver*Park Ridge* Office Park: 5/1000 / Professional Office 4/10001.5/exam room3/10001/60 sf pulbic seating (excludes outdoor seating)3/1000Efficiency or 1‐bedroom unit:1.5 per dwelling unit 2‐bedroom or more unit: 2 per dwelling unit .25 per bed + 1 per 2 employees1/4 seats 3/1000 sf1 per 2 employees + 2 passenger loading spaces2 per 1000 sf GFA of any accessory convenience retail and/or foold service plus 2 stacking spaces per bay for any accessory automatic car wash2 per service bay + 1 per 500 sf of office and waiting area 1 per 2 beds + 2 per 3 employees based on largest shift 1 per 1000 sf of public use space 4/1000 sf public space 3 per 1000 gfa Glenview, IL*1/300 1/300 1/3001/3 people per max capacity1/3 people per max capacity2 per unit1/3 units 1/3 seats 1/800 1 per 350sf GFA 4 parking spaces plus one for each employee plus one space for each emergency vehcle kept on the premises three parking spaces for each five beds, plus three parking spaces for every five employees, other than doctors, plus one space for each doctor assigned to the staffOne parking space for each three seats or bench seating spaces, based upon the maximum permanent seating capacity. For the purpose of such use, parking spaces already provided to meet off‐street parking requirements for business, commercial and industrial establishments, or off‐street parking facilities provided by the Village, lying within 300 feet of the place of public assembly as measured along lines of public access, and that are not normally in use between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and midnight or on Sundays or holidays, and are made available for other parking, may be used to meet up to 75 percent of the total requirements for parking spaces for places of public assemblyone parking space for each 800 square feet of floor area. one parking space for each 800 square feet of floor area. Nashville1/300 sf 1/200 sf 1/200 sfShopping Center Retail: 1 space per 250 square feet for less than 400,000 square feet and 1 space per 225 square feet for 400,000 to 600,000 square feet and 1 space per 200 square feet for 1/100 sf and 10 spaces for takeout 1/100 sf by use 1 per bedroom up to 2 bedrooms; .5 spaces per bedroom for each additional bedroom; 2 bedrooms or more‐1.5 per unit .5 spaces per unit 1 space per 4 seats in the sanctuary or equivalent worship space1 space for each 5 individuals accommodated, up to 50 individuals; for more than 50 individuals accommodated, 10 spaces plus 1 space per 10 individuals4 spaces for each of the first four service bays or stalls,plus 2 spaces for each additional service bay or stall2 spaces per bedEstablished by the traffic engineer (Section 17.20.030)1 space per 3 seats—Established by the traffic engineer for facilities with a capacity of more than 500 spectatorsPuyallup, WAhttps://www.codepublishing.com/WA/Puyallup/html/Puyallup20/Puyallup2055.html Day care centers: one space for each 100 square feet of indoor play area and classroom space; Automobile service stations and repair garages: three spaces for each service bay;(19) Motorcycle and small engine vehicle sales and service: one space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area, plus one space for each 1,000 square feet of open sales lot;Hospitals: three spaces for each bed the facility is designed to accommodate;Health and physical fitness clubs: one parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area;Theaters and auditoriums: one space for each five seats. A “seat” means 18 lineal inches of bench seating or seven square feet of seating floor area where there are no permanent seats;Libraries and museums: one space for each 250 square feet of gross floor area;Bloomingtonhttps://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/bloomington/latest/bloomington_mn/0‐0‐0‐109945#JD_21.301.0621.301.06 (e) 1.2 spaces for each 10 program participants based on the facility’s licensed capacity, plus 1 space per caregiver on the maximum shift1 space per 200 square feet of gross floor area, with no more than 0.5 of the required spaces located at fuel pumps1 space per 300 square feet of gross floor area excluding service bays, plus 2 spaces per service bayN/A1 space per 250 square feet of gross floor area (not including swimming pools), and additional off‐streetparking for the following uses: Swimming pool: 1 space per 500 square feet of gross floor area; Tennis, handball or racquetball: 2 spaces per courtSpaces equal in number to 1/3 capacity in persons; if use includes an educational component, those facilities are required to provide additional parking as provided in the ordinance under educational institutionsSpaces equal in number to 1/3 capacity in persons; if use includes an educational component, those facilities are required to provide additional parking as provided in the ordinance under educational institutions See Tables in attached Word Doc‐Minimums and Maximums by use determined by zone‐use first link to see zoning information See email from staff in attached word doc*Detailed information included on word doc City Office Medical Office Retail Shopping Center Restaurants Apartments Sr Apartments Edina - Current Ordinance 1/200-1/250 sf 1/200 sf 1/167- 1/200 1/200+1/10 seats (formula)1/3 seats + employ 2/unit .75+employ Edina 1-27 draft 1/250 sf 1/250 sf 1/250 sf 1/300 sf 1/100 s.f. plus 1/150 s.f of outdoor space 1-1.25/unit .75+employ Edina 2-24 draft 1/300 sf (1/200 max)1/300 sf 1/250 sf 1/350 sf 1/100 sf 1-1.25/unit with 1.75 max .75+employ Eden Prairie 1/200-333 max 1/200- 333 max 1/200- 1/333 1/200- 1/333 max 1/3-1/2max1/3-1/2 max 1/unit TBD Minnetonka 1/250 1/175- 20 min 1/250 1/250 1/2.5 seats 2/unit 1/unit Saint Louis Park 1/200-250 max 1/200-250 max 1/250- 1/150 max 1/250 1/60 sq ft 1/bed 1/unit Richfield 1/275- 350 max 1/200- 250 max 1/200-1/285 1/250 1/100 sq ft 2/unit/1.25TBD TBD Bloomington 1/285 1/285 1/180- 1/220 460+1/285 1/ 3 seats 1.8/1 bed-.75 1.5/unit Golden Valley 1/250 1/200 1/250 1/200 1/60-100 sq ft 1.5/unit .5/1/unit Apple Valley 1/150-200 1/150 1/150 1/200 1/2.5 seats 1.5/unit 1.5 TBD Crystal 4+1/200-500 4+1/200-500 4+1/250 4+1/500 4+1/100 sq ft 2/per unit 2/unit Plymouth 1/250 - 300 1/200 1/200 1/200-300 1/40+1/80 kit 2/per unit 1.5/unit New Hope 1/300 1/300 1/200 1/200 1/40+1/80 kit 2.25 unit 1/unit+employ Brooklyn Park 1/181/200 1/150+Dr.1/200 1/200-240 1/40+1/80 kit 2/unit+.5 outside .5/unit Roseville 1/275-1/325 1/250 1/325 1/325 1/3 seats 1/employ 1.25/unit 1.25 unit Burnsville 1/666 - 200 3/Dr. 1/empl 1/150 - 1/200 1/200 1/3 seats1/2em 1/table 1,5 - 2.5 unit .5/unit Mpls 2/1000-1/200 2/1000 2/1000-1/200 1/200 2/1000-1/75 qs ft 1/unit 1/unit Highland Park* Office sites in Commercial Districts sites <15,000 sf: 2.5/1,000 >15,000 sf: 0 for first 2,000 sf, then 2.5/1000 additional sf >15,000 sf: 0 for first 2,000 sf, then 2.5/1000 additional sf 4.11 spaces per 1000 sf Development site <15000: 2.5/1000sf >15000: none for first 2000 sf then 2.5 spaces per 1000 sf 20 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA for kitchen area, serving counter and waiting area, plus 0.5 spaces per seat See attached word doc Nursing Facility: .33 space per resident Durham, NC* 1/250 1/250 1/200 to 1/250 sf 1/100 sf 2/unit .6/unit Park Ridge, IL* Office Park: 5/1000 / Professional Office 4/1000 1.5/exam room 3/1000 1/60 sf pulbic seating (excludes outdoor seating) 1.5 to 2 per dwelling unit .25 per bed + 1 per 2 employees Glenview, IL*1/300 1/300 1/300 1/3 people per max capacity 2 per unit 1/3 units Nashville, Tenn.1/300 sf 1/200 sf 1/200 sf 1 space per 250 square feet to 200 s.f. 1/100 sf and 10 spaces for takeout 1 to 1.5 per bedroom .5 spaces per unit City Office Medical Office Retail Shopping Center Restaurants Apartments Sr Apartments Birmingham, Ala 1/300 sf 1/150 sf 1/300 sf 1/300-550 sf 1/75 sf 1.5-2/UNIT .5 spaces per unit Dublin Ohio 1/250 sf 1/200 sf 1/200 sf 1/200 sf 1/50 sf 2/unit 1/unit Charlotte, NC 1/300 sf 1/200 sf 1/200 sf 1/250 sf 1/75 sf 1.5-2/unit .25/unit Sustainable Parking Policies City of Edina, MN Planning Commission Iain Banks, Nelson\Nygaard Tom Brown, Nelson\Nygaard Overview Sustainable Parking Policies gave away free pizza, would you ever have Which uses make your urban areas active? Parking Wastes Land If you require more than 3 spaces per 1,000 sq ft, parking than land use You Have More Parking than You Think Downtown Portsmouth, NH On-Street Off-Street 330 428 456 463 533 553 287 189 161 154 84 64 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 10:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM Sustainable Parking Policies Best Practices for a Sustainable Parking Program Price public parking Parking benefit districts Expand access beyond parking Elimination/reduction of parking minimums Promote/require unbundling of parking costs Promote/enable parking cash-out Residential parking permit 8 Phase I: Price Public Parking Establish as formal policy that: Public parking resources will be priced whenever, and wherever free parking will result in too few available spaces. Prices will be adjusted based on performance (actual vs. preferred utilization rates). 9 Step 1 Put it in Writing Codify Access to public parking will be maintained primarily through pricing Define Performance Target (about 15% availability) Frequency of potential rate adjustments Increment of adjustment Conditions that will trigger an adjustment: Availability consistently 5-10 percentage points above or below target (85% for on-street, 85-95% for off-street), As measured by field conditions surveys to be conducted no less frequently than monthly. 10 11 12 Phase I: Price Public Parking Establish as formal policy that: Off-street supplies will have to be self- financing. Rates must reflect cost of maintaining the facility, including any debt service obligations. No new supply will be built until rates are high enough for user fees to cover its costs. 13 Step 1 Put it in Writing Many parking authorities operate under this philosophy already. Putting it in writing can help stave off political pressure to do the wrong thing. 14 15 16 17 Step 2 Define New Paradigm Define proposed paradigm shift Outline its many benefits, most of which directly benefit them: Parking rates based on performance, not revenue Easier access for their customers Particularly those not scared away by a $1 charge for the best spot in downtown. New revenue will be isolated from general fund. Spent on local improvements, As prioritized by local stakeholders Rates will only go up or down in response to market indicators. Consumers, not planners or politicians, will determine how much a space is worth. 18 Glendale, CA 19 Step 3 Bring Merchants Onboard Create Parking Benefit Districts Famously successful for turning around Old Pasadena, CA Spend new revenue on local improvements. This was a big step toward getting meters installed in Ventura, CA 20 Step 4 Monitor And Adjust 21 Step 4 Monitor And Adjust 22 Step 5 Invest to Expand Access Beyond Parking Most cities in MN have plenty of latent demand for some kind of alternate mode: Bikes: Network improvements, parking facilities, employee benefits, promotional events Transit: Improved stop amenities, employee benefits, subsidize new, improved service Pedestrian: Support Park-Once access via improvements to pedestrian networks and general streetscape. In most cases, these investments can expand access for much less than new parking construction They also reduce parking demand, thereby reducing the need to increase parking rates for drivers. 23 24 25 Phase II: Encourage Pricing of Accessory Parking Step 1: Stop Mandating Oversupply Eliminate/ Reduce minimum parking requirements Forcing developers to build more parking than their pro- forma indicates is the best way to ensure that those spaces will be free. Allow developers to build as little or as much parking as they, and their backers, deem necessary. If this might lead to too much parking in sensitive areas, consider Maximums. 26 Phase II: Encourage Pricing of Accessory Parking Step 2: Directly Promote Pricing by Building Owners Promote or Require Unbundling Reveals cost of on-site parking to tenants Tenants have opportunity to save $ by parking less Developers must ensure a paying market for proposed supply Works well with parking maximums and shared-parking incentives. Require unbundling only for spaces: Built in excess of desirable levels Not shared with off-site users 27 Phase II: Encourage Pricing of Private Parking Step 3: Directly Promote Pricing by Employers Promote or Require Parking Cashout Businesses pass on parking costs to employees/ sub-tenants Employees drive less Tenants save $ on unbundled parking. State of California requires certain employers who provide subsidized employee parking to offer a cash allowance in lieu of a parking space. Enacted after studies showed cash allowances in lieu of parking encourage employees to find alternate means of commuting to work, such as public transit, carpooling, vanpooling, bicycling, or walking. 28 Phase II: Encourage Pricing of Accessory Parking Step 4: Lead by Example 29 Phase III: Manage Spillover 30 Image: Flickr User johnducguz Residential Parking Permits This is a more effective way to protect curb parking for residents. Like meters these have not always been used to their full potential, reducing public confidence Emerging best practices to learn from, including: Demand-responsive (matching hours and restrictions to address local conditions) Residential Parking Benefit Districts (Residents park free, others pay, revenue goes to neighborhood improvements) Austin, Montreal Variable permit rates (based on demand, number of permits, time of year, etc.) Arlington County, Canada 31 NELSON\NYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES © 2011 Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX DRAFT - ORDINANCE NO. 2021-__ - DRAFT AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING OFF STREET PARKING REGULATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Sec. 36-1311 – Minimum number required. Shall be amended as follows: (a) Single dwelling units, double dwelling units and residential townhouses. One fully enclosed space per dwelling unit. (b) Apartment buildings in the PRD district. (1) 1.25 fully enclosed spaces and 0.75 exposed spaces per dwelling unit. (2) The required aggregate number of exposed spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent (10%) to not less than 0.5 spaces per dwelling unit if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stopnumber of enclosed spaces is increased by a like amount so that the total number of exposed and enclosed spaces equals not less than two per dwelling unit. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (3) [need to specify number of spaces for handicapped, ride-sharing, emergency access, loading, other special use cases] (c) Senior citizen dwelling unit buildings in the PSR-4 and PSR-5 subdistricts. (1) 0.5 exposed spaces and 0.25 enclosed spaces per senior citizen dwelling unit. (2) In addition to subsection (c)(1) of this section, the following spaces are required: a. One completely enclosed and one exposed space for each non senior citizen dwelling unit located in a building in the Planned Senior Residence District. b. One completely enclosed space per vehicle owned by the building's management and stored on the property; and c. One exposed space for each employee who is not a resident of the building. Options: 0.75 spaces per bedroom, plus one space per employee on a maximum shift, plus one space per vehicle owned by the building's management; 1 space per unit plus one space per employee on a maximum shift; one space per three units; other? (The aggregate number of required parking spaces for Eemployees parking spaces may be reduced by ten 10 percent (10%) for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a qualified transit stop.) To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (d) Nursing, convalescent and rest homes. One space for every four patients or residents based on the maximum capacity of the building, plus one space per employee on the major shift, plus one space per vehicle owned by the building's management. (e) Day care, nurseries and preschools (principal use). One space per teacher or employee, plus one space per 20 individuals (or major fraction) receiving care. Commented [BT1]: Consider options to reduce by 10% each, for: 1) transit proximity and 2) the unbundling the cost of residential parking. (https://www.parkingtoolboxntx.org/ptdm-tools- content/Unbundled-Parking-Costs) With both, this would bring the requirement down to 1/DU, which would facilitate developments that intentionally leverage transit proximity to market to low/no-car households. Commented [BT2]: Just noting that the language used directly below uses the term “major shift”. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 2 (f) Public or private senior high schools and seminaries. One space per classroom plus one space per ten students, or spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, whichever is greater. (g) Public or private elementary or junior high schools. Two spaces per classroom, or spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, whichever is greater. (h) Community centers. Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, or one space for each 200 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. The required aggregate number of exposed spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent (10%) if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (i) Churches and other religious institutions. Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity of the largest place of assembly, plus spaces for other church facilities which are used concurrently with the largest place of assembly, the number of which shall be determined by the council in connection with the granting of a conditional use permit. (j) Theaters (except within shopping centers), stadiums, auditoriums, arenas, lodge halls, mortuaries, and clubhouses. Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, plus one space for each employee on the major shift. The required aggregate number of exposed spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent (10%) if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (k) Governmental administration, public service, post office. The greater of one space: (1) Per employee on the major shift, plus one space per government-owned vehicle, plus ten visitor spaces; or (2) For each 200 250 square feet of gross floor area. The required aggregate number of exposed spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent (10%) if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (l) Libraries, art galleries. Ten spaces, plus one space for each 300 square feet of gross floor area. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 3 (m) Medical or dental offices, clinics and animal hospitals. One space for each 200 250 square feet of gross floor area, plus one space per physician, dentist or veterinarian. The required aggregate number of exposed spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent (10%) if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (n) Hospitals. One space per bed for each two patient beds, plus one space per employee or volunteer on the major shift. Required spaces for employees or volunteers may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (o) Athletic, health and weight reduction facilities. (1) Six Four spaces per court for handball, racquetball, and tennis courts. (2) One space per 200 500 square feet of gross floor area for all other uses. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (p) Restaurants (except within shopping centers). Spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, One space for each 100 square feet of indoor floor area, one space per each 150 square feet of outdoor floor area plus one space for each employee on the major shift and one space for each loading dock. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (q) Carwashes. One space per employee on the major shift, plus five spaces for each wash lane, plus stacking spaces in accordance with section 36-1264. (r) Accessory carwashes. Two parking spaces, plus stacking spaces in accordance with section 36-1264. (s) Gas stations. One space per employee on the major shift, plus one space for each 100 300 square feet of accessory retail uses in excess of 500 square feet exclusive of restrooms, storage areas and mechanical equipment. (t) Automobile service centers. Three parking spaces per service bay, plus one space per employee on the major shift, plus one space for each 100 300 square feet of accessory retail uses in excess of 500 square feet exclusive of restrooms, storage areas and mechanical equipment. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 4 (u) Bowling alleys. Five spaces per lane. (v) Offices, medical and dental laboratories, business or professional offices, financial institutions, employment agencies and travel bureaus. Gross Floor Area (GFA) (in square feet) Number of Spaces 0—20,000 GFA/200 20,001—220,000 GFA/[(0.00025*GFA)+195] Over 220,000 GFA/250 One space per 250 square feet plus one space for a loading zone dock. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (w) Mixed Development District. (1) Residential. One enclosed space, plus 0.75 exposed space, per dwelling unit. 1.25 fully enclosed spaces and 0.75 exposed spaces per dwelling unit. The required aggregate number of exposed spaces for a building may be reduced by ten percent (10%) to not less than 0.5 spaces per dwelling unit if the building is located within one quarter of a mile from a qualified transit stop (2) Nonresidential. Excluding publicly owned facilities and uses accessory to residential uses: Shall be regulated per Section 36-1311 above. Gross Floor Area (GFA) (in square feet) Number of Spaces 0—20,000 GFA/200 20,001—220,000 GFA/[(0.0005*GFA)+190] Over 220,000 GFA/300 (3) Where there is combined within a single building an office use and a commercial restaurant, up to 30% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the commercial restaurant. (4) Where there is combined within a single building an office use and a residential use, up to 40% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 5 use may also be used to meet the requirement for the residential use, provided that the number of spaces required for residential parking shall never be less than one (1) parking space per dwelling unit. (5) Where there is combined within a single building an office use, a residential use, and a commercial restaurant, up to 40% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the residential use, provided that the number of spaces required for residential parking shall never be less than one (1) parking space per dwelling unit, and up to 30% of the parking supplied to meet the requirement for the office use may also be used to meet the requirement for the commercial restaurant. (x) Multitenant industrial buildings. One space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area, or the sum of the component gross floor areas as follows, whichever is greater: (1) One space for each 200 square feet of office space. (2) One space for each 2,000 square feet of warehouse space. (3) One space for each 300 square feet of manufacturing, processing, packaging, treatment and assembly space. (4) One space for each 500 square feet of space containing machines and equipment for conducting scientific research, testing or experimentation. (5) One space for each 200 square feet of facilities for athletic, health and weight reduction purposes; six spaces per court for handball, racquetball or tennis. (y) Automobile and boat sales, new or used. One space per 250 square feet of gross floor area, including showrooms, sales space and offices, but excluding service areas, plus three spaces for each service bay. Required parking spaces shall not be used for the storage or display of vehicles, boats or other products. (z) Furniture and major appliance sales. (1) Over 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. One space per 400 square feet of gross floor area. (2) Under 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. One space per 200 square feet of gross floor area. (aa) Hotels and motels. One space per guest unit, plus one space for each employee on the major shift. (bb) Taproom and cocktail room. One space per 40 square feet of gross floor area. (cc) Brewery, winery and distillery without on-site sales. One space per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. (dd) Brewpub, winery and distillery with on-site sales. One space per 1,000 gross square feet of production floor area, and spaces equal in number to one-third the maximum seating capacity, plus one space for each employee on the major shift for the restaurant. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 6 (ee) Uses not Specified. Where ambiguity exists in the application of off-street parking requirements, or where the parking requirements for a use are not specifically defined herein, the parking requirements for such use shall be determined by the city planner or the city planner designee and such determination shall be based upon the requirements for the most comparable use specified in this chapter. Section 2 Sec. 36-1312. - Planned Commercial District. Shall be amended as follows: For uses allowed in the Planned Commercial District, except uses for which a parking quantity is otherwise specified, the minimum spaces are as follows: (1) Planned Commercial District – 1 (PCD-1) (Areas include: 70th and Cahill, ValleyView/Wooddale, 44th and France) Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. One (1) space per 250 square feet. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 1.25 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Office. One space per 300 square feet. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (2) Planned Commercial District – 2 (PCD-2) (50th and France, area defined in the 50th and France small area plan) Developments with a floor area ratio up to 1.0 Parking for uses in the 50th and France commercial node may rely on the City Parking Ramps to meet the parking requirements for all on-site useswith a floor area ratio up to 1.0. Uses Developments exceeding 1.0 must provide additional off-street parking spaces for the uses linked to the square footage above 1.0. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 1.25 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the Commented [BT3]: Consider options to reduce by 10% each, for: 1) transit proximity and 2) the unbundling the cost of residential parking. (https://www.parkingtoolboxntx.org/ptdm-tools-content/Unbundled-Parking-Costs) Commented [BT4]: I would consider striking this, especially if you do not provide a reduction option for transit proximity. There are other ways for developers to maintain availability for residents in a shared facility. Requiring design/physical barriers to achieve this will prevent potential shared-parking efficiencies, which may become particularly important as mobility trends and car-ownership rates evolve and fluctuate. Commented [BT5]: What is the intent of this? Commented [BT6]: I assume you want to frame the FAR around the project itself, and not the individual uses it contains. A development with a 5 FAR could contain 6 uses that are all smaller than 1 FAR. Commented [BT7]: Consider options to reduce by 10% each, for: 1)transit proximity and 2) the unbundling the cost of residential parking. (https://www.parkingtoolboxntx.org/ptdm-tools- content/Unbundled-Parking-Costs) Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 7 exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. (3) Planned Commercial District – 2 (PCD-2) (Grandview, area defined in the Grandview Development Framework) Retail. Eight spaces for the first 1,000 square feet, plus six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of the original 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet, plus five spaces for each 1,000 square feet in excess of 15,000 square feet. One (1) space per 250 square feet. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 1.25 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Office. One space per 300 square feet. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. (4) Planned Commercial District – 3 (PCD-3) (Property zoned PCD-3 within the Greater Southdale area as defined in the Southdale District Plan) Shopping centers (6+ businesses and at least 25,000 s.f.). One space per 200 300 square feet of gross floor area (including theaters and restaurants), plus one additional space for each ten seats in a restaurant, theater or other place of assembly. Atrium areas and mall areas, not used for retail sales purposes, shall be excluded from gross floor area calculations. Required spaces may be reduced by 10 percent for any parcel located within one quarter of a mile of a transit stop. To qualify, the transit stop must be served by regular transit service on all days of the week and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the transit stop and the parcel. Multiresidential uses. One fully enclosed parking space for each dwelling unit, except that dwelling units with a floor area in excess of 1,500 square feet must provide 1.50 1.25 fully enclosed parking spaces per dwelling unit. Such parking spaces must be designed for the exclusive use of residents of the dwelling units and their guests. The council may require the provision of exposed parking spaces in addition to the required enclosed spaces as a condition to the issuance of a conditional use permit. Commented [BT8]: I would consider striking this, especially if you do not provide a reduction option for transit proximity. There are other ways for developers to maintain availability for residents in a shared facility. Requiring design/physical barriers to achieve this will prevent potential shared-parking efficiencies, which may become particularly important as mobility trends and car-ownership rates evolve and fluctuate. Commented [BT9]: What is the intent of this? Commented [BT10]: Consider options to reduce by 10% each, for: 1)transit proximity and 2) the unbundling the cost of residential parking. (https://www.parkingtoolboxntx.org/ptdm-tools- content/Unbundled-Parking-Costs) Commented [BT11]: I would consider striking this, especially if you do not provide a reduction option for transit proximity. There are other ways for developers to maintain availability for residents in a shared facility. Requiring design/physical barriers to achieve this will prevent potential shared-parking efficiencies, which may become particularly important as mobility trends and car-ownership rates evolve and fluctuate. Commented [BT12]: What is the intent of this? Commented [BT13]: Consider options to reduce by 10% each, for: 1)transit proximity and 2) the unbundling the cost of residential parking. (https://www.parkingtoolboxntx.org/ptdm-tools-content/Unbundled-Parking-Costs) Commented [BT14]: I would consider striking this, especially if you do not provide a reduction option for transit proximity. There are other ways for developers to maintain availability for residents in a shared facility. Requiring design/physical barriers to achieve this will prevent potential shared-parking efficiencies, which may become particularly important as mobility trends and car-ownership rates evolve and fluctuate. Commented [BT15]: What is the intent of this? Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 8 Section 3 Sec. 36-1324. Parking Space Reductions Section 36-1324 is amended to add the following: Reductions. The following off-street parking reductions may be utilized jointly or separately except as indicated otherwise: (1) RideCar-share Parking. A reduction of up to one space or five percent of the overall number of required parking spaces, whichever is greater, may be granted for any development that provides reserved parking for use by car-share vehicles. Parking for car-share vehicles may be provided in any required or non-required off-street parking space. (2) Environmental Sustainability. With the consent of the city planner or the planner’s designee upon review of potential adverse impacts, a reduction of up to ten percent (10%) in parking requirements may be approved for parking areas composed of pervious pavement or where the reduced parking area is used for a low impact development storm water facility; and a reduction of up to twenty percent (20%) in parking requirements may be approved for clustered site design where the reduced parking area is used for tree retention or native landscaping. (3) A reduction of up to one nonresidential parking space may be granted for every 10 long- term bicycle parking spaces provided on-site. In order to qualify for this reduction, the long-term bicycle parking must: (i) Be protected from weather and from access by unauthorized persons; (ii) Consist of bike racks or lockers anchored so that they cannot be easily removed; (iii) Allow both the bicycle frame and the wheels to be locked with the bicycle in an upright position using a standard U-lock; (iv) Have minimum dimensions of two feet in width by six feet in length, with a minimum overhead vertical clearance of seven feet. Bicycle lockers are exempt from overhead clearance requirements referenced herein. Section 4 Sec. 36-1325. Additional Parking Regulations. Section 36-1325 is amended to add the following: (1) Shared Parking. Shared off-street parking facilities are allowed to collectively provide parking in any district for more than one structure or use, subject to the following conditions: (a) The applicant(s) must provide evidence that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the buildings or uses for which the joint use of off-street parking facilities is proposed. For purposes of this subsection, no substantial conflict shall mean: (a) up to 75 percent of the required parking for Commented [BT16]: Another approach to consider: A 10% reduction for providing at least: •1 covered, long-term bike space per 3 dwelling units; and •1 covered, long-term bike space per 5,000 SF of retail/services uses; and •1 conveniently located, short-term bike space per 5,000 SF of retail/services uses. Commented [BT17]: Were bike parking requirements considered for the planned PCDs at all? Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 9 daytime use may be provided in the parking facilities of a nighttime or weekend use; or (b) up to 75 percent of the required parking for a nighttime or weekend use may be provided in the parking facilities of a daytime use. A parking plan shall address the hours, size and mode of operation of the respective uses. Within the Planned Commercial District, an applicant shall document proposed joint-use parking proposals through the use of the Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Model (ULI Shared Parking, Second Edition). (b) The minimum spaces required under a shared parking agreement shall be based on the number of spaces required for the use that requires the most parking. (c) Shared parking facilities shall be protected by an irrevocable legal agreement running with the land and recorded with the county in a form approved by the city attorney. A certified copy of the recorded document shall be provided to the city planner within 60 days after approval of the agreement by the city council. (d) To qualify, parking must be supplied within 300 feet of the main entrance to the parcel and adequate pedestrian access must be available between the principal structure and all parking spaces. (2) Proof of parking measures. An applicant may be eligible for a reduction in the required number of off-street parking spaces where the applicant can demonstrate there is lesser need for the required number of off-street parking spaces, and/or there is a space set aside for code complying off-site parking spaces to be constructed if a need is later indicated by the city issuing authority, provided: (a) Where the applicant is seeking a reduction in the total number of required constructed parking spaces, the lesser number of constructed spaces may be allowed, provided: (i) The city would require a parking study conducted in accordance with accepted methodology approved by the city issuing authority, prepared by an independent traffic engineering professional under the supervision of the city and paid for by the applicant, demonstrating that there is not a present need for the portion of parking for which the applicant is requesting proof of parking flexibility. (ii) Where a site plan is approved with proof of parking measures, a properly drawn legal instrument, memorializing the parking measures drafted and executed by the parties concerned, must be filed with the records for that property in the Registrar of Titles’ or Recorder’s office of the county with proof thereof presented to the issuing authority. (b) Suitability of deferred spaces. The applicant must not assign deferred parking spaces to areas required for landscaping, required buffer zones, setbacks, fire Commented [BT18]: Consider at least doubling this in PCDs. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 10 lanes, drive aisles or areas that would otherwise be unsuitable for parking spaces because of the physical characteristics of the land or other requirements of this code. (c) Conversion of deferred spaces by applicant. The applicant may at any time request that the issuing authority approve a revised site plan to allow conversion of deferred spaces to operable parking spaces. (3) The placement of two (2) abutting off-street parking facilities with continuous street frontage shall not be permitted. Section 5. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor The CITY of EDINA Zoning Ordinance Amendment –Off-Street Parking Regulations The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 2 Use Current Ordinance 1-27 Draft Regulation Proposed Ordinance Apartments 2.0 spaces per unit 1.25 spaces per unit minimum 1.25 spaces per unit minimum with a 1.75 space per unit maximum Nursing Home One space per 4 patients or residents One space per 4 patients or residents One space per 5 patients or residents Community Center One space per 200 s.f.One space per 200 s.f.One space per 250 s.f. Medical,dental, clinic & animal hospital One space per 200 s.f.One space per 250 s.f.One space per 300 s.f. Restaurant 1 space per 3 seats One space per 100 s.f.plus one space per 150 s.f of outdoor space One space per 100 s.f.no requirement for outside seating Office Formula based on size One space per 250 s.f.One space per 300 s.f.with a max of one space per 200 s.f.(generally one space per 200 s.f. Residential use in a Mixed Development District 1.75 spaces per unit 1.25 spaces per unit minimum 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Residential use in a Planned Commercial District 1-1.5 spaces per unit depending on unit size 1.0 spaces per unit minimum 1.0 spaces per unit with a maximum of 1.5 spaces per unit Office use in a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f.One space per 300 s.f.One space per 350 s.f.with a maximum of one space per 200 s.f. Shopping Center within a Planned Commercial District One space per 200 s.f.One space per 300 s.f.One space per 350 s.f. Project Examples Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance The CITY of EDINA4500FranceRestaurant Examples are based on the square footage of the space available. 100 seat restaurant (3,700 s.f.)=requires 43 spaces required 3,700 s.f.restaurant =42 spaces required (using the 10% reduction - transit stop) Avenue on France (project denied by City Council) Mixed Use District Nonresidential =1/300 s.f.(708,348 s.f.) 2,361 spaces required Residential =1 enclosed space/unit (239) + .75 spaces exposed per unit (179) 418 spaces required 2,779 total spaces required Mixed Use District Nonresidential = 1/300 s.f.(708,348 s.f.)(10%reduction –bus stop) 2,125 spaces required Residential =1 enclosed space/unit (239) 215 spaces required (Council could add spaces if necessary) 2,340 total spaces required 70th and France (project received preliminary approval) Retail (50,000 s.f)&Office (140,000 s.f.)= 1,006 spaces Residential =379 enclosed spaces 1,385 spaces total required Retail (50,000 s.f)&Office (140,000 s.f.)= 702 spaces Residential =341 enclosed spaces 1,043 spaces total required EdinaMN.gov (1,170 stalls are proposed)3 Project Examples Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance The CITY of EDINA6950 France (New Furniture Store) 10,000 s.f.of retail =62 spaces required 10,000 s.f.of retail =40 spaces required (51 spaces were installed) Amundson Flats (70th and Cahill/Amundson) 62-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 124 total required (77 enclosed) 62-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 77 total required (62 enclosed) (94 stalls total,62 enclosed approved) Aeon Housing Project (76th Street) 70-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 140 total required (70 enclosed) 70-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 87 total required (70 enclosed) (87 stalls total,64 enclosed approved) Hazelton Apartments 185-unit apartment 2 spaces per unit (1.25 enclosed) 370 total required (185enclosed) 185-unit apartment 1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) 231 total required (185 enclosed) (277 stalls enclosed approved) 7200-7250 France Development 309-unit apts.-2 space per unit (1.25 enclosed =618 spaces 30,000 s.f.retail/office =146 spaces Total Required =764 spaces 309-unit apt.-1.25 spaces per unit (1 enclosed) =386 total required (309 enclosed) 30,000 s.f.retail/office =120 spaces Total Required =506 spaces(590 stalls approved –540 underground) EdinaMN.gov 4 The CITY of EDINABetterTogether EdinaMN.gov 5 The CITY of EDINAOptions EdinaMN.gov 6 The CITY of EDINA 8 EdinaMN.gov 7 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 8 The CITY of EDINA EdinaMN.gov 9 The CITY of EDINA 8 EdinaMN.gov 10 Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.D. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Chad A. Millner, P.E., Director of Engineering Item Activity: Subject:Approve Assessment Policy and Street Funding Revisions Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Assessment Policy and Street Funding Revisions from 100% Special Assessment to 100% Taxes with a 16-year Transition Period. INTRODUCTION: See attached staff report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: Approve Assessment Policy and Street Funding Revisions Assessment Policy with Tracked Revisions Revised Assessment Policy Asessment Policy Appendix: Assessment Tables Street Reconstruction History Graphic Staff Presentation July 21, 2021 Mayor and City Council Chad A. Millner, P.E., Director of Engineering Don Uram, Finance Director Approve Assessment Policy and Street Funding Revisions Executive Summary: Approve revision to the Assessment Policy to fund street reconstruction for both local and Municipal State Aid-designated streets with 100% taxes with a transition over 16 years. Information / Background: On April 6, 2021, the City Council revised the assessment policy to align with the recommendations of the Street Funding Task Force. Those revisions removed subcuts and public retaining walls immediately from street reconstruction assessments for 2021 projects. At the June 1, 2021 City Council Work Session, staff heard Council members support street reconstruction funded from 100% taxes with a transition over 16 years. Staff reinforced that a decision is required on a permanent funding solution this summer or else we would be accepting a lower level of service, more risk, and higher future cost of replacement. Noted in the table below are the recent dates where street funding was discussed: Dates of Recent Street Funding Discussions May 2020 Street Funding Task Force Appointed November 2020 Council Work Session with Task Force January 2021 Community Engagement on Task Force Recommendations March 2, 2021 Council Accepts Task Force Final Report & Recommendations March 13, 2021 Council Retreat to Discuss Street Funding April 6, 2021 Council Revised Assessment Policy to remove subcuts and public retaining walls STAFF REPORT Page 2 June 1, 2021 Council Work Session to Discuss Street Funding July 21, 2021 Council Considers Revision to Assessment Policy and Street Reconstruction Funding Financial Analysis: Option #2 in the table below is an original recommendation from the Task Force. The table shows estimated impacts to assessments, the tax levy and taxes on the median value house. Table 1. ESTIMATED Funding Option Impacts to Assessments, Levy & Taxes Impact to City Tax Levy Impact to Taxes Paid by Median Value House % Reduction in Special Assessments by Year Annual $$$ Increase in Levy (3) Annual % Increase in Levy (3) Annual $$$ Tax Increase to Median Value House (1)(3) Annual % Tax Increase to Median Value House (1)(3) Option # 2: Task Force recommendation - 100% Tax Levy Dollars transition over 16-years Year 1 21.1% $950k (2) 2.3% $37.90 2.46% Year 2 - 16 5.3% $260K-$510K (4) 0.6% $10.49 0.67% Cumulative Tax Impacts over 16-years $1,865 (3) (1) Increase on City portion of property tax levy only. Median Value Home = $551,300 (2) $950,000 is an estimated subcut amount for Year 1. (3) All values are estimates with a 2% annual inflation factor. Estimated impacts are related to the future market value of the city. Increases or decreases in market value will impact the values shown in the table. (4) The ranges reflect the estimated impact of the decrease in assessments and impacts of inflation during the transition period. Typically, the levy increases gradually during the transition period to account for these forces. STAFF REPORT Page 3 City of Edina Street Reconstruction Background: In the last 24 years, 83 of the 164 miles of local streets (or ~51%) have been reconstructed and funded by special assessments. If this pace continues, all local streets will be reconstructed in a period of 50 years. Although many of these streets were initially constructed in the 1950s and 1960s, many have surpassed their intended design life of 30 years. Our goal with the street reconstruction program is to level out annual street reconstruction needs to better align with an industry-standard 50-year design life. In the last 19 years, 14 of 42 miles of Municipal State Aid (MSA) designated streets (or ~33%) have been reconstructed and funded by a combination of MSA and special assessments. Current funding allows 0.5 mile of MSA reconstruction every year. At this pace, it will take 56 years to reconstruct the remaining 28 miles of MSA designated streets. This is a concern. A graphic of completed street reconstruction is attached. During the funding transition, 56 miles of local and 8 miles of MSA will be constructed if the current reconstruction pace of 3.5 miles of local streets and 0.5 miles of MSA streets per year continues, leaving approximately 8 years or 25 miles of local streets remaining and 40 years or 20 miles of MSA streets at the end of the funding change transition period. Communication Plan: Council noted the importance of a plan to communicate this major change in how street reconstruction is funded. A successful communication plan details the audience (who), communicator (from whom), message (what/why), schedule (when or how often), and delivery method (how). Goals / Audience / Communicator The goal of the plan is to address questions and concerns from previously assessed properties, properties currently within a street reconstruction project and future street reconstruction projects. The audience is property owners and residents of Edina. The communicators will be staff and City Council with the communication channels, schedule, delivery method, responsibilities, and messaging detailed below. Communication Channels Schedule Delivery Method Responsibility Press Release Immediately Press Release and Social Media Staff Friday Report Immediately Email Staff Edition: Edina First Available Monthly Newsletter Printed and Posted Online Staff Agenda: Edina First Available Monthly TV Episode Staff STAFF REPORT Page 4 Town Talk Style Event Within first 6- months of change In-Person Presentation with Q&A Staff Individual Communications with Residents from Phone Calls, Emails, or other. As needed Phone Calls, Emails, In-Person Meetings Staff and Council Street Reconstruction Information on City of Edina Website Yearly Website Staff Current Year Street Reconstruction Area Public Hearings Yearly Mailings, Engineering Reports, Public Hearing Staff and Council Current Year Street Reconstruction Project Area Meetings Yearly Mailings, Videos, In-Person Meetings or Hybrid Virtual / In- Person Meetings Staff 2-3 Year Future Street Reconstruction Area Meetings Yearly Mailings, Videos, In-Person Meetings or Hybrid Virtual / In- Person Meetings Staff Current and Future Street Reconstruction Area Information on BetterTogetherEdina Website Yearly Website Staff Messaging - What / Why Special assessments for roadway reconstruction costs in Edina began in late 1990s and early 2000s. From the beginning, residents of all property classes and values have expressed concerns with assessments. During the public hearing for a scheduled 2020 street reconstruction project, it became apparent that the City’s ability to justify the benefit of a projected $32,000 assessment to each property owner, as required by Chapter 429 of Minnesota State Statutes, would likely lose a legal challenge. Further, due to the numerous cost variables imbedded in the current assessment policy, it was evident that a reevaluation of the City’s street reconstruction funding policy was necessary. The Street Funding Task Force was created by the City Manager in response to concerns regarding assessments. This initiative is not related to only high value properties, it is a concern for all properties. Over the course of ten months and sixteen meetings, the Task Force gathered data and participated in discussions with area experts regarding: 1) Historical reconstruction costs by neighborhood. STAFF REPORT Page 5 2) Composition of specific costs included or excluded in prior special assessments. 3) Funding alternatives used by other Twin City metro communities, including special assessments, tax levies, and franchise fees. 4) Legal and financial obstacles to changing the policy with respect to both residents previously assessed and properties that have not yet been assessed. 5) The concept of equity, should the Task Force conclude that a change needed to be made. 6) Edina’s use of a 100% assessment strategy was clearly an outlier. 7) State statute chapter 429 which requires assessments financially benefit those assessed and again clearly realized the current 100% assessment strategy was no longer legally and financially sustainable. The Task Force received almost 300 feedback forms and phone calls during the public engagement portion of their work. This change is difficult and unfair if you have paid or are still paying for an assessment. The old policy that assesses 100% of the cost of the pavement, was adopted in the early 2000s. That policy worked for most of those years, but it is not legally and financially sustainable. Ultimately, the Task Force concluded that a change in policy needed to be made. When considering a change in taxation policy, “equity” or “fairness” is an issue that must be addressed. In this case, fairness to those who have experienced a special assessment but also fairness in terms of future taxation policy. To that end, the Task Force recognized that the previous method of street assessments is both fair and unfair at the same time. It is fair in that all residents are subject to the same rules. It is unfair in that a resident may pay significantly more or less based on A) the density of their particular neighborhood project, as defined by the City, B) the quality of the street’s sub-soil (“subcut”) and/or C) the possibility of retaining wall replacement on City owned boulevard. It is also unfair that some people may live many years in Edina and never experience a special assessment, while others may relocate within the City and experience more than one special assessment. The Task Force believed their recommendations were fairer than the current system, though they realize either will seem unfair to those residents who currently reside in Edina and have previously experienced a special assessment. The Task Force sought advice from legal counsel on what could be done to lessen the financial impact on those residents. Unfortunately, there is no legal method to refund or apply different tax rates to those previously assessed. In an attempt to lessen this burden on current residents who have had special assessments, the Task Force recommended a 16-year transition period. Frequency Asked Questions How was street reconstruction funded and what is the new method or the change? The City’s Utility Funds covers the cost of curb and gutter, sanitary sewer, domestic water and stormwater utility improvements in a neighborhood reconstruction project. Under the City’s previous Special Assessment Policy, residents are assessed the rest of the project cost, (major costs include road base and pavement) or 100% of the cost for the street reconstruction portion of the project. The new policy will transition from 100% assessment to 100% taxes with a transition period of 16-years. STAFF REPORT Page 6 Why did the City’s Special Assessment Policy change? The old policy is not financially or legally sustainable. Recent estimates for special assessments in neighborhoods with homes of all sizes have climbed as high as $32,000, a figure that is not sustainable. Under State Statutes, the City can assess properties for public improvements, but the benefit to property values must be equal to or greater than the assessment. As assessments climb, it may be difficult for the City to prove the market benefit. How would the City phase in the new policy? The cost of subcuts and retaining walls will be removed from special assessments in the first year or 2021 construction projects. After the first year, assessments would be reduced each year until it reaches no assessment at Year 16. Sample assessment amounts by year are provided in the appendix of the assessment policy. The street by my house was recently reconstructed and I paid a special assessment. Will I be impacted by a change in the policy? Yes. All taxpayers will begin paying taxes to the city for street reconstruction each year. In the first year, City taxes on the median-valued home would increase by approximately $40 for funding street reconstruction. In the remaining 15 years of the transition of either option, City taxes on the median- valued single-family home would increase by $11 per year for funding street reconstruction. Over the 16- years, the cumulative amount paid to the city from a median-valued single-family home is estimated at $1,865. Note that higher-valued homes would pay more in City taxes and lesser valued homes would pay less. I paid a special assessment. How will I benefit by a change in the policy? The policy change benefits all taxpayers by creating a sustainable funding source to ensure high quality streets. The streets provide the traveling public pathways to key destinations. These trips occur 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in a variety of modes for a variety of reasons. Residents, businesses, emergency services, and others expect a high level of service to ensure disruptions do not occur. Can the City refund residents who have been previously assessed for street reconstruction? No; the State Statute that allows the City to assess for public improvements is very clear on this matter. If the special assessments were validly levied and collected, there is no way for the City to refund previously paid special assessments. Can residents who are still paying off a previous special assessment be taxed differently? Minnesota’s power of taxation is found in Article X of the Constitution of the State of Minnesota. The article states that taxes will be uniform. The City cannot tax properties of the same class differently based on the fact that they were previously subject to a special assessment. All single-family residential properties must have the same tax rate. STAFF REPORT Page 7 What happens with a special assessment that has been levied on a property when it is sold? Typically during the sale of a home, the buyer and seller negotiate paying off the assessment into price of the home. What is the current interest rate for special assessments not paid in full? The City borrows money to fund street reconstruction. The interest rate applied to unpaid portions of the special assessments is 1 percent above the rate at which the City borrows. Historically, that rate was typically between 3 and 4 percent. Approximately what percentage of single-family homes have paid for a street reconstruction project under the current Special Assessment Policy? The City has reconstructed approximately half of the local streets. Therefore, approximately half of the properties have paid an assessment. Approximately 4% of properties change owners per year. If they moved into a neighborhood after street construction, some property owners within a recently constructed street may not have paid for an assessment. We anticipate it will take approximately 25 years to complete reconstruction of the remaining local streets at which point the cycle starts over. How are street reconstruction areas prioritized for reconstruction? Data is collected on the condition of the pavement, watermain, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and lighting systems. The condition of the systems are compared to the remaining life in those systems to determine if now is the right time to maintain the systems or reconstruct the systems. Once reconstruction is determined the right plan of action, street reconstruction areas are compared to planning documents such as the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan to determine additional needs. After all the needs are identified, staff tries to prioritize based on need with consideration of impacts to residents in an area over multiple years. Can the city delay the street reconstruction project in my neighborhood so my neighborhood can have a smaller assessment? It is not recommended to delay a street reconstruction project after staff has determined the systems need replacement. The street and utility systems are vital pieces of infrastructure. Delaying reconstruction increases the risk of outages to customers. Staff has considered many factors in prioritizing street reconstruction neighborhoods to keep up with the needs of the community. CITY OF EDINA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY Afar-41-6July 21, 2021 POLICY PURPOSE: Establish a special assessment policy for public improvements for local and MSA roadways, alleys, sound walls, water service utility lines, sanitary sewer service utility lines, street lights, sump pump removal or redirection, garbage and debris removal, aquatic weeds, weed mowing, tree removals, and maintenance districts. DEFINITIONS: 1. Municipal State Aid Roadway (MSA): MSA refers to roadways that are enrolled in the MSA system and is eligible for State Aid funding. 2. Local Roadway: All other roadways without an MSA designation. 3. Public Retaining Walls: Retaining walls installed by the City to support streets, alleys or sidewalks. 4. Subcut: Excavation and replacement of unsuitable subgrade soils under the proposed roadway pavement and aggregate base section with suitable load bearing soils. POLICY: Assessable Costs: Assessable costs shall be assessed to the benefitting properties of the public improvement, based on a Residential Equivalent Unit formula or an alternate methodology described below. Assessable costs include all project costs not allocated to other funding sources or otherwise excluded by this policy. 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. Assessable costs do not include subcut or public retaining walls. Construction finance costs are the cost of funds used to finance the project construction until the adoption of the resolution imposing the special assessment. Costs are assessed as follows: • 20A percentage% of the costs for MSA roadways based on Table 1, • 100 A percentage% of the costs for local roadways and alleys based on Table 2. • 100% of the costs specific to a single benefitting property, elected to be assessed by the property owner for the following: • Sanitary Sewer Service Utility Line • Water Service Utility Line • Sump Pump Removal or Redirection • Tree Removal • 100 A percentagg% of the costs for alleys_frename Table 2 as "Estimated Assessment for 11 • 100% of the costs for streetlights. • 100% of the costs for sound walls unless partially financed by another agency. • 100% of the costs for designated Maintenance Districts. • 100% of the costs for garbage and debris removal, aquatic weeds, and weed mowing. Residential Equivalent Unit (REU): REU is an equivalency factor used to determine assessment amounts for MSA, local roadway and alley improvements. REU is based on traffic generation of one residential lot, regardless of lot size or amount of street frontage. REU's shall be calculated according to the following table: Scenario Land Use Class REU Factor Notes A Single Family Residential — Single Family Detached 1.0 1 B Multi-Family Residential — Single Family Attached 0.8 1 C Multi-Family Residential — Multi-Family 0.5 1,4 D Industrial and Utility 0.5 2,3 E Commercial — Office and Retail 1.5 2,4 F Institutional — City Owned Buildings 0.9 2,5 G Institutional — City Owned Open Space See Note 2,6 H Institutional — Schools — Public and Private 0.2 2 I Institutional — Places of Worship 0.2 2 J Mixed Use See Note 4 Notes: 1. Per Unit 2. Per 1000 SF Gross Floor Area from the Assessing Department 3. All uses allowed in Planned Industrial Development (PID) except offices and retail. 4. Mixed Use Properties — A combination calculation by Land Use Class (generally mixes of C and E from data held in the Assessing Department). 5. Facilities associated with the production or distribution of water, sanitary, or storm water shall not be assessed. These include, but are not limited to: parcels with well houses, lift stations, water towers, water treatment facilities. 6. REU calculations shall be based on the placement of like-sized lot lines of nearby properties on developable space. These are for only the first layer of potential properties directly adjacent to the open space. Areas of wetlands, floodway, or other non-developable space will not be considered in the calculation. REU for Corner Lots: If a corner lot is subject to multiple roadway assessments on adjacent streets, the total assessable cost shall be equal to one (1) REU after all streets are improved. A partial REU shall be determined by dividing the number of improved streets by the number of adjacent streets. In a typical corner lot on the boundary of an improvement project, this will result in a 0.5 REU per street assessed in two separate projects, totaling 1 REU. Corner lots subject to a previous street reconstruction assessment under the previous corner lot methodology that paid a 2/3 REU will be assessed 1/3 REU. Other Costs: Other costs are improvement costs paid for by other funding sources such as the Utility Fund, Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund (PACS), MSA, taxes, or other funding sources described in an agreement. Other costs include the following public improvements: • 80 A percentage 4694-of the costs for MSA roadway based on Table 1. • A percentage of costs for local roadways and alleys based on Table 2. • The costs of curbs, gutters and other storm water management improvements are paid from the Utility Fund. • The costs of the publicly-owned portions of underground water, sanitary sewer, or storm sewer utility lines are paid from the Utility Fund. • The costs of sidewalks, trails, and pedestrian/cyclist related safety improvements are paid from PACS. Payment and Interest: Assessment methodology, repayment, and interest are described in the table below, and are subject to the following provisions: Project Type Assessment Methodology Payment Period Interest Rate MSA or Local Roadway REU 15 years Net Interest +1% Sanitary Sewer Service Utility Line Direct Costs 15 years Net Interest +1% or 6.5%* Water Service Utility Line Direct Costs 15 years Net Interest +1% or 6.5%* Street Lighting REU 5 years Net Interest +1% Alleys REU 5 years Net Interest +1% Sound Wall Benefit Determination 15 years Net Interest +1% Sump Pump Removal and Redirection Direct Costs 5 years 6.5% Maintenance District Direct Costs 1 Year 6.5% Garbage and Debris Removal Direct Costs 1 Year 6.5% Tree Removal under $500 Direct Costs 1 Year 6.5% Tree Removal $500-$1000 Direct Costs 2 Year 6.5% Tree Removal over $1000 Direct Costs 3 Year 6.5% *6.5% if not done with roadway improvements. 1. Assessment Interest Rate —The interest rate for a special assessment shall be paid based on the "net interest" rate of the bonds to be issued for the project, plus an interest rate premium described in the table above. If a bond is not issued for a project then the net-interest rate shall be the net interest rate of the most recent bonds sold by the City prior to ordering the public improvement. 2. Senior Deferral Program: The City makes available an option for residents over age 65 or who have a permanent disability and meet eligibility standards to defer special assessment. The Senior Deferral Program is described in Resolution 2005-78 (Appendix 43). 3. Prepayment: The City will accept both partial pre-payments and full pre-payments on assessments before certifying the assessment to Hennepin County. A minimum of 25% of the assessable cost must be paid as a partial prepayment. 4. Payment Periods: Payment period vary depending on the purpose for which the assessment was levied. Payment periods and terms shall be amortized using a level annual payment schedule. Background: A. Special Assessment Policy dated April 6, 2021 A,B.Special Assessment Policy dated December 4, 2018 43,C.Special Assessment Policy dated June 7, 2016 D. Special Assessment Policy dated August 6, 2012 4D,E.Special Assessment Policy Background dated September 7, 2010 F. Special Assessment Policy Proposal dated August 16, 2005 -SG.Municipal State Aid Special Assessment Policy dated December 5, 2006 G,FI. Municipal State Aid Special Assessment Policy dated December 21, 2010 Appendix: 1. Table 1: MSA Roadway Assessment Amount per Year 2. Table 2: Local Roadway andAlley Assessment Amount per Year 43. Senior Deferral Program Resolution 2005-78 GAENG\ADMIN\ASSESSMENTSIPOLICY2021 Assessment Policy Revisions\xxx 2021 Policy Reyision12021xxxx Policy redlines.docxGAENG1ADMINIASSESSMENT-S1POLIGYA202-1-Assessment-Policy-Revisions1April-202-1-Reyisions1202-10406-Policy-Rinandoex CITY OF EDINA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY July 21, 2021 POLICY PURPOSE: Establish a special assessment policy for public improvements for local and MSA roadways, alleys, sound walls, water service utility lines, sanitary sewer service utility lines, street lights, sump pump removal or redirection, garbage and debris removal, aquatic weeds, weed mowing, tree removals, and maintenance districts. DEFINITIONS: 1. Municipal State Aid Roadway (MSA): MSA refers to roadways that are enrolled in the MSA system and is eligible for State Aid funding. 2. Local Roadway: All other roadways without an MSA designation. 3. Public Retaining Walls: Retaining walls installed by the City to support streets, alleys or sidewalks. 4. Subcut: Excavation and replacement of unsuitable subgrade soils under the proposed roadway pavement and aggregate base section with suitable load bearing soils. POLICY: Assessable Costs: Assessable costs shall be assessed to the benefitting properties of the public improvement, based on a Residential Equivalent Unit formula or an alternate methodology described below. Assessable costs include all project costs not allocated to other funding sources or otherwise excluded by this policy. 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. Assessable costs do not include subcut or public retaining walls. Construction finance costs are the cost of funds used to finance the project construction until the adoption of the resolution imposing the special assessment. Costs are assessed as follows: • A percentage of the costs for MSA roadways based on Table 1. • A percentage of the costs for local roadways and alleys based on Table 2. • 100% of the costs specific to a single benefitting property, elected to be assessed by the property owner for the following: Sanitary Sewer Service Utility Line Water Service Utility Line Sump Pump Removal or Redirection Tree Removal • • 100% of the costs for streetlights. • 100% of the costs for sound walls unless partially financed by another agency. • 100% of the costs for designated Maintenance Districts. • 100% of the costs for garbage and debris removal, aquatic weeds, and weed mowing. Residential Equivalent Unit (REU): REU is an equivalency factor used to determine assessment amounts for MSA, local roadway and alley improvements. REU is based on traffic generation of one residential lot, regardless of lot size or amount of street frontage. REU’s shall be calculated according to the following table: Scenario Land Use Class REU Factor Notes A Single Family Residential – Single Family Detached 1.0 1 B Multi-Family Residential – Single Family Attached 0.8 1 C Multi-Family Residential – Multi-Family 0.5 1,4 D Industrial and Utility 0.5 2,3 E Commercial – Office and Retail 1.5 2,4 F Institutional – City Owned Buildings 0.9 2,5 G Institutional – City Owned Open Space See Note 2,6 H Institutional – Schools – Public and Private 0.2 2 I Institutional – Places of Worship 0.2 2 J Mixed Use See Note 4 Notes: 1. Per Unit 2. Per 1000 SF Gross Floor Area from the Assessing Department 3. All uses allowed in Planned Industrial Development (PID) except offices and retail. 4. Mixed Use Properties – A combination calculation by Land Use Class (generally mixes of C and E from data held in the Assessing Department). 5. Facilities associated with the production or distribution of water, sanitary, or storm water shall not be assessed. These include, but are not limited to: parcels with well houses, lift stations, water towers, water treatment facilities. 6. REU calculations shall be based on the placement of like-sized lot lines of nearby properties on developable space. These are for only the first layer of potential properties directly adjacent to the open space. Areas of wetlands, floodway, or other non-developable space will not be considered in the calculation. REU for Corner Lots: If a corner lot is subject to multiple roadway assessments on adjacent streets, the total assessable cost shall be equal to one (1) REU after all streets are improved. A partial REU shall be determined by dividing the number of improved streets by the number of adjacent streets. In a typical corner lot on the boundary of an improvement project, this will result in a 0.5 REU per street assessed in two separate projects, totaling 1 REU. Corner lots subject to a previous street reconstruction assessment under the previous corner lot methodology that paid a 2/3 REU will be assessed 1/3 REU. Other Costs: Other costs are improvement costs paid for by other funding sources such as the Utility Fund, Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Fund (PACS), MSA, taxes or other funding sources described in an agreement. Other costs include the following public improvements: • A percentage of the costs for MSA roadway based on Table 1. • A percentage of costs for local roadways and alleys based on Table 2. • The costs of curbs, gutters and other storm water management improvements are paid from the Utility Fund. • The costs of the publicly-owned portions of underground water, sanitary sewer, or storm sewer utility lines are paid from the Utility Fund. • The costs of sidewalks, trails, and pedestrian/cyclist related safety improvements are paid from PACS. Payment and Interest: Assessment methodology, repayment, and interest are described in the table below, and are subject to the following provisions: Project Type Assessment Methodology Payment Period Interest Rate MSA or Local Roadway REU 15 years Net Interest +1% Sanitary Sewer Service Utility Line Direct Costs 15 years Net Interest +1% or 6.5%* Water Service Utility Line Direct Costs 15 years Net Interest +1% or 6.5%* Street Lighting REU 5 years Net Interest +1% Alleys REU 5 years Net Interest +1% Sound Wall Benefit Determination 15 years Net Interest +1% Sump Pump Removal and Redirection Direct Costs 5 years 6.5% Maintenance District Direct Costs 1 Year 6.5% Garbage and Debris Removal Direct Costs 1 Year 6.5% Tree Removal under $500 Direct Costs 1 Year 6.5% Tree Removal $500-$1000 Direct Costs 2 Year 6.5% Tree Removal over $1000 Direct Costs 3 Year 6.5% *6.5% if not done with roadway improvements. 1. Assessment Interest Rate – The interest rate for a special assessment shall be paid based on the “net interest” rate of the bonds to be issued for the project, plus an interest rate premium described in the table above. If a bond is not issued for a project then the net-interest rate shall be the net interest rate of the most recent bonds sold by the City prior to ordering the public improvement. 2. Senior Deferral Program: The City makes available an option for residents over age 65 or who have a permanent disability and meet eligibility standards to defer special assessment. The Senior Deferral Program is described in Resolution 2005-78 (Appendix 3). 3. Prepayment: The City will accept both partial pre-payments and full pre-payments on assessments before certifying the assessment to Hennepin County. A minimum of 25% of the assessable cost must be paid as a partial prepayment. 4. Payment Periods: Payment period vary depending on the purpose for which the assessment was levied. Payment periods and terms shall be amortized using a level annual payment schedule. Background: A. Special Assessment Policy dated April 6, 2021 B. Special Assessment Policy dated December 4, 2018 C. Special Assessment Policy dated June 7, 2016 D. Special Assessment Policy dated August 6, 2012 E. Special Assessment Policy Background dated September 7, 2010 F. Special Assessment Policy Proposal dated August 16, 2005 G. Municipal State Aid Special Assessment Policy dated December 5, 2006 H. Municipal State Aid Special Assessment Policy dated December 21, 2010 Appendix: 1. Table 1: Municipal State Aid (MSA) Roadway Assessment Amount per Year 2. Table 2: Local Roadway and Alley Assessment Amount per Year 3. Senior Deferral Program Resolution 2005-78 G:\ENG\ADMIN\ASSESSMENTS\POLICY\2021 Assessment Policy Revisions\xxx 2021 Policy Revision\2021xxxx Policy redlines.docx Appendix Table 1. Municipal State Aid (MSA) Roadway Assessment Amount per Year Percentages Sample Assessments During Transition Year Construction Year Assessment Year Reduction in Assessments per Year Cumulative Reduction in Assessment per Year Assessment per Year $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 0 2020 2021 20.00% $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 1 2021 2022 21.10% 21.10% 15.78% $3,945 $5,918 $7,890 2 2022 2023 5.26% 26.36% 14.73% $3,682 $5,523 $7,364 3 2023 2024 5.26% 31.62% 13.68% $3,419 $5,129 $6,838 4 2024 2025 5.26% 36.88% 12.62% $3,156 $4,734 $6,312 5 2025 2026 5.26% 42.14% 11.57% $2,893 $4,340 $5,786 6 2026 2027 5.26% 47.40% 10.52% $2,630 $3,945 $5,260 7 2027 2028 5.26% 52.66% 9.47% $2,367 $3,551 $4,734 8 2028 2029 5.26% 57.92% 8.42% $2,104 $3,156 $4,208 9 2029 2030 5.26% 63.18% 7.36% $1,841 $2,762 $3,682 10 2030 2031 5.26% 68.44% 6.31% $1,578 $2,367 $3,156 11 2031 2032 5.26% 73.70% 5.26% $1,315 $1,973 $2,630 12 2032 2033 5.26% 78.96% 4.21% $1,052 $1,578 $2,104 13 2033 2034 5.26% 84.22% 3.16% $789 $1,184 $1,578 14 2034 2035 5.26% 89.48% 2.10% $526 $789 $1,052 15 2035 2036 5.26% 94.74% 1.05% $263 $395 $526 16 2036 2037 5.26% 100.00% 0.00% $0 $0 $0 Table 2. Local Roadway and Alley Assessment Amount per Year Percentages Sample Assessments During Transition Year Construction Year Assessment Year Reduction in Assessments per Year Cumulative Reduction in Assessment per Year Assessment per Year $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 0 2020 2021 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 1 2021 2022 21.10% 21.10% 78.90% $7,890 $11,835 $15,780 2 2022 2023 5.26% 26.36% 73.64% $7,364 $11,046 $14,728 3 2023 2024 5.26% 31.62% 68.38% $6,838 $10,257 $13,676 4 2024 2025 5.26% 36.88% 63.12% $6,312 $9,468 $12,624 5 2025 2026 5.26% 42.14% 57.86% $5,786 $8,679 $11,572 6 2026 2027 5.26% 47.40% 52.60% $5,260 $7,890 $10,520 7 2027 2028 5.26% 52.66% 47.34% $4,734 $7,101 $9,468 8 2028 2029 5.26% 57.92% 42.08% $4,208 $6,312 $8,416 9 2029 2030 5.26% 63.18% 36.82% $3,682 $5,523 $7,364 10 2030 2031 5.26% 68.44% 31.56% $3,156 $4,734 $6,312 11 2031 2032 5.26% 73.70% 26.30% $2,630 $3,945 $5,260 12 2032 2033 5.26% 78.96% 21.04% $2,104 $3,156 $4,208 13 2033 2034 5.26% 84.22% 15.78% $1,578 $2,367 $3,156 14 2034 2035 5.26% 89.48% 10.52% $1,052 $1,578 $2,104 15 2035 2036 5.26% 94.74% 5.26% $526 $789 $1,052 16 2036 2037 5.26% 100.00% 0.00% $0 $0 $0 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HWY 16978TH ST W VALLEY VIEW RD VALLEY VIEW RD DEWEY HILL RD 76TH ST W 70TH ST WGLEASON RD58TH ST W 54TH ST W 50TH ST W 4 4 T H S T W MALONEY AVE INTERLACHEN BLVD YORK AVE S66TH ST W 70TH ST W CAHILL RDXERXES AVE SFRANCE AVE SVER N O N A V ESCHAEFER RDBLAKE RDGLEA S O N R D §¨¦169 §¨¦169 §¨¦62 §¨¦62 §¨¦100 §¨¦100 INTERLACHENCOUNTRYCLUB VANVALKENBURGPARK BREDESENPARK BRAEMAR PARKGOLF COURSE FRED RICHARDSPARK EDINACOUNTRYCLUB City of EdinaRoadway Reconstruction History 1998 - 2020 Engineering Dept.May 2021 Legend µ 19981999 2000200120022003200420052006200720082009 2010201120122013201420152016201720182019 2020!!!!! The CITY of EDINAStreet Funding and Assessment Policy Revisions City Council July 21, 2021 The CITY of EDINA www.EdinaMN.gov 2 Discussion Dates Dates of Recent Street Funding Discussions May 2020 Street Funding Task Force Appointed November 2020 Council Work Session with Task Force January 2021 Community Engagement on Task Force Recommendations March 2, 2021 Council Accepts Task Force Final Report & Recommendations March 13, 2021 Council Retreat to Discuss Street Funding April 6, 2021 Council Revised Assessment Policy to remove subcuts and public retaining walls June 1, 2021 Council Work Session to Discuss Street Funding July 21, 2021 Council Considers Revision to Assessment Policy and Street Reconstruction Funding The CITY of EDINA 1.Street Funding Task Force Report 1.Current method is no longer legally & financially sustainable 2.A change in policy needs to be made www.EdinaMN.gov 3 Background The CITY of EDINA 1.Edina Street Reconstruction History –See Map 1.Local –83 of 164 miles (51%) 2.Municipal State Aid (MSA) –14 of 42 miles (33%) www.EdinaMN.gov 4 Background The CITY of EDINA www.EdinaMN.gov 5 Background The CITY of EDINA •Street Reconstruction Project Prioritization Data Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Utility Needs –Watermain, Sanitary & Storm Sewer Systems Transportation Needs –Multi-Modal needs www.EdinaMN.gov 6 Background The CITY of EDINA 1.Legal Review –Refunds and Taxing 1.David Kendall –City Attorney 2.Jay Lindgren –Dorsey & Whitney Attorney www.EdinaMN.gov 7 Background The CITY of EDINA 1.Comments from June Work Session 1.Fund Street Reconstruction with 100% Taxes 2.Transition over 16-years 2.Need Communications / Change Management Plan www.EdinaMN.gov 8 Funding The CITY of EDINA100% Taxes Transition Period % Reduction in Special Assessments by Year Annual $$$ Increase in Levy Annual % Increase in Levy Annual $$$ Tax Increase to Median Value House Annual % Tax Increase to Median Value House Year 1 21.1%$950k (2)2.3%$37.90 2.46% Year 2 -16 5.3%$260K-$510K (4)0.6%$10.49 0.67% Cumulative Tax Impacts over 16- years $1,865 www.EdinaMN.gov 9 The CITY of EDINA www.EdinaMN.gov 10 Recommendation Percentages Sample Assessments During Transition Year Construction Year Assessment Year Reduction in Assessments per Year Cumulative Reduction in Assessment per Year Assessment per Year $5,000 $7,500 $10,000 0 2020 2021 20.00%$5,000 $7,500 $10,000 1 2021 2022 21.10%21.10%15.78%$3,945 $5,918 $7,890 2 2022 2023 5.26%26.36%14.73%$3,682 $5,523 $7,364 3 2023 2024 5.26%31.62%13.68%$3,419 $5,129 $6,838 4 2024 2025 5.26%36.88%12.62%$3,156 $4,734 $6,312 5 2025 2026 5.26%42.14%11.57%$2,893 $4,340 $5,786 6 2026 2027 5.26%47.40%10.52%$2,630 $3,945 $5,260 7 2027 2028 5.26%52.66%9.47%$2,367 $3,551 $4,734 8 2028 2029 5.26%57.92%8.42%$2,104 $3,156 $4,208 9 2029 2030 5.26%63.18%7.36%$1,841 $2,762 $3,682 10 2030 2031 5.26%68.44%6.31%$1,578 $2,367 $3,156 11 2031 2032 5.26%73.70%5.26%$1,315 $1,973 $2,630 12 2032 2033 5.26%78.96%4.21%$1,052 $1,578 $2,104 13 2033 2034 5.26%84.22%3.16%$789 $1,184 $1,578 14 2034 2035 5.26%89.48%2.10%$526 $789 $1,052 15 2035 2036 5.26%94.74%1.05%$263 $395 $526 16 2036 2037 5.26%100.00%0.00%$0 $0 $0 Table 1. Municipal State Aid (MSA) Roadway Assessment Amount per Year The CITY of EDINA www.EdinaMN.gov 11 Recommendation Table 2. Local Roadway and Alley Assessment Amount per Year Percentages Sample Assessments During Transition Year Construction Year Assessment Year Reduction in Assessments per Year Cumulative Reduction in Assessment per Year Assessment per Year $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 0 2020 2021 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 1 2021 2022 21.10%21.10%78.90%$7,890 $11,835 $15,780 2 2022 2023 5.26%26.36%73.64%$7,364 $11,046 $14,728 3 2023 2024 5.26%31.62%68.38%$6,838 $10,257 $13,676 4 2024 2025 5.26%36.88%63.12%$6,312 $9,468 $12,624 5 2025 2026 5.26%42.14%57.86%$5,786 $8,679 $11,572 6 2026 2027 5.26%47.40%52.60%$5,260 $7,890 $10,520 7 2027 2028 5.26%52.66%47.34%$4,734 $7,101 $9,468 8 2028 2029 5.26%57.92%42.08%$4,208 $6,312 $8,416 9 2029 2030 5.26%63.18%36.82%$3,682 $5,523 $7,364 10 2030 2031 5.26%68.44%31.56%$3,156 $4,734 $6,312 11 2031 2032 5.26%73.70%26.30%$2,630 $3,945 $5,260 12 2032 2033 5.26%78.96%21.04%$2,104 $3,156 $4,208 13 2033 2034 5.26%84.22%15.78%$1,578 $2,367 $3,156 14 2034 2035 5.26%89.48%10.52%$1,052 $1,578 $2,104 15 2035 2036 5.26%94.74%5.26%$526 $789 $1,052 16 2036 2037 5.26%100.00%0.00%$0 $0 $0 The CITY of EDINA •Immediately –Press Release, Friday Report •First Available –Edition: Edina and Agenda: Edina •Within 6-months –Town Talk Style Event •As Needed –Communications from Residents •Yearly –Street Reconstruction Program Website, BetterTogetherEdina, current year public hearings, current year projects, future year projects, www.EdinaMN.gov 12 Communication Plan The CITY of EDINA www.EdinaMN.gov 13 Recommendation •Approve Street Funding Revision From 100% Special Assessment to 100% Taxes Transition over 16-years (per tables in revised policy) •Approve Revised Assessment Policy Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.E. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Scott H. Neal, City Manager Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-59: Affirming and Authorizing the Submission of a Request for State Bonding Bill Funding Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-59 affirming and authorizing the submission of a request for state bonding bill funding. INTRODUCTION: If adopted, this resolution will affirm the submission of a request for state bonding bill assistance to the State Legislature. A request for bonding bill funding for additional capital improvements and expansion to Braemar Ice Arena was submitted to state officials Monday, June 21, 2021. The submission was suggested to me by State Sen. Melisa Franzen. I submitted a proposed set of improvements that have been under discussion by a group of local hockey advocates. The proposed scope and estimated cost are included in the attachments to this memorandum. The proposed local match for the project would be generated by local option sales tax, if that funding stream is approved by voters at the referendum in November 2022. The Council’s adoption of this resolution is a statement to the State that you support the proposed project and wish for the project to remain in the state bonding bill queue. Approving the resolution does not legally obligate the Council to build the project should the terms of the proposed funding stream change or if some other aspect of the project turns out to be objectionable to the Council in the future. The act of getting into the queue obligates staff to continue to provide information to the State and to answer questions from legislators. It probably goes without saying, but being in the queue does not obligate the State to grant our request. The bonding bill process is long and complex. Legislators will discuss and tour proposed projects starting this summer through the winter. They will start debating actual bill language during the 2022 session with a final vote most likely near the end of that session in May 2022. Normally, the City Council would adopt a resolution like this one prior to the submission of a proposal for bonding bill funding. I’m asking you to take this ex post facto action because staff were not able to process this matter prior to the Council’s June 15 meeting. If approved, I will forward the resolution to the state officials managing the bonding bill process and notify our state legislative delegation of your action. Also, Perry Vetter will notify the various groups that have an interest in Braemar Ice Area about the action and proposed project. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution No. 2021-59: Affirming and Authorizing the Submission of a Request for State Bonding Bill Funding Braemar Arena Master Plan Design Concept RESOLUTION NO. 2021-59 AFFIRMING AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF A REQUEST FOR STATE BONDING BILL FUNDING WHEREAS, the City of Edina owns and operates a regional ice skating asset called Braemar Arena; and, WHEREAS, the substantial regional benefit of Braemar Arena is regularly enjoyed by people from all over Minnesota, several adjoining states and several adjoining Canadian provinces; and, WHEREAS, the financial burden of operating Braemar Arena falls, primarily, on Edina property taxpayers; and, WHEREAS, a substantial investment in new capital improvements and expansion is required at Braemar Arena in order to fulfill its role as a regional asset; and, WHEREAS, there are alternative revenue sources to local property taxes to financially support the necessary improvements and expansion at Braemar Arena; and, WHEREAS, the Edina City Council supports proposed set of capital improvements to Braemar Arena, known collectively as the Braemar Arena Expansion Project, and requests state fiscal support for the project. NOW, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the City Council requests the State of Minnesota include funding for the Braemar Arena Expansion Project in the 2022 State Capital Investment and Bonding Bill; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council requests the City Manager take the necessary steps to submit said proposal to the state for consideration in the bonding bill process. Dated: July 21, 2021 Attest: Sharon Allison, 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 July 21, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this _______ day of ___________________, 2021. City Clerk -4 INDOOR RINKS -1 OUTDOOR RINK -NEW ENTRY, LOBBY AND CIRCULATION -946 CARS (INCLUDES LOT AT BASEBALL FIELDS) 2 NEW RINKS NEW ENTRY + LOBBY STRUCTURED PARKING DROP OFF/ PICK UP Braemar Arena Masterplan |Design Concept Site Plan Braemar Arena Masterplan | Design Concept Southwest Aerial View Braemar Arena Masterplan |Design Concept View from the Frontage Road Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.F. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Scott H. Neal, City Manager Item Activity: Subject:Approve Proposed Spending Plan for Edina's American Rescue Act Plan Funds Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve proposed spending plan for Edina’s American Rescue Act Plan funds. INTRODUCTION: At the Council’s June 15 meeting, I shared with the Council my proposed spending plan for the City’s allocation of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, which are just over $4.9 million. The City has received the first half of the total funding. We have been told to expect the second half in mid-2022. The City has until 2024 to spend the funds on seven broad federal government priorities: 1. Supporting public health response 2. Addressing the negative economic impacts caused by the public health emergency 3. Serving the hardest-hit communities and families 4. Replacing lost public sector revenue 5. Providing premium pay for essential workers 6. Investing in water and sewer infrastructure 7. Investing in broadband infrastructure There are also two broad categories of spending that are ineligible for ARPA funds: 1. Direct or indirect tax reductions, rebates, credits, etc. 2. Deposits into pension funds I have attached my staff report from the June 15 meeting that describes my proposed plan and how it fits within the federal categories. Generally, the plan can be summarized as follows: 1. Investments in Broadband Infrastructure $2,000,000 2. Direct Assistance to People $1,600,000 3. Direct Assistance to Business. $700,000 4. Revenue Loss at City Facilities. $400,000 5. Climate Change Mitigation. $100,000 As you consider this spending plan, Council Members are advised to keep the following thoughts in mind: 1. This ARPA spending plan was designed to put approximately 70% of the funds into the community and spend 30% for internal expenses. The spending plan for last year’s CARES Act funds was approximately 30% external and 70% internal. 2. Staff conducted a community engagement plan on spending priorities. While we could not recommend all of the public’s ideas, two in particular (climate change mitigation and increase mental health spending) have been included in the proposed plan. 3. The ARPA funds must be spent in compliance with the seven federal priorities in Edina. 4. If we delegate spending of ARPA funds to a third party, the City is still responsible to make sure the funds are spent in compliance with the federal priorities. 5. There are media, social media and community members who will be watching our decisions about how the ARPA money is spent. We should endeavor to be good stewards with this money. 6. The sooner the Council approves an ARPA spending plan, the sooner the money can start making a difference in our local economy. There is one amendment I am proposing to my June 15 recommendation. There is a software improvement that we can add to our Community Health Division that will create a significant process improvement for residents and businesses when they seek various permits from the City. The budget for this proposed addition is $300,000. There is a modest cost for ongoing annual support and license that would be carried in our future annual operating budgets. With that amendment, I offer the following revised recommendation: 1. Investments in Broadband Infrastructure $2,000,000 2. Direct Assistance to People $1,600,000 3. Direct Assistance to Business. $600,000 4. Revenue Loss at City Facilities. $200,000 5. Climate Change Mitigation. $100,000 6. Community Health Software Upgrade $300,000 In my June 15 memorandum to the Council, I asked you to take my proposal under advisement and to approve it - or something akin to it - at your July 21 meeting. If you approve my proposed spending plan at the July 21 meeting, staff will put together specific plans for each spending category and advance that specific plan to the Council for final approval at your Sept. 9 meeting. If approved at the Sept. 9 meeting, staff will begin implementation of the approved plan on Sept. 10. I will be happy to answer any questions about the proposed spending plan before or at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report ARPA June 15, 2021 June 9, 2021 Mayor & City Council Scott H. Neal, City Manager Proposed Spending Plan for Edina’s American Rescue Plan Act Funds Information / Background: The City of Edina has been allocated $4,932,493 in federal grant aid through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021. Half of the funds will be delivered in 2021 and half will be delivered in 2022. The City has until the end of 2024 to complete the spending of the ARPA funds. There are seven broad federal government priorities for which the funds can be used: 1. Supporting the public health response 2. Addressing the negative economic impacts caused by the public health emergency 3. Serving the hardest-hit communities and families 4. Replacing lost public sector revenue 5. Providing premium pay for essential workers 6. Investing in water and sewer infrastructure 7. Investing in broadband infrastructure There are two broad categories that are ineligible uses of the ARPA funds: 1. Direct or indirect tax reductions, rebates, credits, etc. 2. Deposits into pension funds There is specific guidance on spending questions available from the U.S. Department of Treasury. This guidance is dynamic. City staff track the guidance to make sure that our ARPA spending plans are compliant with the ARPA. The role of staff in this matter is to develop a proposed spending plan. The role of Council is to consider the recommended plan and approve it as submitted or as amended. If the staff’s proposed plan is amended by the Council, I request time for staff to review and analyze Council’s amendments to ensure the amended STAFF REPORT Page 2 plan is compliant with federal law. If staff determine that Council’s amended plan is compliant, staff will ask Council to formally approved and then staff will begin implementation. As I considered my recommendation for the City’s ARPA spending plan, I had two goals in mind. First, our spending plan for the CARES Act funds allocated about 70% of those funds to internal city government costs and 30% to direct program and service costs in the community. For ARPA, I want to flip those percentages. I want to dedicate 70% of ARPA funds to program and service costs in the community and 30% on internal city government costs. Deploying more of this money externally than internally feels fair to me given the stated purpose of the money is to help the community recover from the economic and societal damage caused by the pandemic. My proposed spending plan recommendation accomplishes this goal. My second goal was to seek input and ideas from the community about how to best deploy $4.9 million of federal aid into the community. City staff facilitated two community meetings with a total of 28 live attendees; two city employee meetings with a total of ten attendees; and organized a Better Together Edina project page with 557 total visits offering 162 unique ideas. The public engagement process employed by staff accomplished my second goal. Based on the community and employee input, and the federal guidance, I have prepared the following ARPA spending plan for the Council’s consideration. The spending plan line items are general spending priorities. When a spending plan is approved by the Council, staff will more fully develop a specific implementation plan for a later Council review. The general tenets of my recommended ARPA spending plan, and which federal ARPA spending priorities they support, are as follows: • An urban forestry initiative to plant 1,000 trees on public and private property as a mitigating response to climate change. A substantial percentage of these trees would be planted in and around multifamily housing areas that lack trees. The City’s forester will develop a plan for this initiative. (Priorities 1, 3) • Food aid and rental assistance as a form of direct assistance to people in need (Priority 3) • Direct financial aid to small businesses; direct assistance to business support programs at the 50th & France Business Association and the Edina Chamber of Commerce (Priorities 2, 3) • An expansion of the City’s current shared mental health/social worker program to provide a more robust mental health support function to the community (Priorities 1, 3) • Revenue loss from the City’s recreation enterprise operations from 2020 (Priority 4) • Investments in HVAC improvements in City facilities that are currently identified in the City’s CIP (Priority 1) • Investment in extension of broadband connections to the City’s water, sewer and storm sewer equipment and building sites (Priorities 6, 7) • Investments in partnerships with local private sector broadband service providers to incentivize them to ramp up the build out of their systems in the community with a focus of providing services in areas of the city with the most economic need first (Priorities 3, 7) STAFF REPORT Page 3 A financial summary of my recommended spending plan is below: 2021 Urban Forestry Initiative $100,000 Food Assistance $100,000 Rental Assistance $300,000 Small Business Assistance - General $300,000 Small Business Assistance – Targeted $200,000 50th & France Business Assistance $100,000 Chamber of Commerce Business Assistance $100,000 Mental Health Assistance Expansion $400,000 Broadband Connections for City Utility Facilities $300,000 Community Broadband Expansion $500,000 $2,400,000 2022 Food Assistance $100,000 Rental Assistance $300,000 HVAC Improvements to City Facilities $400,000 Revenue Loss for City Rec Facilities $400,000 Mental Health Assistance Expansion $400,000 Broadband Connections for City Utility Facilities $300,000 Community Broadband Expansion $500,000 $2,400,000 STAFF REPORT Page 4 As mentioned earlier, the City has until 2024 to complete the spending of the ARPA funds. I suggest that we go forward with a plan that encourages funds to be spent by December 31, 2023. Any funds left unexpended after that date would be “swept” into the Community Broadband Expansion program budget. Summary I suggest the Council take this recommendation under advisement at the June 15 City Council meeting and reserve action on it until your July 21 City Council meeting. If an ARPA spending plan is approved at the July 21 meeting, staff will develop an implementation program for the Council to consider approving at your September 9 Council meeting. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: X.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Minutes From:Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: Community Health Commission, April 12 and May 10, 2021 Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Receive the minutes from April and May 2021 Community Health Commission meetings. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes: Community Health Commission: April 12, 2021 Minutes: Community Health Commission: May 10, 2021 Audio Conference: US Toll +1-415-655-0001 Access code: 133 313 2646 MINUTES Community Health Commission April 12, 2021 at 6:30 PM City Hall, Community Room I.Call To Order II.Roll Call Present: Rob Loesch, Julia Selleys, Philip King-Lowe, Andrew Hawkins, Amanda Herr, Michael Wood, Tracy Nelson, Mary Absolon, Isadora LI, Ellie Mullen, Eva DeSimone III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion by Amanda Herr to approve meeting agenda. Seconded by Philip King-Lowe. Motion Carried. IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes A.March 8, 2021 Draft Meeting Minutes Motion by Tracy Nelson to approve March 8, 2021 meeting minutes. Seconded by Greg Wright . Motion Carried. V.Community Comment VI.Reports/Recommendations A.Vaccine Hesitancy Presentation Presentation from Atman Jahagirdar regarding vaccine hesitancy in Edina Public School students and parents. COVIDEDU.ORG is website for more information. Possible avenue for outreach to Edina residents with hesitancy around COVID vaccine. B.Opioid Initiative Draft Report Sharing of draft Opioid Initiative report. Will be refined for final review and approval by Commission. VII.Chair And Member Comments VIII.Staff Comments Update on COVID-19 case rates and Edina staff participation in vaccine clinics at Bloomington Civic Plaza. IX.Adjournment US Toll +1-415-655-0001 Access code: 133 469 9756 MINUTES Community Health Commission May 10, 2021 at 6:30 PM City Hall, Community Room I.Call To Order II.Roll Call Present: Julia Selleys, Mary Absolon, Greg Wright, Andrew Hawkins, Tracy Nelson, Amanda Herr, Michael Wood, Philip King-Lowe, Isa Li. Absent: Rob Loesch, Eva DeSimone, Ellie Mullen III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion by Amanda Herr to approve meeting agenda. Seconded by Tracy Nelson. Motion Carried. IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes Motion by Greg Wright to approve April 12, 2021 meeting minutes. Seconded by Mary Absolon. Motion Carried. A.Minutes: Community Health Commission, April 12, 2021 V.Community Comment VI.Reports/Recommendations A.Commission Member Review Review of Commission member duties and responsibilities presented by Community Engagement Coordinator MJ Lamon. B.Sub-Committee Report Out/Discussion C.Council Work Session Debrief/Discussion VII.Chair And Member Comments VIII.Staff Comments IX.Adjournment Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: X.B. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: From:Liz Moore, Engineering Coordinator Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: Energy and Environment Commission, May 6, 2021 CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None. INTRODUCTION: Receive the attached minutes of the Energy and Environment Commission from May 6, 2021. ATTACHMENTS: Description May 6, 2021 EEC Meeting Minutes Agenda Energy and Environment Commission City Of Edina, Minnesota VIRTUAL MEETING Members of the public can observe the meeting by watching the live stream on YouTube at youtube.com/edinatv or by listening in by calling toll free 1-415-655-0001 with Access code:133 717 7482. Thursday, May 6, 2021 7:00 PM I.Call To Order Chair Martinez called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM. II.Roll Call Answering roll call were Chair Martinez, Commissioners Horan, Haugen, Lanzas, Lukens, Tessman, Student Commissioners Ana Martinez. Absent: Commisioner Ratan, Student Commissioner Mans. Late: Commissioner Dakane and Hovanec. III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion by Tom Tessman to Approve Meeting Agenda. Seconded by Michelle Horan. Motion Carried. IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes A.Minutes: Energy & Environment Commission April 8, 2021 Motion by Hilda Martinez Salgado to Approve April 8 Meeting Minutes. Seconded by John Haugen. Motion Carried. V.Special Recognitions And Presentations A.Climate Action Plan Baseline Assessment: paleBLUEdot Ted Redmond from paleBlueDot presented the Climate Action Plan Baseline Assessment and answered questions from the commissioners. B.Board and Commission Member Review Engagement Coordinator, MJ Lamon, presented the Board and Commission Member Review and answered questions from commissioners. VI.Reports/Recommendations A.Initiatives 2 and 5, info only: To-Go Packaging & Green Business Initiative #2 & #5 - read update in packet. B.Initiative 3: EEC Event Tabling Initiative #3 - Tabling events will start with Farmer's Markets. Volunteers will be needed. C.Initiative 7: ETC & organized trash collection Initiative #7 - John Haugen provided an update from the ETC's organized trash collection initiative. VII.Chair And Member Comments A.EEC Brief History and Context Commissioner Horan shared a brief history and context of the EEC with members. Chair Martinez will be presenting a work plan update to City Council on June 15th. VIII.Staff Comments Sustainability Coordinator, Grace Hancock, reminded everyone student commissioner positions are open until June 1st. The City holds town talks quarterly. Sustainability will be presenting May 19th. Edina Art Festival will take place this year and they are looking at making it a zero waste event. IX.Adjournment Motion by Hilda Martinez Salgado to Adjourn. Seconded by Michelle Horan. Motion Carried. T he City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing amplification, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: X.C. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Minutes From:Risi Karim, City Management Fellow Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: Human Rights & Relations Commission May 25, 2021 CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Receive the minutes from the May 25, 2021 Human Rights & Relations Commission meeting. INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description May 25, 2021 HRRC Minutes Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: 6/22/2021 Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Human Rights & Relations Commission Virtual Meeting, WebEx, May 25, 2021 7 p.m. I. Call To Order Chair Epstein shared information for virtual meeting guidelines for Commissioners and those watching or listening in to the meeting. Chair Epstein called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering Roll Call: Chair Epstein, Commissioners Edwards, Felton, Ismail, Ross, Stringer Moore, Segall, and Bennett; Student Commissioners Lichtenberger and Mirza Staff Present: Heidi Lee, Race & Equity Coordinator; Risi Karim, City Management Fellow Absent: Commissioner Guadarrama and Student Commissioner Borene Late: III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion by Commissioner Ross to approve the May 25, 2021 meeting agenda, seconded by Commissioner Stringer Moore. Roll call vote. Motion carried. IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes Commissioners indicated the following changes to the draft minutes: No changes Motion by Commissioner Bennett to approve the April 27, 2021 meeting minutes, seconded by Commissioner Ross. Roll call vote. Motion carried. V. Special Recognitions & Presentations A. Board and Commission Member Review • Engagement Coordinator MJ Lamon presented to the Commission the annual Boards & Commission Member Review. Sharing updates made to guiding documents and fielded questions related to Work Plan Development. B. Human Service Task Force • City Management Fellow Risi Karim gave a brief introduction about the Human Service Task Force and requested a volunteer from the Commission to serve on Task Force. • Due to timeline of the Task Force and the reappointment process for Student Commissioners it was determined that Student Commissioners are not eligible to serve on the Task Force. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: 6/22/2021 Motion by Commissioner Felton to appoint Commissioner Bennett to the Human Service Task Force, seconded by Commissioner Segall. Roll call vote. Motion carried. VI. Reports/Recommendations A. 2021 Work Plan Development • The Commission discussed the 2021 Work Plan o Initiative #1 – Days of Remembrance Commissioner Stringer Moore shared the following updates with the Commission: - Days of Remembrance will be held on July 29th at 7pm in Edina City Hall - The event will be Hybrid, with the in-person component being held in the council chambers. - Manny Gabler is confirmed as the keynote speaker for the event. - Student Commissioners Mirza and Lichtenberger will serve as the MC’s of the event The subcommittee also request that all commissioners save the date and make themselves available to assist during the event. o Initiative #2 – Tom Oye Award - Commissioner Edwards comments that the subcommittee will likely follow the same timeline as previous years, kicking off the initiative in the fall. o Initiative #3 – Sharing Values Sharing Community Event - Commissioner Bennett shares that she has been in contact with the city’s communication team to begin planning for a hybrid event. - Commissioner Bennett inquires feedback from the Committee regarding the location of the event and the technology needed to make the event hybrid. o Initiative #4 – Race, Justice, and Policing Community Awareness Plan & Implementation - Mentioned in information shared for Initiative #3 o Initiative #5 – Bias Offense Review - No update o Initiative #6 – Review and comment on a plan developed by P&R and R&E staff - Staff Liaison lee shared with the commission that herself and Parks & Rec Director have begun meeting to discuss the project as well as reached out to other communities to inquire about how they went about receiving public participation. VII. Chair and Member Comments • Chair Epstein reflect on the George Floyd incident that took place in May of 2020 and how his time on the HRRC shaped his experience and ability to process the situation. • Commissioner Edwards notes that there have been numerous incidents of hate towards several marginalized groups and shares that she believed the HRRC is a great place to start enacting change. • Commissioner Bennett thanks the Commission for their support in asking council to weigh in on the legislature for police reform. • Commissioner Stringer Moore asks members of the Commission to reflect on the following: o What you have learned in the past year o What you are committed to doing as it related to equity, equality, and social justice o What you are going to do and what you wished people would do - Commissioner Stringer Moore brings attention to the heighted and growing number of bias incidents to several marginalized communities across the country. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: 6/22/2021 - Commissioner Stringer Moore acknowledges that this month is Asian American Island Pacific Heritage month as well as Mental Health Awareness month. - Commissioner Stringer Moore shares that Edina Police Chief Dave Nelson has announced his retirement and in addition the city has hired Andrew Slama to be the city’s new Fire Chief. - As of May 14th the state’s mask mandate is no longer in effect. City Facilities no longer require mask. • Commissioner Ismail shares her commitment to educating others about the Islamic observance of Ramadan. Commissioner Ismail also shares that she is pleased with the outcome of the Derek Chauvin trial. • Commissioner Segall announced that the League of Women Voters and Edina Community Foundation are jointly launching a study titled “Operational Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” in Edina, with a focus on business ,institutions and organizations in Edina. • Commissioner Ross recalls the George Floyd incident and affirms that the HRRC should continue to play a role in the community to facilitates conversations around race & equity. • Student Commissioner Mirza reflects on his time serving on the HRRC and is grateful for all the things he has learned while serving. VIII. Staff Comments • Staff Liaison Lee shares the following: o On May 24th Gov Waltz issued a proclamation encouraging everyone in the state of Minnesota to join in a moment of silence at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 25, 2021 for 9 minutes and 29 seconds, to honor George Floyd and every person whose life has been cut short due to systems of racism and discrimination in Minnesota. o City Hall will open to the public June 21st, City Council will be the first public meeting to go back in person. Bit has not yet been determined when Boards & Commissions will return to in person meetings. o Staff Liaison Lee provided a race and Equity Work Summary to the Commission IX. Adjournment Motion by Commissioner Felton to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Commissioner Ross. Roll call vote. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: X.D. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Minutes From:Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: Transportation Commission, May 20, 2021 Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None; information only. INTRODUCTION: Receive the minutes of the Transportation Commission from May 20, 2021 (see attached). ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes: Transportation Commission, May 20, 2021 Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: June 17, 2021 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Transportation Commission WebEx May 20, 2021 I. Call To Order Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were Commissioners Ahler, Brown, Johnson, Kane, Lewis, Plumb-Smith, Richman, Clark, Khariwala. Absent: Commissioners McCarthy, Atri Staff present: Transportation Planner Andrew Scipioni, Community Engagement Coordinator MJ Lamon III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion was made by Commissioner Ahler and seconded by Commissioner Richman to approve the agenda. All voted aye. Motion carried. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Motion was made by Commissioner Kane and seconded by Commissioner Plumb-Smith to approve the March 18, 2021 meeting minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried. V. Special Recognitions and Presentations A. Annual Commission Member Review Community Engagement Coordinator MJ Lamon presented an annual review of Board and Commission policies and procedures. B. Safe Routes to School Engineering Study Liaison Scipioni presented the findings of the recent Safe Routes to School engineering study completed by SRF Consulting Group. VI. Reports/Recommendations A. CloverRide Service Contract Renewal The Commission reviewed and comments on staff’s recommendation to renew the service contract with DARTS for the CloverRide circulator bus. Comments from Commissioners included: • CloverRide is a useful service and should be renewed for another year. • There is a social benefit that riders enjoy from the service. • DARTS provides a high level of service and has flexibility to modify the route to meet riders’ needs. • Suggest that the Community Health Commission be given an opportunity to provide feedback on the service. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: June 17, 2021 B. Traffic Safety Report of April 27, 2021 The Commission reviewed and commented on the Traffic Safety report of April 27, 2021. C. 2021 Work Plan Updates • #1 Organized Trash Collection – Midpoint meeting with the VANTAGE team held April 16. The team has done more research on other cities, drafted a survey but City has said not to distribute this year. The team is analyzing traffic data collected by staff. The final VANTAGE report is expected May 25. • #2 Street Funding Task Force – Completed. • #3 CloverRide – The Commission reviewed and commented on staff’s recommendation to renew the service for another year. • #4 Traffic Safety Reports – Reviewed the April 27, 2021 report. • #5 Capital Improvement Projects – No update. • #6 Traffic Impact Studies & TDM – City Council approved the TDM policy April 20. The Commission reviewed and commented on traffic studies for proposed projects at 4917 Eden Ave, 5146 Eden Ave and 4040 Valley View Rd. Staff received studies for projects at 4660 W 77th St and 4911 W 77th St. • #7 Metro Transit Connectivity – Suggest using a 0.5-mile radius around the Green Line stations and a 1-mile radius around BRT services to review existing and proposed pedestrian and bicycle connections. D. Advisory Communication: Off-Street Parking Ordinance Amendments The Commissioner reviewed an advisory communication drafted by Commissioners Ahler, Brown and Richman on proposed off-street parking ordinance amendments. Motion was made by Commissioner Kane and seconded by Commissioner Richman to approve the Advisory Communication as written. All voted aye. Motion carried. VII. Chair and Member Comments Commissioner Ahler attended a workshop by Move Minneapolis about removing freeways. Ahler is on the Transportation and Land Use subteam for the Climate Action Plan, and boulevard trees have come up in their discussions. There are surveys available on Better Together Edina for youth and adults to provide feedback on the Climate Action Plan. Commissioner Kane participated in a community meeting to discuss how the City should use the $4.9 million it is expected to receive through the American Rescue Plan Act and suggested that other consider providing input through Better Together Edina. Commissioner Plumb-Smith asked staff to share information on how to access the commission resource portal. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: June 17, 2021 Commissioner Richman still doesn’t have access to the commission resource portal. Richman noted that there are no speed limit signs on W 58th St following the reconstruction project and requested that temporary signs be installed to address speed concerns. Richman said the new traffic signal at W 58th St and France Ave is working great and asked when in-person meetings will resume. VIII. Staff Comments • Speed limit implementation update: About 250 signs are anticipated to be replaced/added throughout the City. Staff has met with Public Works, Communications and Police to discuss sign installation, community education and enforcement. The implementation plan is expected to go to City Council in June for approval; sign replacement will occur between August and December 2021, if approved. • Hennepin County projects update: o Vernon Ave bridge over CP Rail is scheduled to be replaced in 2023. Hennepin County is hosting a virtual open house through the end of June (the link is on Better Together Edina). o France Ave pavement resurfacing between W 50th St and Excelsior Blvd is expected in 2023. The County and adjacent Cities are interested in adding dedicated bike lanes along this corridor, which would require significant changes to on-street parking. The County will lead community engagement efforts later this year into 2022, including surveying impacted properties. • The City recently completed a test closure of the southbound Highway 100 ramp on Eden Ave. The data collected during the test supports removing the ramp, as no significant concerns related to traffic operations or safety were observed. The City is working with MnDOT to consider removal of the ramp in 2024. • Metro Transit is proposed to extend Local Route 542 on W 78th St up to Braemar Arena as part of the Orange Line BRT Connecting Bus Study. Engineering and Parks staff met with Metro Transit to discuss impacts and review potential locations for a bus stop at Braemar Arena. Staff is planning to bring a site use agreement to Council in June, and the route would start operating in December. • City is looking for Board and Commission representatives to serve on the Human Services Task Force. If interested, contact Liaison Scipioni. • Board and Commission and City Council meetings will return to in-person in July. Staff is developing a procedure for moving back from virtual meetings. More information will be shared when available. • 2022 work plan development will begin next month. • The next meeting is Thursday, June 17 at 6 p.m. IX. Adjournment Motion was made by Commissioner Ahler and seconded by Commissioner Lewis to adjourn the May 20, 2021 meeting at 7:52 p.m. All voted aye. Motion Carried. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: June 17, 2021 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE J F M A M J J A S O N D # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings/Work Sessions 1 1 1 1 1 5 NAME Ahler, Mindy 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Brown, Chris 1 1 1 3 100% Johnson, Kirk 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Kane, Bocar 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Lewis, Andy 1 1 1 3 100% McCarthy, Bruce 1 1 1 1 4 80% Plumb-Smith, Jill 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Richman, Lori 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Atri, Nihar (s) 1 1 1 1 4 80% Clark, Anna (s) 1 1 1 1 4 80% Khariwala, Anand (s) 1 1 1 1 4 80% Lafferty, Peter 1 1 RESIGNED 2 N/A Scherer, Matthew RESIGNED 0 N/A Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: X.E. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Minutes From:Susan M Tarnowski, General Manager-Edina Arts Center Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: Arts & Culture Commission May 27, 2021 Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Receive the minutes of the Arts & Culture Commission for May 27, 2021. INTRODUCTION: See attached minutes. ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes: Arts & Culture Commission May 27, 2021 Draft Minutes ☐ Approved Minutes ☒ Approved Date: June 24, 2021 Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Edina Arts & Culture Commission VIRTUAL MEETING May 27, 2021 4:30 p.m. I. Call to Order Chair Sorensen called the meeting to order at 4:34 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were Commissioners Chandler, DiLorenzo, Fram, Johnson, Piela, Rubin, Sorensen, Stemmler, Suckow, Shen, Westlund. Absent was Commissioner Konkimalla. Staff present: Parks and Recreation Director Perry Vetter, Assistant Recreation and Facilities Director Tracy Petersen, Art Center Manager, Susan Tarnowski. III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion made by Westlund to approve the meeting agenda. Motion seconded by Rubin. Roll call vote. Motion carried. IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes Motion made by Fram to approve the April 22, 2021 minutes. Motion seconded by Johnson. Roll call vote. Motion carried. V. Special Recognitions and Presentations MJ Lamon presented on a variety of Commission functions: • Roles and responsibilities • Communication with Council • Workplan development timeline and best practices • Recommendations for spending communicated through the Workplan • Duties (timeless) and Workplans (continually evolving) • Director Vetter & Chair Sorensen will develop an advisory communication for Council for any Workplan revisions VI. Reports/Recommendations A. 2021 Work Plan Updates Initiative #1 – Commissioners DiLorenzo and Sorensen reported • Submissions to virtual gallery continue • Click-throughs have increased • Working with the City on marketing • Events at 50th and France to include EHS students and call attention to the virtual gallery project • Expand Initiative #1 to include in-person events and/or roll initiative into 2022 Workplan; discuss as Workplan for 2022 is developed and use Comment Section for communication to staff and Council Initiative #2 – Commissioner Fram reported • Should be receiving marketing updates from City staff on the virtual gallery; marketing is bridge into the community • Possibility of electronic display at City Hall Initiative #3 – Commissioner Rubin reported • Recommends that a small group to meet to move initiative forward • Discussing systems for support/funding for public art in the broadest sense with other cities such as St. Louis Park, Bloomington, and Minneapolis Initiative #4 – Director Vetter reported • First meeting on new/revitalized physical space for pottery/3D programs with Sarah Peterson on June 3, 2021 • Not a study, but a plan for Council by Fall 2021 • Commissioner Westlund recommended a magazine piece on Edina Public Art; Director Vetter and Westlund will meet to discuss VI. Chair and Member Comments Chair Sorensen commented: • Thanked Commissioners for their participation in the Work Session with Council, highlighting Initiative #1, the virtual gallery • Encouraged promotion of the virtual gallery and evening events on 50th and France • Congratulated graduating student Commissioners Shreya Konkimalla and Lauren Piella VII. Staff Comments Director Vetter commented: • The parameters for application for the Federal American Rescue Act • Exploring Council and Commission meetings in a hybrid (in-person and virtual) format General Manager Tarnowski commented: • Edina Fall Into the Arts Festival will be held September 11 & 12, 2021 Input is requested for the use of a booth space by the Arts & Culture Commission • Speaking of Authors … continues and is available on YouTube and Edina TV • Youth Summer Art Camps and Youth Tech Camps & adult drawing and painting classes begin in June VIII. Adjournment Motion made by Rubin to adjourn the June 24, 2021 meeting of the Arts & Culture Council at 5:57. Motion seconded by DiLorenzo. Roll call vote. Motion carried. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: XIII.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: From: Item Activity: Subject:Prep Memo for July 21, 2021 City Council and Work Session Meetings CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: INTRODUCTION: ATTACHMENTS: Description Prep Memo 1 Sharon Allison From:Scott H. Neal Sent:Wednesday, July 21, 2021 2:37 PM To:jhovland@hovlandrasmus.com; James Hovland; Kevin Staunton; Ron Anderson; James Pierce; Carolyn Jackson Cc:Lisa Schaefer; Sharon Allison Subject:Prep Memo for Council Meeting and Work Session for July 21, 2021 Good Afternoon Everyone – We have a heavy agenda tonight for our first meeting back in the Council Chambers. I have had no requests to remove any items from the Consent Agenda. That will help us get to our Special Presentations section and then on to the public hearing and Reports & Recommendations. Given the Special Presentation tonight for the Edina High School student athletes and the Interlachen public hearing, we anticipate a full City Council Chambers tonight. We have reduced the seating capacity for the audience in the Chambers, per our COVID-19 protection guidelines. If we have an over-flow situation, we can direct people to watch from the atrium. We will have the option tonight for public to participate in the meeting either live in the Chambers or by calling in using the InterCall system that we’ve been using for the past 15 months. One presenter tonight, Solhem Companies, will be participating remotely tonight. Planning Commission Chair Ian Nemerov will also be participating in the meeting remotely, although Cary Teague will be with us in the Chambers. Our new Finance Director, Alesha McAndrews, will join us tonight at the Work Session. She wants to get a head start on learning about our budget and financial systems. I will introduce you to her prior to the meeting. It would be good for us to wrap-up our Work Session tonight by 6:30 pm. Staff would like Council Members to have a few minutes between meetings to get familiar with the City Council dais and for staff to answer any questions you might have about meeting protocol and logistics. Your City of Edina Hydroflask water bottle will be filled and at your spot on the dais tonight. Please take it home with you. It is yours to keep. If at future meetings you forget your water bottle, cups will be available to fill at the water station in the lobby before the meeting. That’s all I have for now. Scott Scott H. Neal, City Manager 952-826-0401 | Fax 952-826-0390 sneal@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Stay informed about the City’s response to COVID-19 at EdinaMN.gov/Coronavirus. Need a hand or want to help? Visit BetterTogetherEdina.org/COVID-19. Follow me on Twitter. Date: July 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: XIV. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Activity: Subject:Calendar of City Council Meetings and Events CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None; information only. INTRODUCTION: Date Time Meeting/Event Location Wed, Jul. 21 5:30 p.m.2022-2023 Draft Budget Work Plan & Scenarios Community Room 7:00 p.m.City Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers T hurs, Jul. 29 7:30 a.m.Housing and Redevelopment Authority Council Chambers Wed, Aug. 4 5:30 p.m.Public Works/Parks Maintenance Staffing Study Community Room 7:00 p.m.City Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers T hurs, Aug. 12 7:30 a.m.Housing and Redevelopment Authority Council Chambers Tues, Aug. 17 5:30 p.m.2022-2023 City Manager Proposed Budget Community Room 7:00 p.m.City Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers T hurs, Aug. 26 7:30 a.m.Housing and Redevelopment Authority Council Chambers