Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2021-12-21 City Council Meeting Packet
Agenda City Council Meeting City of Edina, Minnesota Edina City Hall Council Chambers Tuesday, December 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 4645228. 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, December 7, 2021 B.Approve Payment of Claims C.Odinance No. 2021-16: Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2022 D.Resolution No. 2021-121: Setting Parks & Recreation Fees for 2022 E.Approve Braemar Golf Course Restaurant Lease Second Amendment F.Request for Purchase: Edina Liquor Store Study G.Request for Purchase: Three 2022 Toyota Hybrid Highlanders for Investigations H.Request for Purchase: E911 Call Handling System Hardware Refresh I.Resolution No. 2021-124: Authorizing 2022 Local Public Health Services Agreement J.Request for Purchase: Three 2022 Ford Explorer Hybrid K.Request for Purchase: Change Order: Design Services for Replacement of Lift Station No. 6 L.Approve Contract for Strategic Communications Plan for 2022 Referendum M.Approve 2022 Board & Commission Reappointments N.Approve Amended 2022 Calendar of Meetings and Religious Observance Dates O.Resolution No. 2021-125: Accepting Donations VII.Special Recognitions And Presentations A.Transportation Commission Report on Organized Trash Collection VIII.Public Hearings During "Public Hearings," the Mayor will ask for public testimony after staB and/or applicants make their presentations. The following guidelines are in place to ensure an eDcient, 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: Ordinance 2021-03, Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Impervious Surface, Basement, 1-foot Rule and Setback DeInitions IX.Reports/Recommendations: (Favorable vote of majority of Council Members present to approve except where noted) A.Approve Human Services Task Force 2022-2023 Funding Recommendation B.Resolution No. 2021-116: Approving Final Layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan C.Resolution No. 2021-123: Morningside D&E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-461 D.Resolution No. 2021-122: Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-463 X.Commission Correspondence (Minutes and Advisory Communication) A.Minutes: Parks & Recreation Commission Oct. 12, 2021 B.Minutes: Energy & Environment Commission November 18, 2021 XI.Aviation Noise Update XII.Mayor And Council Comments XIII.Manager's Comments 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 ampliIcation, an interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Date: December 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: December 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, December 7, 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, Dec.7, 2021 Minutes: Draft Regular Meeting, Dec. 7, 2021 MINUTES OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL TUESDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2021 5:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 5:35 p.m. ROLL CALL Answering roll call were Members Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, and Mayor Hovland. Staff in attendance: Scott Neal, City Manager; Lisa Schaefer, Assistant City Manager; Alisha McAndrews, Finance Director; Chad Millner, Director of Engineering; and Sharon Allison, City Clerk. 2022-2023 DRAFT BUDGET WORK PLAN Manager Neal reviewed the 2022-23 budget process and timeline one final time before approval and said how the operating budget was set in the odd year for 2 years, while the capital improvement plan was set in the even year for 5 years. Assistant City Manager Schaefer outlined the strategic policy and implementation process and how the budget feeds into commissions and employees work plan. Schaefer said the budget was driven by goals and values established by the City Council with broad goals that does not change, values that will guide staff’s decision- making and budget strategies to strengthen budget pillars of Strong Foundation, Reliable Service, Livable City, and Better Together. Neal outlined how residents would benefit from the budget with investments in public safety, preparation for climate change, investments in capital improvements like park improvements, preserving and enhancing a strong economy, greater emphasis on maintaining assets, and investments in City employees. Finance Director McAndrews outlined the funding sources focusing on the $80M governmental funds and the proposed tax levy which was 5.71% for 2022, and 5.30% for 2023 and outlined budget strategies investment and benefits in technology systems, public facilities and infrastructure, mental health-related calls and medical response, responding to increased complex data requests and managing secure elections, market wage, Climate Action Plan and Sustainable Building Policy, tree protection, street-sweeping, ARPA funding, communicate City performance and budget to the public, Quality of Life Survey, equity initiatives, and Boards & Commissions. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hovland adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk Minutes approved by the Edina City Council, December 21, 2021. ___________________________________________ James B. Hovland, Mayor Page 1 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 7, 2021 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Hovland called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. then shared the procedure for public hearing and community comment in the hybrid meeting format. II. ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland. Absent: None. III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. MEETING AGENDA APPROVED AS PRESENTED Member Staunton 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 The Council shared comments on the recent public safety challenges. Lieutenant White shared strategies to help combat the increase in crime in Edina that included assistance from the community by locking doors and vehicles, partnerships with community members, and building community trust. He spoke about increased patrols and data analysis that was focused on where the trends were occurring. David Frenkel, 4510 Lakeview Drive, shared that MnDOT had stated the two pedestrian bridges over Highway 100 between Benton and Eden Avenues were not ADA-compliant and needed to be address as part of Edina’s reconnecting the City discussion. V.A. CITY MANAGER’S RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY COMMENTS Manager Neal responded to Community Comments from the last meeting. VI. CONSENT AGENDA ADOPTED AS AMENDED Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Jackson approving the consent agenda as amended, removing Items VI.D., Ordinance No. 2021-16; Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2022, and VI.L, Request for Purchase; Public Safety Software from Tyler Technologies: VI.A. Approve minutes of the Work Session and Regular Meetings of November 16, 2021 VI.B. Approve Claims for Payment for Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated November 19, 2021, totaling $ 1,378,752.15, Pre-List Dated November 24, 2021, totaling $ 420,996.93, Pre-List Dated November 16, 2021, totaling $ 1,074,422.59, and Pre-List Dated December 3, 2021, totaling $ 1,620,641.03 VI.C. Request for Purchase; Well Nos. 2 and 12 Rehabilitation, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, E.H. Renner for $86,021 VI.D. Ordinance No. 2021-16; Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2022 VI.E. Adopt Ordinance No. 2021-15; Amending Chapter 26 of the City Code Concerning Bicycle Lanes VI.F. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-112; Removal of a Condition from Resolution No. 2019-64 for Our Lady of Grace Church Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 2 VI.G. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-113; Approving Parking Restrictions VI.H. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-119; Authorizing Participation in the National Prescription Opioid Settlement VI.I. Request for Purchase; Public Stormwater Best Management Practices Inspection and Maintenance, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Barr Engineering for $150,000 VI.J. Approve Traffic Safety Report of October 26, 2021 VI.K. Approve E911 Call Handling System Agreement Amendment VI.L. Request for Purchase; Public Safety Software from Tyler Technologies VI.M. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-117; Approving 2022-2025 Residential Waste Reduction and Recycling Grant Agreement with Hennepin County VI.N. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-120; Setting 2022 Ambulance and Miscellaneous Fire Fees VI.O. Approve 2022 City Observances/Days of Significance VI.P. Approve 2022 Commission Work Plans VI.Q. Approve 2022 Legislative Affairs Contract with Messerli & Kramer VI.R. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-114; Setting Polling Locations for 2022 Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA VI.D. ORDINANCE NO. 2021-16; AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY CODE, SETTING FEES FOR 2022 – FIRST READING GRANTED The Council spoke about the increases in recycling and composting fees and the need to better align incentives for waste disposal with costs. Member Staunton made a motion to grant First Reading of Ordinance 2021-16 amending Chapter 2 of the Edina City Code. Member Pierce seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VI.L. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE; PUBLIC SAFETY SOFTWARE FROM TYLER TECHNOLOGIES – APPROVED The Council asked how this software would be more effective in law enforcement and that it was a great example of how the department was working to improve. Lieutenant White explained the evolution of the current software which was 15 years old and how crime analysis and data compilation was used to help address crime trends and response. Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Anderson, to approve request for purchase; Public Safety Software from Tyler Technologies, awarding the bid to the recommended low bidder, Tyler Technologies, Inc. for $962,619. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VII. SPECIAL RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS VII.A. 2021 TOM OYE AWARD – PRESENTED Chair Epstein said the Human Rights and Relations Commission would recognize the 2021 Tom Oye Award recipient. He explained the award paid tribute to the late Tom Oye and other members of the Edina community whose good works promoted human relations and advance human rights then announced this year’s winner, Sayali Amarapurkar. He shared her work that encouraged the South Asian community to think about systemic racism and make the world a better place through AshaUSA. Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 3 Ms. Amarapurkar thanked the Council and nominator then shared more about their organization. VII.B. AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT SPENDING PLAN – UPDATE RECEIVED Municipal Consultant Annie Coyle provided an update on the status of the implementation process for the City’s approved American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Spending Plan. Ms. Coyle shared that Edina was allocated $4.9 million, half received in 2021 and the second half expected mid-2022. She spoke about the City’s vision to serve populations most impacted by the pandemic that used a race and equity lens, short and long-term impacts, and focused the majority of funding to directly benefit the community. She outlined the areas of focus that included food, rent, internet, and mental health assistance, direct assistance to businesses, improvements to City facilities/technology, and climate change mitigation. She shared more about each area of implementation that included Comcast internet essentials program, Edina Chamber of Commerce, 50th and France Business Association, small business technical assistance program, and direct support for the Edina Theater. Ms. Coyle spoke about the community support through VEAP, NextGen Tree program that would include 1,000 new tree plantings, City investment of utility broadband connections as part of water and sewer projects, then spoke about how unique Edina was by engaging school districts throughout this process. She shared the federal report requirements and ongoing tracking of progress and impacts and that staff would continue to review and make recommendations for Council consideration for Round 2 in March 2022. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Affidavits of Notice presented and ordered placed on file. VIII.A. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-116; APPROVING FINAL LAYOUT FOR PROJECT 1 OF THE I-494 CORRIDOR VISION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN – CONTINUED TO DECEMBER 21, 2021 Amber Blanchard, MnDOT Project Manager, said Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) was in process of developing Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan. She said this project was the first of four phases that would construct managed lanes from Highway 169 to the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and required the City to approve the proposed final layout. She outlined the process intended to allow municipalities an additional opportunity to provide formal input on the project design and that by law, the City was required to conduct a public hearing on the proposed final layout as part of this process. She shared a video of the proposed plan and outlined the municipal consent from Edina with the addition of EZ-PASS lanes as part of the I-494 corridor vision. She shared the process to date that included virtual public open houses then outlined the project cost of total $417 million and funding sources that included Corridors of Commerce, local, state and federal funds. Ms. Blanchard said they would continue outreach efforts for this project and shared the construction timeline to would begin late summer 2023. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:01 p.m. Public Testimony No one addressed the Council. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded b Member Pierce, to close the public hearing at noon on December 13, 2021, and continue action on Resolution No. 2021-116 approving final layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan, to the December 21, 2021, City Council meeting. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VII.B. REQUEST TO KEEP MORE THAN THREE PETS – APPROVED Animal Control Officer Tim Hunter shared that Jessica Moody, 5225 Kelsey Terrace, had requested the ability to keep four dogs at her home. He said she currently had three dogs and wished to adopt another, Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 4 which required City approval. He said staff followed the ordinance requirement that included neighbor notification within a 200-foot radius of the home to inform them of the public hearing and that staff received two comments in response, both in favor of approving the permit. Officer Hunter said staff had no concerns with the care or diligence of Ms. Moody’s current dogs and saw no reason to deny the request. Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:08 p.m. Public Testimony Jessica Moody, 5225 Kelsey Terrace, addressed the Council. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Anderson, to close the public hearing and approve the request to keep more than three pets for Jessica Moody, 5225 Kelsey Terrace. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. VIII.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-115; SETTING 2022 TAX LEVY AND ADOPTING 2022 OPERATING BUDGET - ADOPTED Manager Neal shared the action regarding the proposed 2022 tax levy and adoption of the 2022 operating budget. He said the City started the 2022-2023 Budget development process early in 2021 and noted the biennial budget process allowed more time to be spent in the second year on the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and less time making changes to the operating budget. He said on September 23, 2021, staff recommended a preliminary levy for taxes payable in 2022 based on the proposed budget which would increase the total of all levies by $3,349,065 or 8.98%. Since the preliminary levy was approved, staff had worked with the City's financial advisor, Ehlers, to identify and execute bond refinancing opportunity that resulted in debt service expense savings for the City which resulted in a final 2022 levy recommendation of $45,130,036, or 7.97% increase over 2021. He spoke about what this budget proposal would accomplish in the community that included themes of investment in public safety, preparation for climate change, investments in capital improvements, preservation and enhancement of a strong local economy, greater emphasis and maintenance of current assets, and investments in employees. He outlined investments and benefits in technology such as replacement public safety 911 dispatch and records systems, increased IT staff to support services and provide additional cyber security and expand City fiber optics, continued investment in well-maintained public facilities and infrastructure, work to implement the City’s climate action plan and sustainable building policy, then spoke about the service-based organization and the great team of staff that was led to action. Assistant Manager Schaefer shared the work plan, budget, strategic policy and implementation levels and how the City’s 20-year vision, Comprehensive Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, and two-year budget work plan and operating budget worked together. She outlined the goals and values of the community, budget pillars, and strategies that included a strong foundation, reliable service, livable city, and better together government. She outlined the budget values that included stewardship, equity, health, and sustainability. Ms. Schaefer outlined the proposed budget of $140 million overall, outlined the proposed levy for 2022-2023, excluding the special street levy, with a proposed increase of 5.71% and 5.30%. She outlined investments and benefits that included improved response and outcomes for mental health-related calls for emergency services and response, increased resources for responding to public data requests and managing secure elections, proposed 2% overall market wage increases, ARAP funding, improved transparency tools and performance dashboards, completion of a quality-of-life survey, and continued investment in equity initiatives and Boards and Commissions. Finance Director McAndrews spoke about the City’s AAA bond rating, 2022 estimated market value of $13.8 billion, Southdale II TIF District decertification, stable City tax levy with growing tax capacity, estimated levy impacts, and the 2022 change in City tax by property types. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 5 Mayor Hovland opened the public hearing at 8:52 p.m. Public Testimony Russel Fystrom, 5250 Grandview Square, Unit 2103, addressed the Council. Member Staunton moved to close the public hearing, introduce, and adopt Resolution No. 2021-115 adopting the budget for the City of Edina for Year 2021, and establishing the proposed tax levy payable in 2022. Member Anderson seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX. REPORTS/RECOMMENDATIONS IX.A. EDINA CLIMATE ACTION PLAN – APPROVED Sustainability Manager Hancock shared that Council charged staff to develop a Climate Action Plan in 2021. Staff contracted a consultant and convened a group of 24 community members that represented residents, business owners, institutions and technical City staff to develop the plan. She said the plan outlined new greenhouse gas emission reduction goals for the community - a 45% reduction by 2030 based on 2019 GHG inventory, and to become a net zero community by 2050 and that the plan identified more than 200 actions to be completed by 2030 order to achieve these goals. She said the Energy and Environment Commission approved the plan at their October 14, 2021 meeting, with one additional action that the City Manager would work with staff to develop a year 1 implementation plan that specified a work sequence and timeline for implementation tasks, estimated necessary funding and staffing resources, and outlined an accountability process, and recommended the Council approve the plan for implementation beginning in 2022. Energy and Energy Commission Chair Martinez shared reduction and emission goals developed in collaboration with the planning team of community, business, and commission members and staff’s work to engage the community. She spoke about addressing sectors and actions that provided a roadmap for the next nine years that focused on economic growth, social equity, and environmental well-being then thanked members of the Climate Action Plan Team and those who helped throughout the process. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Staunton, to approve the Edina Climate Action Plan as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.B. RESOLUTION 2021-109; APPROVING RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT VACATION AT PENTAGON VILLAGE – ADOPTED Director of Engineering Millner shared that Pentagon Village, LLC had applied for a vacation of a drainage and utility easement at Pentagon Village. He said no comments were received during the public hearing and that staff recommended approval. Member Jackson introduced and moved adoption of Resolution No. 2021-109 vacating drainage and utility easement, Pentagon Village. Member Pierce seconded the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.C. AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS GRANT AGREEMENT WITH EDINA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE – APPROVED Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 6 Economic Development Manager Neuendorf explained on September 9, 2021, the City Council approved a Spending Plan for its American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds and pledged to support two well-established and long serving not-for-profit associations that promoted businesses and economic prosperity in Edina. The Edina Chamber of Commerce suffered significant economic declines due to the COVID-19 pandemic that resulted in decreased membership and cancelled fund-raising events that threatened the stability and future of this organization. He said the City established the American Rescue Plan Act State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Program to provide financial support to this entity and that staff had prepared a Grant Agreement to provide $100,000 to this organization. Staff had reviewed the financial return of the organization and confirmed the negative economic impact and said it was intended that the grant fund would allow the organization to reinvigorate their membership activities and retool as needed so they could continue to support the Edina business community for years to come. Lori Syverson, Edina Chamber of Commerce, thanked the Council then shared comments about businesses and employees still suffering the impacts of pandemic. Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Pierce, to approve ARPA State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Grant Agreement with Edina Chamber of Commerce. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.D. AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT STATE AND LOCAL FISCAL RECOVERY FUNDS GRANT AGREEMENT WITH 50TH AND FRANCE BUSINESS ASSOCIAITON – APPROVED Mr. Neuendorf explained this similar action would assist the 50th and France Business Association address impacts from the pandemic. Judy Johnson said if not for ARPA funding, the 50th and France Business Association would no longer exist and they look forward to hosting the Art Fair again as well as many other activities and thanked staff for their support throughout process. Member Anderson made a motion, seconded by Member Pierce, to approve ARPA State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Grant Agreement with 50th and France Business Association. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. IX.E. AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT AGREEMENT WITH COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT, LLC – APPROVED Mr. Neal explained the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the disparity of access to fast and affordable internet service and caused disproportionate economic harm to low- and moderate-income households across the nation. He said the City had committed to providing assistance to residents most impacted by the pandemic with funding received through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and providing internet access to eligible households was identified in the U.S. Treasury guidance as an appropriate use of the funding. Ms. Coyle said the Internet Essentials by Comcast Program had been in effect for over 10 years and provided low-cost, high speed Xfinity internet service to households. She said the proposal was for the City to sponsor the full monthly cost of this internet service for eligible Edina households through December 2022 and outlined program eligibility based on household income. She said funding for this initiative was approved as part of the ARPA Implementation Plan (Round 1 - 2021) Priority Area 5: Community Broadband Expansion and the goal to enroll as many as possible to support those enrolled, especially students. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 7 Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Staunton, to approve agreement with Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC to sponsor monthly internet service to eligible residents as part of the ARPA Funding Plan. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. Andrea Kayer, Comcast, noted they are excited for the partnership with local governments and help connect those that need service. IX.F. SKETCH PLAN FOR 4701 77TH STREET WEST – REVIEWED Community Development Director Teague said the Council was asked to consider a sketch plan request to redevelop 4701 77th Street West. The applicant was proposing to tear down the existing office building on the site and construct a seven-story 189-unit apartment complex. He said the applicant proposed to provide 17 units within the development for affordable housing. He said when the application was received the applicant intended to conform to the Comprehensive Plan for density but staff was informed they wanted to be compliant but still needed units to proceed and would need require a Comprehensive Plan amendment, which staff would not support. He said the site was currently zoned Planned Industrial District and guided Office Residential which allowed density up to 75 units per acre. The request would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to increase density on the site, a rezoning and flexibility would be requested through the PUD Ordinance to vary from parking, setback and floor area ratio (FAR) requirements. Sheldon Berg, DJR Architecture, shared the proposed plan that included townhomes and parallel parking as part of the project which would be ready-made for visitors. He shared about the five-story residential above with 90 parking stalls on the south side and other parking then outlined the storm water elements. He said each of the townhomes for sale would be 10% of the total units then shared materials of brick, stucco, and metal. Mr. Berg said they were receptive to comments offered by the traffic consultant and shared location of the project had good adjacencies to bike paths and others elements that would add character to the project. Dean Devolis, DJR Architecture, spoke about the flexibility of density, the affordability elements, main street concept, and the chance to upgrade hierarchy and create a development pattern that would lead to richness of the project in alignment with the Southdale study. He spoke about the creation of an affordable rental project and ownership which would result in increased housing options for the community. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. IX.G. SKETCH PLAN FOR 5780 LINCOLN DRIVE, LONDONDERRY APARTMENTS – REVIEWED Mr. Teague shared the Council was asked to consider a sketch plan request to redevelop 5780 Lincoln Drive by tearing down the existing office building on the site and constructing a 4-5 story 195-unit apartment. He said the site was currently zoned Planned Industrial District and guided Office Residential in the City’s Comprehensive Plan which allowed residential density up to 75 units per acre. This site was 2.6 acres in size therefore, the applicant was proposing to max out the density on the site at 75 units per acre. He said the applicant proposed to provide 10% of the units within the development for affordable housing to meet the City’s affordable housing policy and the request would require a rezoning to PUD and flexibility to vary from parking, height, setback and floor area ratio (FAR) requirements. Curt Gunsbury, Solhem Companies, shared the proposed project would allow a continuum of housing opportunities for Edina and would follow all guidelines. He shared more about the proposed 195 units, 10% of which would be at 50% AMI for affordable housing, and thanked the Council for their guidance. Jason Lord, Solhem Companies, explained the design philosophies and topography and referred to the important intersection by Nine Mile Creek. He said there were many constraints on site that could be Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 8 opportunities then spoke about investments in commercial opportunity, common area activation, and public realm. Craig Hartman, Momentum Design Group, said the site was ideal for high density residential and provided a buffer to 169. He said adjacency helped then spoke about the topography challenges and the importance for presence on Londonderry and how they intended to pull the building up to obtain a front door feel. He said the project would provide connection to regional and amenities in the area then commented about managing bulk and FAR and how shifting the building to the west would address the concern. He spoke about providing a larger natural buffer, reviewed the east/west wings, and how the concept focused on homes that had air, light, and unobstructed views. He shared how people interacted with the buildings and the shared amenities outside the common area through use of a trail then spoke about proposed exterior design elements that included a natural palette that embraced the topography with stone accents. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. IX.H. JUNETEENTH HOLIDAY - APPROVED Mr. Neal explained the proposed action to establish Juneteenth, June 19, as a paid holiday for City employees based on an act of President Biden in May 2021. He said the holiday had also been approved as a new paid holiday by the city councils in Minneapolis and St. Paul and by the County Commissioners in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties but that most other suburban communities in the Twin Cities had not yet taken the same step. He outlined options for Council that included taking action now, taking action contingent upon similar action by the State during the 2022 legislative session, or take no action. He recommended Council approve this holiday as it was consistent with the City’s collective work around race and equity and was very likely to be approved by the State and the importance that Edina be a leader among suburban municipalities on this issue. The Council asked questions and provided feedback. Member Staunton made a motion, seconded by Member Pierce, to approve Juneteenth, June 19, as an official paid City holiday starting in 2022. Rollcall: Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. X. CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS - Received X.A. MINUTES: ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT COMMISSION, OCTOBER 14, 2021 X.B. MINUTES: HUMAN RIGHTS AND RELATIONS COMMISSION, OCTOBER 26, 2021 X.C. MINUTES: TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, OCTOBER 28, 2021 X.D. MINUTES: ARTS AND CULTURE COMMISSION, OCTOBER 28, 2021 XI. AVIATION NOISE UPDATE – Received XII. MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMENTS – Received XIII. MANAGER’S COMMENTS – Received XII.A. AMENDMENT TO THE 2022 CALENDAR OF MEETING AND RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE DATES XIV. CALENDAR OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND EVENTS – Received XV. ADJOURNMENT Member Jackson made a motion, seconded by Member Anderson, to adjourn the meeting at 11:46 p.m. Minutes/Edina City Council/December 7, 2021 Page 9 Ayes: Anderson, Jackson, Pierce, Staunton, Hovland Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Allison, City Clerk Minutes approved by Edina City Council, December 21, 2021. James B. Hovland, Mayor Video Copy of the December 7, 2021, meeting available. Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.B. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Claims From:Alisha McAndrews, 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 12.03.21 TOTAL $1,620,641.03. Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 12.10.21 TOTAL $2,612,226.00. INTRODUCTION: Claims information for approval is attached. ATTACHMENTS: Description Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 12.03.21 TOTAL $1,620,641.03 Check Register Claims Pre-List Dated 12.10.21 TOTAL $2,612,226.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 52 JOURNAL ENTRIES TO BE CREATED FUND SUB FUND DUE TO DUE FR 1000 General 166,167.402500 Conservation & Sustainability 37,585.802600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 24,363.502600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 1,567.502600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 198,542.933000 Debt Service 450.003000 Debt Service 450.004000 Capital Projects 102,794.134400 PIR Capital Projects 2,352.895200 Braemar Golf Course 17,884.615200 Braemar Golf Course 516.085400 Edinborough Park 2,895.865500 Braemar Arena 5,640.055600 Braemar Field 8,567.795700 Centennial Lakes 8,449.545800 Liquor 341,244.975900 Utility Fund 55,680.915900 Utility Fund 509,012.775900 Utility Fund 17,088.405900 Utility Fund 783.106000 Risk Management 6,197.596100 Equipment Operations 26,667.686200 Information Technology 72,955.616300 Facilities Management 8,148.417200 MN Task Force 1 4,633.519999 Pooled Cash Fund 1,620,641.03 TOTAL 1,620,641.03 1,620,641.03 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Shirleng Tan Geil ** City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467043 12/03/2021 PRTD 133644 A DYNAMIC DOOR CO INC 22111021 11/03/2021 20211203 6,311.53 CHECK 467043 TOTAL: 6,311.53 467044 12/03/2021 PRTD 143557 ADIDAS AMERICA INC 6154940759 10/20/2021 20211203 321.75 CHECK 467044 TOTAL: 321.75 467045 12/03/2021 PRTD 120796 ALERUS RETIREMENT AND BENEFITS C115748 11/05/2021 20211203 198.00 CHECK 467045 TOTAL: 198.00 467046 12/03/2021 PRTD 160095 AM CRAFT SPIRITS SALES & MARKETIN 13380 11/16/2021 20211203 235.15 AM CRAFT SPIRITS SALES & MARKETIN 13382 11/16/2021 20211203 125.65 AM CRAFT SPIRITS SALES & MARKETIN 13381 11/16/2021 20211203 67.15 CHECK 467046 TOTAL: 427.95 467047 12/03/2021 PRTD 141960 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1XQ6-3TFT-6MRT 11/02/2021 20211203 259.96 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1WN3-N943-3N73 11/02/2021 20211203 17.03 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1YM4-YFKN-NN1W 11/03/2021 20211203 140.97 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16L4-P176-TG1V 11/03/2021 20211203 76.95 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 19YC-1N46-1FL9 11/03/2021 20211203 68.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1PFT-MTYK-1L7L 11/03/2021 20211203 -9.65 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1CLN-9194-63XX 11/03/2021 20211203 -9.65 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1P1V-LV9K-FMTR 11/04/2021 20211203 37.94 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1XG6-7FM1-6GC9 11/04/2021 20211203 18.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 134C-PCHP-4Y63 11/04/2021 20211203 -38.87 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1VNW-XQDR-NDWQ 11/04/2021 20211203 90.02 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 149M-9PQK-R9NV 11/05/2021 20211203 24.89 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 191K-FXY3-H1RF 11/05/2021 20211203 65.78 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1V9V-W6VD-N3KN 11/06/2021 20211203 35.37 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 17NP-6G4J-JL6X 11/07/2021 20211203 220.91 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1CF4-YDC3-J7DL 11/07/2021 20211203 212.72 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 19PT-MPRY-7YY1 11/08/2021 20211203 62.79 CHECK 467047 TOTAL: 1,275.14 467048 12/03/2021 PRTD 100630 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY 10670175-00 11/03/2021 20211203 895.00 CHECK 467048 TOTAL: 895.00 467049 12/03/2021 PRTD 151441 ARAMARK UNIFORM AND CAREER APPEAL 250000016053 11/03/2021 20211203 125.21 CHECK 467049 TOTAL: 125.21 467050 12/03/2021 PRTD 151756 ARBEITER BREWING COMPANY LLC 504 11/18/2021 20211203 96.00 ARBEITER BREWING COMPANY LLC 500 11/18/2021 20211203 174.00 CHECK 467050 TOTAL: 270.00 467051 12/03/2021 PRTD 160237 ARMAG CORPORATION 12078 11/03/2021 20211203 2,941.00 CHECK 467051 TOTAL: 2,941.00 467052 12/03/2021 PRTD 106304 ASPEN MILLS INC 283481 11/05/2021 20211203 180.10 ASPEN MILLS INC 283482 11/05/2021 20211203 156.80 CHECK 467052 TOTAL: 336.90 467053 12/03/2021 PRTD 100636 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY INC 01P53216 11/02/2021 20211203 46.07 CHECK 467053 TOTAL: 46.07 467054 12/03/2021 PRTD 102709 BDS LAUNDRY SYSTEMS LMV415275 11/10/2021 20211203 271.95 CHECK 467054 TOTAL: 271.95 467055 12/03/2021 PRTD 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092292900 11/12/2021 20211203 883.85 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092292800 11/12/2021 20211203 837.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092348500 11/18/2021 20211203 2,512.45 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092326700 11/18/2021 20211203 270.00 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0104256800 11/18/2021 20211203 129.59 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092327500 11/18/2021 20211203 275.70 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092362000 11/18/2021 20211203 858.00 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0104261000 11/18/2021 20211203 598.89 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092327600 11/18/2021 20211203 275.70 CHECK 467055 TOTAL: 6,641.18 467056 12/03/2021 PRTD 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 870323 11/03/2021 20211203 1,022.80 CHECK 467056 TOTAL: 1,022.80 467057 12/03/2021 PRTD 142153 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 15082 11/11/2021 20211203 217.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 15178 11/18/2021 20211203 361.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 15177 11/18/2021 20211203 415.00 CHECK 467057 TOTAL: 993.00 467058 12/03/2021 PRTD 125268 BLUE COMPACTOR SERVICES LLC 5274NOV 11/04/2021 20211203 386.00 CHECK 467058 TOTAL: 386.00 467059 12/03/2021 PRTD 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 84273468 11/02/2021 20211203 1,489.55 CHECK 467059 TOTAL: 1,489.55 467060 12/03/2021 PRTD 119351 BOURGET IMPORTS 182525 11/16/2021 20211203 556.98 BOURGET IMPORTS 182527 11/16/2021 20211203 1,931.50 BOURGET IMPORTS 182526 11/16/2021 20211203 3,281.00 CHECK 467060 TOTAL: 5,769.48 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467061 12/03/2021 PRTD 117040 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 005P8305 11/05/2021 20211203 5.57 CHECK 467061 TOTAL: 5.57 467062 12/03/2021 PRTD 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION B272431 11/02/2021 20211203 2,832.00 CHECK 467062 TOTAL: 2,832.00 467063 12/03/2021 PRTD 125155 BRAUN, MICHAEL 3115 11/08/2021 20211203 78.36 CHECK 467063 TOTAL: 78.36 467064 12/03/2021 PRTD 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855230 11/17/2021 20211203 4,418.55 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855227 11/17/2021 20211203 1,571.90 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855224 11/17/2021 20211203 140.55 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855225 11/17/2021 20211203 1,890.80 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855231 11/17/2021 20211203 289.38 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855228 11/17/2021 20211203 2,309.20 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855244 11/17/2021 20211203 4,984.58 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855248 11/17/2021 20211203 6,931.39 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855232 11/17/2021 20211203 4,149.63 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855245 11/17/2021 20211203 1,345.75 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855241 11/17/2021 20211203 110.68 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855242 11/17/2021 20211203 181.34 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855243 11/17/2021 20211203 77.15 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855247 11/17/2021 20211203 289.38 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855249 11/17/2021 20211203 468.20 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855254 11/17/2021 20211203 849.60 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855253 11/17/2021 20211203 289.38 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855252 11/17/2021 20211203 1,518.20 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855256 11/17/2021 20211203 3,999.65 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855250 11/17/2021 20211203 27.24 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855251 11/17/2021 20211203 77.15 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855255 11/17/2021 20211203 2,897.49 CHECK 467064 TOTAL: 38,817.19 467065 12/03/2021 PRTD 124529 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830729 11/16/2021 20211203 83.10 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830731 11/16/2021 20211203 138.50 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830730 11/16/2021 20211203 12,489.30 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830732 11/16/2021 20211203 2,556.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830734 11/16/2021 20211203 940.00 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830733 11/16/2021 20211203 83.10 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830714 11/16/2021 20211203 138.50 CHECK 467065 TOTAL: 16,429.45 467066 12/03/2021 PRTD 100648 BERTELSON BROTHERS INC OE-584396-1 11/02/2021 20211203 29.04 BERTELSON BROTHERS INC WO-1154881-1 11/02/2021 20211203 197.66 BERTELSON BROTHERS INC WO-1155782-1 11/08/2021 20211203 120.98 CHECK 467066 TOTAL: 347.68 467067 12/03/2021 PRTD 102149 CALLAWAY GOLF 933677645 08/13/2021 20211203 86.40 CHECK 467067 TOTAL: 86.40 467068 12/03/2021 PRTD 142195 CALUMET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS PARTNE 91673128 01/20/2021 20211203 3,286.40 CHECK 467068 TOTAL: 3,286.40 467069 12/03/2021 PRTD 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2619181 11/12/2021 20211203 234.00 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2619185 11/12/2021 20211203 824.85 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2619187 11/12/2021 20211203 48.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2619186 11/12/2021 20211203 117.00 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2619188/18690074CR 11/12/2021 20211203 1,430.55 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2620238 11/16/2021 20211203 499.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2620237 11/16/2021 20211203 28.00 CHECK 467069 TOTAL: 3,181.90 467070 12/03/2021 PRTD 101515 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2448295 11/04/2021 20211203 1,011.00 CHECK 467070 TOTAL: 1,011.00 467071 12/03/2021 PRTD 105497 CENTRAL ROOFING COMPANY 29542 10/31/2021 20211203 68,893.13 CHECK 467071 TOTAL: 68,893.13 467072 12/03/2021 PRTD 100683 CHEMSEARCH 7573458 11/07/2021 20211203 657.22 CHECK 467072 TOTAL: 657.22 467073 12/03/2021 PRTD 142028 CINTAS CORPORATION 4100983880 11/08/2021 20211203 27.65 CINTAS CORPORATION 4100983919 11/08/2021 20211203 11.78 CINTAS CORPORATION 4100983983 11/08/2021 20211203 33.05 CINTAS CORPORATION 4100984015 11/08/2021 20211203 34.88 CINTAS CORPORATION 4100984112 11/08/2021 20211203 23.14 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101560005 11/12/2021 20211203 63.28 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101672574 11/15/2021 20211203 82.94 CHECK 467073 TOTAL: 276.72 467074 12/03/2021 PRTD 104800 CITY OF COON RAPIDS 30442 11/23/2021 20211203 474.64 CHECK 467074 TOTAL: 474.64 467075 12/03/2021 PRTD 141531 CITY OF HASTINGS 29888 11/08/2021 20211203 1,816.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 CHECK 467075 TOTAL: 1,816.00 467076 12/03/2021 PRTD 103216 CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS 29919 11/05/2021 20211203 14,448.96 CHECK 467076 TOTAL: 14,448.96 467077 12/03/2021 PRTD 100687 CITY OF RICHFIELD 7863 11/19/2021 20211203 350.99 CHECK 467077 TOTAL: 350.99 467078 12/03/2021 PRTD 145926 CLEARWATER ANALYTICS LLC 527531 11/04/2021 20211203 849.32 CHECK 467078 TOTAL: 849.32 467079 12/03/2021 PRTD 102165 ROGER CLEVELAND GOLF CO. INC 6654182 SO 10/26/2021 20211203 190.20 ROGER CLEVELAND GOLF CO. INC 6661748 SO 10/31/2021 20211203 570.60 CHECK 467079 TOTAL: 760.80 467080 12/03/2021 PRTD 100012 CORE & MAIN LP P895993 11/04/2021 20211203 1,986.92 CHECK 467080 TOTAL: 1,986.92 467081 12/03/2021 PRTD 160189 COYLE, ANN 1014 11/05/2021 20211203 450.00 CHECK 467081 TOTAL: 450.00 467082 12/03/2021 PRTD 142772 CREATIVE ARCADE 1250 11/08/2021 20211203 1,350.00 CHECK 467082 TOTAL: 1,350.00 467083 12/03/2021 PRTD 103833 HOVERSON, THOMAS 3371 11/05/2021 20211203 1,800.00 CHECK 467083 TOTAL: 1,800.00 467084 12/03/2021 PRTD 100130 DAKOTA COUNTY 29158 11/08/2021 20211203 581.93 CHECK 467084 TOTAL: 581.93 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467085 12/03/2021 PRTD 102195 DAY INVESTMENTS LLC P45336781 11/02/2021 20211203 113.33 CHECK 467085 TOTAL: 113.33 467086 12/03/2021 PRTD 160240 DAHL, DEBORAH K 1001 11/04/2021 20211203 1,270.75 CHECK 467086 TOTAL: 1,270.75 467087 12/03/2021 PRTD 100718 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 91922/1 11/03/2021 20211203 27.03 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY K88363/1 11/08/2021 20211203 12.09 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 94289/1 11/08/2021 20211203 54.79 CHECK 467087 TOTAL: 93.91 467088 12/03/2021 PRTD 100730 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 3703553 11/03/2021 20211203 1,567.50 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 3703554 11/04/2021 20211203 24,363.50 CHECK 467088 TOTAL: 25,931.00 467089 12/03/2021 PRTD 132810 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 861500 11/04/2021 20211203 71.40 ECM PUBLISHERS INC 861501 11/04/2021 20211203 77.35 CHECK 467089 TOTAL: 148.75 467090 12/03/2021 PRTD 101630 EDINA COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 2122-655 11/05/2021 20211203 504.00 EDINA COMMUNICATION EDUCATION 2122-1155 11/05/2021 20211203 462.00 CHECK 467090 TOTAL: 966.00 467091 12/03/2021 PRTD 122792 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOGIES MP092721-53 09/27/2021 20211203 231.53 CHECK 467091 TOTAL: 231.53 467092 12/03/2021 PRTD 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC 2294686 11/03/2021 20211203 310.76 CHECK 467092 TOTAL: 310.76 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467093 12/03/2021 PRTD 117375 ESRI 94133402 11/02/2021 20211203 40,527.00 CHECK 467093 TOTAL: 40,527.00 467094 12/03/2021 PRTD 134730 EXPLORE EDINA 001. 11/04/2021 20211203 75.00 CHECK 467094 TOTAL: 75.00 467095 12/03/2021 PRTD 100146 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-433675 11/05/2021 20211203 52.56 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-7232053 11/04/2021 20211203 105.36 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-433568 11/04/2021 20211203 24.72 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-Q03697 11/03/2021 20211203 182.48 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-7228599 11/02/2021 20211203 115.26 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-433381 11/02/2021 20211203 589.85 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-433496 11/03/2021 20211203 300.78 CHECK 467095 TOTAL: 1,371.01 467096 12/03/2021 PRTD 147181 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-4982 11/12/2021 20211203 180.00 FALLING BREWERY - BERGMAN LEDGE L E-5046 11/18/2021 20211203 310.00 CHECK 467096 TOTAL: 490.00 467097 12/03/2021 PRTD 122683 FIRE SAFETY USA INC 152184 10/11/2021 20211203 1,615.00 CHECK 467097 TOTAL: 1,615.00 467098 12/03/2021 PRTD 160036 FIRST HOSPITAL LABORATORIES, INC. FL00477557 11/02/2021 20211203 333.13 CHECK 467098 TOTAL: 333.13 467099 12/03/2021 PRTD 126444 KIRK STENSRUD ENTERPRISES INC 2315-43933 11/05/2021 20211203 990.00 CHECK 467099 TOTAL: 990.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467100 12/03/2021 PRTD 130699 FLEETPRIDE INC 85336120 11/03/2021 20211203 68.66 CHECK 467100 TOTAL: 68.66 467101 12/03/2021 PRTD 122414 FORKLIFTS OF MINNESOTA INC 01P8776790 11/03/2021 20211203 103.90 CHECK 467101 TOTAL: 103.90 467102 12/03/2021 PRTD 160212 FOSSIL INDUSTRIES INC F95514 11/02/2021 20211203 2,532.00 CHECK 467102 TOTAL: 2,532.00 467103 12/03/2021 PRTD 102456 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1482216 11/08/2021 20211203 33.99 CHECK 467103 TOTAL: 33.99 467104 12/03/2021 PRTD 104877 GENERAL SPRINKLER CORPORATION 37258 11/14/2021 20211203 590.00 CHECK 467104 TOTAL: 590.00 467105 12/03/2021 PRTD 144982 GERTENS GREENHOUSES AND GARDEN CE 596364/6 11/08/2021 20211203 1,327.18 CHECK 467105 TOTAL: 1,327.18 467106 12/03/2021 PRTD 101103 WW GRAINGER 9107190788 11/02/2021 20211203 223.56 WW GRAINGER 9107860208 11/03/2021 20211203 2.80 WW GRAINGER 9107885288 11/03/2021 20211203 48.74 CHECK 467106 TOTAL: 275.10 467107 12/03/2021 PRTD 144412 WINEBOW MN00104077 11/17/2021 20211203 1,440.00 WINEBOW MN00104074 11/17/2021 20211203 4,512.98 WINEBOW MN00104076 11/17/2021 20211203 1,773.00 WINEBOW MN00104075 11/17/2021 20211203 1,440.00 WINEBOW MN00104071 11/17/2021 20211203 1,440.00 WINEBOW MN00104070 11/17/2021 20211203 756.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467107 TOTAL: 11,361.98 467108 12/03/2021 PRTD 129108 HAAG COMPANIES INC 4-435846 11/08/2021 20211203 37.80 CHECK 467108 TOTAL: 37.80 467109 12/03/2021 PRTD 140001 HAWK ANALYTICS INC INV24813 11/02/2021 20211203 3,995.00 CHECK 467109 TOTAL: 3,995.00 467110 12/03/2021 PRTD 100798 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPANY R0060801 08/09/2021 20211203 7,000.00 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPANY R0084701 09/06/2021 20211203 7,000.00 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPANY R0089001 09/13/2021 20211203 7,000.00 CHECK 467110 TOTAL: 21,000.00 467111 12/03/2021 PRTD 101503 HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY TAX 30413 11/16/2021 20211203 6,333.15 CHECK 467111 TOTAL: 6,333.15 467112 12/03/2021 PRTD 103085 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000174979 11/08/2021 20211203 654.00 CHECK 467112 TOTAL: 654.00 467113 12/03/2021 PRTD 118765 HENRY SCHEIN INC 12367362 11/03/2021 20211203 227.00 CHECK 467113 TOTAL: 227.00 467114 12/03/2021 PRTD 104375 HOHENSTEINS INC 459045 11/16/2021 20211203 3,280.50 HOHENSTEINS INC 459044 11/16/2021 20211203 299.60 HOHENSTEINS INC 458862 11/16/2021 20211203 1,245.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 458861 11/16/2021 20211203 46.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 459046 11/16/2021 20211203 3,006.00 HOHENSTEINS INC 459077 11/16/2021 20211203 193.60 CHECK 467114 TOTAL: 8,070.70 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467115 12/03/2021 PRTD 100417 HORIZON CHEMICAL CO 211101064-EO 11/03/2021 20211203 491.94 CHECK 467115 TOTAL: 491.94 467116 12/03/2021 PRTD 160239 HUEBSCH LAUNDRY CO 20111403 11/08/2021 20211203 191.93 CHECK 467116 TOTAL: 191.93 467117 12/03/2021 PRTD 131544 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 107377 11/17/2021 20211203 1,515.05 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 107379 11/16/2021 20211203 1,370.50 INDEED BREWING COMPANY MN LLC 107376 11/16/2021 20211203 773.05 CHECK 467117 TOTAL: 3,658.60 467118 12/03/2021 PRTD 121075 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 193769 10/25/2021 20211203 245.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 193902 10/27/2021 20211203 -245.00 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 194613 11/08/2021 20211203 62.68 JIMMY'S JOHNNYS INC 194612 11/08/2021 20211203 62.68 CHECK 467118 TOTAL: 125.36 467119 12/03/2021 PRTD 100741 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248240 11/10/2021 20211203 8,880.70 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248287 11/17/2021 20211203 9,839.41 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248291 11/17/2021 20211203 740.00 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248288 11/17/2021 20211203 108.55 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248285 11/17/2021 20211203 134.00 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248289 11/17/2021 20211203 740.00 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248284 11/17/2021 20211203 3,690.25 CHECK 467119 TOTAL: 24,132.91 467120 12/03/2021 PRTD 100835 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3506490 11/11/2021 20211203 354.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3506373 11/11/2021 20211203 3,245.80 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3507578 11/18/2021 20211203 104.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3507577 11/18/2021 20211203 1,794.05 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3507703 11/17/2021 20211203 1,025.00 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3507580 11/18/2021 20211203 4,570.00 CHECK 467120 TOTAL: 11,092.85 467121 12/03/2021 PRTD 100835 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6302362 11/11/2021 20211203 5,012.35 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 648907 11/05/2021 20211203 -9.72 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 648906 11/05/2021 20211203 -38.88 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306169 11/18/2021 20211203 1,584.66 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306175 11/18/2021 20211203 832.76 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306179 11/18/2021 20211203 1,072.87 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306180 11/18/2021 20211203 1,091.40 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306181 11/18/2021 20211203 207.88 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306182 11/18/2021 20211203 270.58 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306183 11/18/2021 20211203 330.20 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306178 11/18/2021 20211203 160.69 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306173 11/18/2021 20211203 81.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306172 11/18/2021 20211203 2,287.41 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306171 11/18/2021 20211203 1,259.90 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306177 11/18/2021 20211203 1,029.57 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306174 11/18/2021 20211203 3,771.77 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 649124 11/09/2021 20211203 -22.38 CHECK 467121 TOTAL: 18,922.25 467122 12/03/2021 PRTD 100835 WINE MERCHANTS 7355066 11/11/2021 20211203 5,823.44 WINE MERCHANTS 7355067 11/11/2021 20211203 1,324.23 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 WINE MERCHANTS 7355321 11/11/2021 20211203 378.38 WINE MERCHANTS 740968 11/11/2021 20211203 -4.17 WINE MERCHANTS 7356247 11/18/2021 20211203 4,150.42 WINE MERCHANTS 7356248 11/18/2021 20211203 2,794.66 WINE MERCHANTS 7356257 11/18/2021 20211203 2,111.07 WINE MERCHANTS 7356255 11/18/2021 20211203 161.57 WINE MERCHANTS 7356254 11/18/2021 20211203 811.90 CHECK 467122 TOTAL: 17,551.50 467123 12/03/2021 PRTD 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1930904 11/12/2021 20211203 676.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1930903 11/12/2021 20211203 676.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1929724 11/12/2021 20211203 1,874.91 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1930905 11/12/2021 20211203 676.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934733 11/18/2021 20211203 2,235.47 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934732 11/18/2021 20211203 2,483.32 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934731 11/18/2021 20211203 2,453.09 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934730 11/18/2021 20211203 1,506.95 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934721 11/18/2021 20211203 3,293.75 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934724 11/18/2021 20211203 219.98 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934725 11/18/2021 20211203 2,087.29 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934726 11/18/2021 20211203 279.76 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934727 11/18/2021 20211203 1,426.72 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934728 11/18/2021 20211203 587.85 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934729 11/18/2021 20211203 868.71 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934740 11/18/2021 20211203 449.52 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934739 11/18/2021 20211203 4,593.02 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934741 11/18/2021 20211203 133.32 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934742 11/18/2021 20211203 803.23 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934772 11/18/2021 20211203 1,506.95 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934736 11/18/2021 20211203 560.38 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934776 11/18/2021 20211203 2,479.99 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934766 11/18/2021 20211203 1,805.88 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934765 11/18/2021 20211203 909.22 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934763 11/18/2021 20211203 1,895.06 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934764 11/18/2021 20211203 1,618.87 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934775 11/18/2021 20211203 642.26 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934737 11/18/2021 20211203 3,031.06 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934771 11/18/2021 20211203 958.53 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934774 11/18/2021 20211203 2,559.29 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934773 11/18/2021 20211203 2,453.09 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934770 11/18/2021 20211203 41.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934769 11/18/2021 20211203 1,301.16 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934768 11/18/2021 20211203 811.27 CHECK 467123 TOTAL: 49,899.66 467124 12/03/2021 PRTD 102113 AUDRANN INC 1338752A 11/04/2021 20211203 189.98 CHECK 467124 TOTAL: 189.98 467125 12/03/2021 PRTD 160244 THOMPSON, KEITH 29561 11/04/2021 20211203 980.00 CHECK 467125 TOTAL: 980.00 467126 12/03/2021 PRTD 103409 KELBRO COMPANY 2697957 11/12/2021 20211203 44.00 KELBRO COMPANY 2698577 11/18/2021 20211203 74.64 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467126 TOTAL: 118.64 467127 12/03/2021 PRTD 113212 KENDELL INTERMEDIATE CORPORATION INV040684 11/08/2021 20211203 61.00 CHECK 467127 TOTAL: 61.00 467128 12/03/2021 PRTD 124002 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 19884235 10/31/2021 20211203 13,141.86 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES INC 160603028-1021 10/31/2021 20211203 9,850.00 CHECK 467128 TOTAL: 22,991.86 467129 12/03/2021 PRTD 100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 145908 11/10/2021 20211203 568.75 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 146646 11/16/2021 20211203 3,080.90 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 145911 11/10/2021 20211203 568.75 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 146664 11/16/2021 20211203 419.75 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 145910 11/10/2021 20211203 341.25 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 146842 11/17/2021 20211203 162.50 CHECK 467129 TOTAL: 5,141.90 467130 12/03/2021 PRTD 144983 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 53865 11/05/2021 20211203 9,575.00 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 53866 11/08/2021 20211203 8,750.00 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 53864 11/04/2021 20211203 9,675.00 CHECK 467130 TOTAL: 28,000.00 467131 12/03/2021 PRTD 151089 KROWN APPAREL 1891 10/07/2021 20211203 225.00 CHECK 467131 TOTAL: 225.00 467132 12/03/2021 PRTD 151024 LA DONA SBC 5120 11/17/2021 20211203 226.00 CHECK 467132 TOTAL: 226.00 467133 12/03/2021 PRTD 151166 LAMIS, JAMES 12020601.2 11/10/2021 20211203 4,690.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467133 TOTAL: 4,690.00 467134 12/03/2021 PRTD 100605 LANDS' END INC SIN9625108 11/08/2021 20211203 420.00 CHECK 467134 TOTAL: 420.00 467135 12/03/2021 PRTD 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9308979118 11/06/2021 20211203 1,407.66 CHECK 467135 TOTAL: 1,407.66 467136 12/03/2021 PRTD 134957 LEACH LAW OFFICE LLC 10-2021 10/31/2021 20211203 21,681.15 CHECK 467136 TOTAL: 21,681.15 467137 12/03/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 1003628-11/21 11/01/2021 20211203 2,548.31 CHECK 467137 TOTAL: 2,548.31 467138 12/03/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 1003628-11/21 #2 11/01/2021 20211203 1,871.75 CHECK 467138 TOTAL: 1,871.75 467139 12/03/2021 PRTD 101552 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 6866 10/29/2021 20211203 1,593.86 CHECK 467139 TOTAL: 1,593.86 467140 12/03/2021 PRTD 135867 LIBATION PROJECT 40681 11/16/2021 20211203 699.50 LIBATION PROJECT 40671 11/16/2021 20211203 105.50 LIBATION PROJECT 40680 11/16/2021 20211203 404.50 CHECK 467140 TOTAL: 1,209.50 467141 12/03/2021 PRTD 116575 LIFELINE INC LL-15405 11/05/2021 20211203 313.89 CHECK 467141 TOTAL: 313.89 467142 12/03/2021 PRTD 100839 KAMAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES V638055 11/02/2021 20211203 74.61 CHECK 467142 TOTAL: 74.61 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467143 12/03/2021 PRTD 124570 LOCAL 49 TRAINING CENTER 28751 11/01/2021 20211203 2,560.00 LOCAL 49 TRAINING CENTER 29177 11/01/2021 20211203 5,120.00 CHECK 467143 TOTAL: 7,680.00 467144 12/03/2021 PRTD 100858 LOGIS 51094 11/01/2021 20211203 31,932.00 CHECK 467144 TOTAL: 31,932.00 467145 12/03/2021 PRTD 101078 LUBE-TECH 2708171 09/10/2021 20211203 4,615.53 CHECK 467145 TOTAL: 4,615.53 467146 12/03/2021 PRTD 146427 LUCID BREWING LLC 12447 11/17/2021 20211203 134.00 CHECK 467146 TOTAL: 134.00 467147 12/03/2021 PRTD 141916 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 41413 11/16/2021 20211203 491.00 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 41415 11/16/2021 20211203 278.00 CHECK 467147 TOTAL: 769.00 467148 12/03/2021 PRTD 134063 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 22712432 11/02/2021 20211203 1,321.68 MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY 22712431 11/02/2021 20211203 12,245.54 CHECK 467148 TOTAL: 13,567.22 467149 12/03/2021 PRTD 141215 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV676399 11/16/2021 20211203 440.04 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV676388 11/16/2021 20211203 193.50 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV676389 11/16/2021 20211203 86.52 MAVERICK WINE LLC INV676400 11/16/2021 20211203 161.46 CHECK 467149 TOTAL: 881.52 467150 12/03/2021 PRTD 130477 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606935 11/17/2021 20211203 4,008.60 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606936 11/17/2021 20211203 138.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606938 11/17/2021 20211203 1,218.60 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606915 11/17/2021 20211203 2,140.80 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606939 11/17/2021 20211203 138.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606933 11/17/2021 20211203 190.00 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606912 11/17/2021 20211203 535.20 MCDONALD DISTRIBUTING COMPANY 606932 11/17/2021 20211203 760.20 CHECK 467150 TOTAL: 9,129.40 467151 12/03/2021 PRTD 160251 MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL 18660906 10/18/2021 20211203 356.69 CHECK 467151 TOTAL: 356.69 467152 12/03/2021 PRTD 101483 MENARDS INC 49886 11/04/2021 20211203 198.89 MENARDS INC 49908 11/04/2021 20211203 134.51 MENARDS INC 49821 11/03/2021 20211203 122.17 MENARDS INC 49754 11/02/2021 20211203 8.00 CHECK 467152 TOTAL: 463.57 467153 12/03/2021 PRTD 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 0001130548-SHT PD 11/01/2021 20211203 10,000.00 CHECK 467153 TOTAL: 10,000.00 467154 12/03/2021 PRTD 100886 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 0001131728 11/03/2021 20211203 493,781.47 CHECK 467154 TOTAL: 493,781.47 467155 12/03/2021 PRTD 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 526050 11/02/2021 20211203 31.20 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 401424 11/04/2021 20211203 44.94 CHECK 467155 TOTAL: 76.14 467156 12/03/2021 PRTD 138732 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS LLC 29109 11/16/2021 20211203 326.00 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS LLC 29147 11/17/2021 20211203 409.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 TRADITION WINE & SPIRITS LLC 29146 11/17/2021 20211203 1,782.00 CHECK 467156 TOTAL: 2,517.00 467157 12/03/2021 PRTD 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY INC 44131 11/04/2021 20211203 1,075.38 CHECK 467157 TOTAL: 1,075.38 467158 12/03/2021 PRTD 101459 MINNESOTA RECREATION AND PARK ASS 10271 11/05/2021 20211203 125.00 CHECK 467158 TOTAL: 125.00 467159 12/03/2021 PRTD 117837 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION 29983 10/20/2021 20211203 275.00 CHECK 467159 TOTAL: 275.00 467160 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0268467X 11/07/2021 20211203 10.00 CHECK 467160 TOTAL: 10.00 467161 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR026778X 11/07/2021 20211203 10.00 CHECK 467161 TOTAL: 10.00 467162 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0268812X 11/07/2021 20211203 20.00 CHECK 467162 TOTAL: 20.00 467163 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0270165X 11/07/2021 20211203 30.00 CHECK 467163 TOTAL: 30.00 467164 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0268603X 11/07/2021 20211203 30.00 CHECK 467164 TOTAL: 30.00 467165 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0270211X 11/07/2021 20211203 10.00 CHECK 467165 TOTAL: 10.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467166 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0268602X 11/07/2021 20211203 20.00 CHECK 467166 TOTAL: 20.00 467167 12/03/2021 PRTD 100899 MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY ABR0270166X 11/07/2021 20211203 190.00 CHECK 467167 TOTAL: 190.00 467168 12/03/2021 PRTD 122793 MAS MODERN MARKETING INC MMI143390 11/08/2021 20211203 544.19 CHECK 467168 TOTAL: 544.19 467169 12/03/2021 PRTD 140955 MODIST BREWING LLC E-26770 11/16/2021 20211203 744.00 MODIST BREWING LLC E-26769 11/16/2021 20211203 541.50 MODIST BREWING LLC E-26771 11/16/2021 20211203 957.75 CHECK 467169 TOTAL: 2,243.25 467170 12/03/2021 PRTD 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1323168-00 11/02/2021 20211203 916.30 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1323173-00 11/03/2021 20211203 236.00 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1324054-01 11/08/2021 20211203 62.19 CHECK 467170 TOTAL: 1,214.49 467171 12/03/2021 PRTD 100920 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY 2122-774810 11/05/2021 20211203 13.16 CHECK 467171 TOTAL: 13.16 467172 12/03/2021 PRTD 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180737 11/17/2021 20211203 1,538.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180807 11/17/2021 20211203 774.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180811 11/17/2021 20211203 1,476.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180812 11/17/2021 20211203 688.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180815 11/17/2021 20211203 1,636.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180808 11/17/2021 20211203 688.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180738 11/17/2021 20211203 1,006.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180814 11/17/2021 20211203 976.00 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 180691 11/17/2021 20211203 1,156.00 CHECK 467172 TOTAL: 9,938.00 467173 12/03/2021 PRTD 144575 LANCER CATERING AT BRAEMAR GOLF C EDN20210-Tax 11/29/2021 20211203 183.67 CHECK 467173 TOTAL: 183.67 467174 12/03/2021 PRTD 105901 OERTEL ARCHITECTS 20-23.6 09/08/2021 20211203 5,167.50 CHECK 467174 TOTAL: 5,167.50 467175 12/03/2021 PRTD 103578 OFFICE DEPOT 208865333001 11/08/2021 20211203 60.34 CHECK 467175 TOTAL: 60.34 467176 12/03/2021 PRTD 100936 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC 678407 11/02/2021 20211203 15.75 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC 678668 11/05/2021 20211203 50.00 CHECK 467176 TOTAL: 65.75 467177 12/03/2021 PRTD 141965 OMNI BREWING COMPANY LLC E-11086 11/18/2021 20211203 354.00 CHECK 467177 TOTAL: 354.00 467178 12/03/2021 PRTD 999995 BOLLIG AND SONS ED192286-REFUND 11/24/2021 20211203 2,500.00 CHECK 467178 TOTAL: 2,500.00 467179 12/03/2021 PRTD 999995 BOLLIG AND SONS ED192100-REFUND 11/24/2021 20211203 2,500.00 CHECK 467179 TOTAL: 2,500.00 467180 12/03/2021 PRTD 999995 BOLLIG AND SONS ED192871-REFUND 11/23/2021 20211203 2,500.00 CHECK 467180 TOTAL: 2,500.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467181 12/03/2021 PRTD 999995 BUZZ EXTERIORS ED193693-REFUND 11/23/2021 20211203 80.30 CHECK 467181 TOTAL: 80.30 467182 12/03/2021 PRTD 999995 TJB HOMES INC. ED185134-REFUND 11/24/2021 20211203 10,000.00 CHECK 467182 TOTAL: 10,000.00 467183 12/03/2021 PRTD 999996 CATHERINE CICH 33925200-REFUND 11/22/2021 20211203 10.00 CHECK 467183 TOTAL: 10.00 467184 12/03/2021 PRTD 999996 CORNERSTONE HOMES ED179317-REFUND 12/01/2021 20211203 10,000.00 CHECK 467184 TOTAL: 10,000.00 467185 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 20182WY-34 LLC, 00124834-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 144.29 CHECK 467185 TOTAL: 144.29 467186 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 ACKER,SCOTT 00101812-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 22.86 CHECK 467186 TOTAL: 22.86 467187 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 AMUNDSON,MICHAEL 00120013-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 289.56 CHECK 467187 TOTAL: 289.56 467188 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 ANDERSON,DRAKE 00105396-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 1,021.11 CHECK 467188 TOTAL: 1,021.11 467189 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 ANDRE,ROGER 00123078-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 28.45 CHECK 467189 TOTAL: 28.45 467190 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 ARNEBERG,PAUL 00092248-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 264.22 CHECK 467190 TOTAL: 264.22 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467191 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 ASPLUND,CHAD 00125816-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 66.39 CHECK 467191 TOTAL: 66.39 467192 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 AUYOUNG,SAMUEL 00122641-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 102.00 CHECK 467192 TOTAL: 102.00 467193 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BAILEY,TRACEY 00124571-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 41.64 CHECK 467193 TOTAL: 41.64 467194 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BAUER,TIMOTHY 00124200-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 25.84 CHECK 467194 TOTAL: 25.84 467195 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BEATTIE,ALISON 00124244-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 63.77 CHECK 467195 TOTAL: 63.77 467196 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BENNING,KATHLEEN 00127172-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 203.36 CHECK 467196 TOTAL: 203.36 467197 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BERG,JASPER 00115297-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 43.63 CHECK 467197 TOTAL: 43.63 467198 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BERGLUND,BRIAN 00123381-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 92.97 CHECK 467198 TOTAL: 92.97 467199 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BISSONETTE,MITCHELL 00114452-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 200.00 CHECK 467199 TOTAL: 200.00 467200 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BOROWIAK,GAVIN 00124251-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 101.96 CHECK 467200 TOTAL: 101.96 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467201 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BOSSERT,BRANDON 00117266-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 238.95 CHECK 467201 TOTAL: 238.95 467202 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BOYLAN,JOHN 00080571-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 382.57 CHECK 467202 TOTAL: 382.57 467203 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BRELLENTHIN,WILLIAM 00094606-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 373.26 CHECK 467203 TOTAL: 373.26 467204 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BRICKYARD APTS LLC 00125258-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 73.23 CHECK 467204 TOTAL: 73.23 467205 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BROWN,LIZ 00124928-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 8.19 CHECK 467205 TOTAL: 8.19 467206 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BUDDE,KATRINA 00124223-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 81.79 CHECK 467206 TOTAL: 81.79 467207 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 BURROWS,KATHERINE 00122727-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 26.97 CHECK 467207 TOTAL: 26.97 467208 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 CARNEY,KEN 00105070-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 114.85 CHECK 467208 TOTAL: 114.85 467209 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 CHENE,DAVID 00120210-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 233.49 CHECK 467209 TOTAL: 233.49 467210 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 CHO,LAWRENCE 00114993-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 86.01 CHECK 467210 TOTAL: 86.01 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467211 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 CHRISTENSEN,JOHN 00110398-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 129.71 CHECK 467211 TOTAL: 129.71 467212 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 CLANCY,SARA 00118385-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 52.20 CHECK 467212 TOTAL: 52.20 467213 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 DAVIS,CAROLINE 00098345-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 33.82 CHECK 467213 TOTAL: 33.82 467214 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 DEKKER,JUSTIN 00104871-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 749.34 CHECK 467214 TOTAL: 749.34 467215 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 DIETZ,MARIA 00124715-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 24.72 CHECK 467215 TOTAL: 24.72 467216 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 DISCH,ANDREW 00115172-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 30.64 CHECK 467216 TOTAL: 30.64 467217 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 DOVE,TRAVIS 00119772-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 57.15 CHECK 467217 TOTAL: 57.15 467218 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 EVANS,MARK 00092262-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 52.44 CHECK 467218 TOTAL: 52.44 467219 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 FITZGERALD,KEVIN 00121598-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 250.00 CHECK 467219 TOTAL: 250.00 467220 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 FIX,RALPH 00117090-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 510.56 CHECK 467220 TOTAL: 510.56 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467221 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 FLANNERY,J J 00105592-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 294.95 CHECK 467221 TOTAL: 294.95 467222 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 GOEMAN,MARY 00126480-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 50.17 CHECK 467222 TOTAL: 50.17 467223 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 GREENE,MARK 00121508-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 150.00 CHECK 467223 TOTAL: 150.00 467224 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 GRIFFIN,PETER 00121642-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 38.04 CHECK 467224 TOTAL: 38.04 467225 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 HALVERSON,SARA 00112277-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 59.21 CHECK 467225 TOTAL: 59.21 467226 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 HAYMAKER,WILLIAM 00082769-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 16.32 CHECK 467226 TOTAL: 16.32 467227 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 HIGHCROFT TOWNHOMES ASSN 30148 11/22/2021 20211203 1,570.03 CHECK 467227 TOTAL: 1,570.03 467228 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 HOAGLAND,MELVIN 00077178-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 140.00 CHECK 467228 TOTAL: 140.00 467229 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 HOYT,GREG 00119267-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 498.79 CHECK 467229 TOTAL: 498.79 467230 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 HUEPENBECKER,JOHN 00100775-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 53.43 CHECK 467230 TOTAL: 53.43 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467231 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 J MAAS HOLDINGS FOUR LLC 00125966-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 170.00 CHECK 467231 TOTAL: 170.00 467232 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 JAIN,MOTHILAL 00126913-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 159.44 CHECK 467232 TOTAL: 159.44 467233 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 JAY PLUHAR 00099869-0200138001 11/29/2021 20211203 668.22 CHECK 467233 TOTAL: 668.22 467234 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 JOHNSON,RALPH 00085052-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 36.35 CHECK 467234 TOTAL: 36.35 467235 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 JOHNSON,SYDNEY 00113813-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 530.58 CHECK 467235 TOTAL: 530.58 467236 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 JOSAN,JOSE LUIS 00123505-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 77.50 CHECK 467236 TOTAL: 77.50 467237 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 JUDKINS,TAYLOR 00122056-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 32.21 CHECK 467237 TOTAL: 32.21 467238 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 KAUFMANN,THOMAS 00127705-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 169.70 CHECK 467238 TOTAL: 169.70 467239 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 KBD INVESTMENTS LLC, 00127769-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 150.00 CHECK 467239 TOTAL: 150.00 467240 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 KELLER,JOHN 00124055-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 47.78 CHECK 467240 TOTAL: 47.78 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467241 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 KNUTSON,DEAN 00087046-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 196.80 CHECK 467241 TOTAL: 196.80 467242 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 KUZNIA,THOMAS 00114513-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 48.74 CHECK 467242 TOTAL: 48.74 467243 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 LAMM,KATHERINE 00117786-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 275.00 CHECK 467243 TOTAL: 275.00 467244 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 LAMPHERE,JEREMIAH 00117550-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 122.90 CHECK 467244 TOTAL: 122.90 467245 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 LAWRENCE,SCOTT 00125727-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 350.00 CHECK 467245 TOTAL: 350.00 467246 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 LENHARDT, SARAH 00121270-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 109.50 CHECK 467246 TOTAL: 109.50 467247 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 LUTZ,TERRY 00109867-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 26.99 CHECK 467247 TOTAL: 26.99 467248 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MAATZ,RUTH 00093612-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 33.18 CHECK 467248 TOTAL: 33.18 467249 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MANEY,MATTHEW 00124413-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 41.45 CHECK 467249 TOTAL: 41.45 467250 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MANIAK,JEREMY 00112380-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 296.81 CHECK 467250 TOTAL: 296.81 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467251 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MARINOVICH,PATTY 00094498-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 6.77 CHECK 467251 TOTAL: 6.77 467252 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MAYER,SUSAN 00126592-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 200.00 CHECK 467252 TOTAL: 200.00 467253 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MCCONNELL,MICHAEL 00091657-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 366.05 CHECK 467253 TOTAL: 366.05 467254 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MCCOY,PATRICK 00108457-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 47.01 CHECK 467254 TOTAL: 47.01 467255 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MEISENHEIMER,SCOTT 00113200-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 75.00 CHECK 467255 TOTAL: 75.00 467256 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MEJIA,IRIS 00114845-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 241.22 CHECK 467256 TOTAL: 241.22 467257 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MN INVESTMENTS, LLC 00126919-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 109.50 CHECK 467257 TOTAL: 109.50 467258 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MN INVESTMENTS, LLC 00127115-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 263.19 CHECK 467258 TOTAL: 263.19 467259 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MOHAN,SACHIN 00124493-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 500.00 CHECK 467259 TOTAL: 500.00 467260 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MOORE,FRED 00095345-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 202.07 CHECK 467260 TOTAL: 202.07 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467261 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MORGAN,STEVE 00124000-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 250.00 CHECK 467261 TOTAL: 250.00 467262 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 MORRISSEY,SEAN 00124918-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 17.99 CHECK 467262 TOTAL: 17.99 467263 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 NELSON,ROBERT 00113845-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 55.41 CHECK 467263 TOTAL: 55.41 467264 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 NEWSTROM,RICHARD 00085917-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 69.76 CHECK 467264 TOTAL: 69.76 467265 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 NIEBUHR,FRED 00082500-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 517.05 CHECK 467265 TOTAL: 517.05 467266 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 NORMAN,MIKE 00086468-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 143.92 CHECK 467266 TOTAL: 143.92 467267 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 NORMANDALE LUTHERAN CHURCH 00122220-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 81.76 CHECK 467267 TOTAL: 81.76 467268 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 NOWEK,TODD 00106442-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 85.94 CHECK 467268 TOTAL: 85.94 467269 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 NR PROPERTIES 00127000-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 419.80 CHECK 467269 TOTAL: 419.80 467270 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 OBERGFOLL,MATTHEW 00125677-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 79.49 CHECK 467270 TOTAL: 79.49 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467271 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 OSWALT,JOHNATHAN 00125829-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 157.71 CHECK 467271 TOTAL: 157.71 467272 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 OTTERLEI,KATHRYN 00082730-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 1,137.60 CHECK 467272 TOTAL: 1,137.60 467273 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 PIPRUDE,JUSTIN 00122677-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 121.71 CHECK 467273 TOTAL: 121.71 467274 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 PLASTER,EDWARD 00106828-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 35.70 CHECK 467274 TOTAL: 35.70 467275 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 PLOTTS,ADAM 00124067-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 38.41 CHECK 467275 TOTAL: 38.41 467276 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 PUSEY,MARI PAT 00121366-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 122.33 CHECK 467276 TOTAL: 122.33 467277 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 RAM,BRENDA 00085471-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 16.23 CHECK 467277 TOTAL: 16.23 467278 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 RASMUSSEN,CHAD 00117703-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 150.88 CHECK 467278 TOTAL: 150.88 467279 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 REFINED REAL ESTATE 00127631-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 26.38 CHECK 467279 TOTAL: 26.38 467280 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 ROSLER,MICHAEL 00117096-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 45.12 CHECK 467280 TOTAL: 45.12 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467281 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 ROSS,ELIZABETH 00122137-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 665.15 CHECK 467281 TOTAL: 665.15 467282 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 RUSCHY,DARREN 00099341-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 92.81 CHECK 467282 TOTAL: 92.81 467283 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 RYE,MARALYNN 00106555-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 307.06 CHECK 467283 TOTAL: 307.06 467284 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 SAMUELS,MICHAEL 00106900-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 240.00 CHECK 467284 TOTAL: 240.00 467285 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 SASSER,ROB 00118780-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 36.27 CHECK 467285 TOTAL: 36.27 467286 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 SCARLETT,RICHARD 00083648-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 171.21 CHECK 467286 TOTAL: 171.21 467287 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 SIMEK,JASON 00121016-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 450.00 CHECK 467287 TOTAL: 450.00 467288 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 SIZONENKO,GENNADIY 00126323-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 268.57 CHECK 467288 TOTAL: 268.57 467289 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 SPANGLER,DIANE 00102448-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 517.94 CHECK 467289 TOTAL: 517.94 467290 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 STEINES,TERIC 00099090-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 600.00 CHECK 467290 TOTAL: 600.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467291 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 STOUP,GREGORY 00124495-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 473.64 CHECK 467291 TOTAL: 473.64 467292 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 SULLIVAN RENOVATION 00127673-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 23.23 CHECK 467292 TOTAL: 23.23 467293 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 TANGREN,ERIC 00118405-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 154.71 CHECK 467293 TOTAL: 154.71 467294 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 TEDDY,WILLIAM 00124945-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 13.15 CHECK 467294 TOTAL: 13.15 467295 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 THATCHER,E SCOTT 00082843-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 28.55 CHECK 467295 TOTAL: 28.55 467296 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 TODD,DARRELL 00094304-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 45.20 CHECK 467296 TOTAL: 45.20 467297 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 TYSON,PENNY 00109799-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 250.00 CHECK 467297 TOTAL: 250.00 467298 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 VITALE,STEVE 00114762-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 497.71 CHECK 467298 TOTAL: 497.71 467299 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 WALKOVETS,RICHARD 00084405-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 11.93 CHECK 467299 TOTAL: 11.93 467300 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 WILKINSON,GREG 00113240-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 190.57 CHECK 467300 TOTAL: 190.57 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467301 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 WIRKKULA,LEANNE 00124213-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 24.83 CHECK 467301 TOTAL: 24.83 467302 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 WONG,JANIS 00123962-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 235.75 CHECK 467302 TOTAL: 235.75 467303 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 WOODLEY,STEVE 00076602-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 50.41 CHECK 467303 TOTAL: 50.41 467304 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 YOCH,TED 00079117-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 83.07 CHECK 467304 TOTAL: 83.07 467305 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 YOULAND,KELLY 00122514-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 2.80 CHECK 467305 TOTAL: 2.80 467306 12/03/2021 PRTD 999997 YOUNG,ARTHUR 00089634-11/08/2021 11/08/2021 20211203 180.00 CHECK 467306 TOTAL: 180.00 467307 12/03/2021 PRTD 137703 OPG-3 INC 5295 11/02/2021 20211203 16,950.00 OPG-3 INC 5314 11/04/2021 20211203 3,700.00 CHECK 467307 TOTAL: 20,650.00 467308 12/03/2021 PRTD 160026 TED REDMOND 1118 11/02/2021 20211203 37,585.80 CHECK 467308 TOTAL: 37,585.80 467309 12/03/2021 PRTD 100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 00977560 11/16/2021 20211203 527.97 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 00259764 11/16/2021 20211203 458.54 CHECK 467309 TOTAL: 986.51 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467310 12/03/2021 PRTD 149249 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-124750 11/12/2021 20211203 1,077.75 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-124749 11/12/2021 20211203 277.50 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-124751 11/12/2021 20211203 170.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-124752 11/12/2021 20211203 223.25 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-125418 11/18/2021 20211203 540.00 CHECK 467310 TOTAL: 2,288.50 467311 12/03/2021 PRTD 160131 PER MAR SECURITY AND RESEARCH COR 2653043 11/08/2021 20211203 15.00 PER MAR SECURITY AND RESEARCH COR 2653042 11/08/2021 20211203 15.00 CHECK 467311 TOTAL: 30.00 467312 12/03/2021 PRTD 140243 PK BLOODY MARY CORP 1758 11/08/2021 20211203 72.00 CHECK 467312 TOTAL: 72.00 467313 12/03/2021 PRTD 138292 PRECISE IRRIGATION 6110 11/03/2021 20211203 5,620.00 CHECK 467313 TOTAL: 5,620.00 467314 12/03/2021 PRTD 143618 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-29724 11/17/2021 20211203 235.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-29726 11/17/2021 20211203 372.00 CHECK 467314 TOTAL: 607.00 467315 12/03/2021 PRTD 100972 R & R SPECIALTIES INC 0074096-IN 11/05/2021 20211203 2,193.00 CHECK 467315 TOTAL: 2,193.00 467316 12/03/2021 PRTD 110777 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 415851 10/28/2021 20211203 22,605.00 CHECK 467316 TOTAL: 22,605.00 467317 12/03/2021 PRTD 144351 REHDER, MARK 221 11/05/2021 20211203 1,969.94 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467317 TOTAL: 1,969.94 467318 12/03/2021 PRTD 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 83268 11/02/2021 20211203 1,736.00 CHECK 467318 TOTAL: 1,736.00 467319 12/03/2021 PRTD 101659 ORKIN 218357600 11/02/2021 20211203 142.36 CHECK 467319 TOTAL: 142.36 467320 12/03/2021 PRTD 140989 S M HENTGES & SONS INC 04 11/04/2021 20211203 155,884.65 CHECK 467320 TOTAL: 155,884.65 467321 12/03/2021 PRTD 132210 RUSCIANO GROUP INC 67386 11/08/2021 20211203 755.00 CHECK 467321 TOTAL: 755.00 467322 12/03/2021 PRTD 100995 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 414681 11/05/2021 22100003 20211203 4,245.26 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 414658 11/04/2021 20211203 19,666.42 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 414661 11/04/2021 20211203 11,764.49 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 414664 11/04/2021 20211203 3,224.76 CHECK 467322 TOTAL: 38,900.93 467323 12/03/2021 PRTD 120784 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16644 11/03/2021 20211203 380.38 CHECK 467323 TOTAL: 380.38 467324 12/03/2021 PRTD 137482 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 114318521-001 11/02/2021 20211203 306.00 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 114325577-001 11/02/2021 20211203 28.71 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 114322324-001 11/02/2021 20211203 -69.62 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 114015314-001 10/20/2021 20211203 -43.90 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 114477078-001 11/08/2021 20211203 45.40 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 114470855-001 11/08/2021 20211203 13.56 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 467324 TOTAL: 280.15 467325 12/03/2021 PRTD 132195 SMALL LOT MN MN47679 11/16/2021 20211203 230.36 SMALL LOT MN MN47680 11/16/2021 20211203 273.02 CHECK 467325 TOTAL: 503.38 467326 12/03/2021 PRTD 127878 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146442 11/12/2021 20211203 427.60 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146441 11/12/2021 20211203 3,418.40 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146440 11/12/2021 20211203 1,311.90 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146439 11/12/2021 20211203 2,778.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146434 11/12/2021 20211203 339.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146436 11/12/2021 20211203 128.53 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146437 11/12/2021 20211203 9,296.70 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146438 11/12/2021 20211203 2,025.60 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146428 11/12/2021 20211203 1,350.40 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146433 11/12/2021 20211203 986.40 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146427 11/12/2021 20211203 2,285.50 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146431 11/12/2021 20211203 3,420.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146429 11/12/2021 20211203 2,002.40 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146430 11/12/2021 20211203 450.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146426 11/12/2021 20211203 178.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146423 11/12/2021 20211203 145.60 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146432 11/12/2021 20211203 90.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146424 11/12/2021 20211203 381.60 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146448 11/12/2021 20211203 675.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146446 11/12/2021 20211203 1,172.70 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146450 11/12/2021 20211203 6,836.80 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146449 11/12/2021 20211203 1,031.73 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146444 11/12/2021 20211203 264.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146452 11/12/2021 20211203 718.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146443 11/12/2021 20211203 48.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146445 11/12/2021 20211203 2,778.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2146447 11/12/2021 20211203 6,268.50 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148228 11/17/2021 20211203 1,276.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148230 11/17/2021 20211203 128.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148220 11/17/2021 20211203 96.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148226 11/17/2021 20211203 1,319.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148222 11/17/2021 20211203 1,988.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148225 11/17/2021 20211203 2,204.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148227 11/17/2021 20211203 717.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148224 11/17/2021 20211203 85.55 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148223 11/17/2021 20211203 178.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148229 11/17/2021 20211203 1,901.94 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148221 11/17/2021 20211203 917.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148237 11/17/2021 20211203 243.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148232 11/17/2021 20211203 20.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148234 11/17/2021 20211203 1,157.64 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148233 11/17/2021 20211203 2,204.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148239 11/17/2021 20211203 128.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148236 11/17/2021 20211203 484.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148238 11/17/2021 20211203 998.40 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148235 11/17/2021 20211203 409.73 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148211 11/17/2021 20211203 290.40 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: 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 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148212 11/17/2021 20211203 126.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148218 11/17/2021 20211203 216.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148215 11/17/2021 20211203 724.61 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148213 11/17/2021 20211203 880.20 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148216 11/17/2021 20211203 2,204.00 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148217 11/17/2021 20211203 2,778.80 SOUTHERN GLAZERS WINE & SPIRITS L 2148214 11/17/2021 20211203 264.80 CHECK 467326 TOTAL: 74,762.43 467327 12/03/2021 PRTD 133068 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 43337 11/17/2021 20211203 420.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 43336 11/17/2021 20211203 927.00 STEEL TOE BREWING LLC 43338 11/18/2021 20211203 231.00 CHECK 467327 TOTAL: 1,578.00 467328 12/03/2021 PRTD 143698 STORM COMBATIVES TRAINING AND CON 0000141 07/08/2021 20211203 838.95 CHECK 467328 TOTAL: 838.95 467329 12/03/2021 PRTD 101015 STREICHERS INC I1530030 10/19/2021 20211203 47.96 STREICHERS INC I1530058 10/19/2021 20211203 225.97 STREICHERS INC I1532413 11/02/2021 20211203 44.99 STREICHERS INC I152364 11/02/2021 20211203 179.96 STREICHERS INC I1532492 11/02/2021 20211203 160.00 STREICHERS INC I1532964 11/04/2021 20211203 485.98 CHECK 467329 TOTAL: 1,144.86 467330 12/03/2021 PRTD 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 307348 11/02/2021 20211203 52.00 CHECK 467330 TOTAL: 52.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 41 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 467331 12/03/2021 PRTD 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10182610 11/02/2021 20211203 189.00 CHECK 467331 TOTAL: 189.00 467332 12/03/2021 PRTD 133512 SUDDATH RELOCATION SYSTEMS OF MIN 714542 11/09/2021 20211203 1,442.00 CHECK 467332 TOTAL: 1,442.00 467333 12/03/2021 PRTD 101756 SUNDE LAND SURVEYING LLC 55707 09/09/2021 20211203 623.00 CHECK 467333 TOTAL: 623.00 467334 12/03/2021 PRTD 122511 SWANK MOTION PICTURES INC RG 3105462 11/02/2021 20211203 225.00 CHECK 467334 TOTAL: 225.00 467335 12/03/2021 PRTD 143555 TAG CONSTRUCTION INC 28841 11/05/2021 20211203 2,500.00 CHECK 467335 TOTAL: 2,500.00 467336 12/03/2021 PRTD 134784 THE IDEA CREEK 163 11/03/2021 20211203 217.00 CHECK 467336 TOTAL: 217.00 467337 12/03/2021 PRTD 122302 TOUCHPOINT LOGIC LLC 5058 03/17/2021 20211203 155.00 CHECK 467337 TOTAL: 155.00 467338 12/03/2021 PRTD 127543 TSI INCORPORATED 91403187 11/03/2021 20211203 4,700.00 CHECK 467338 TOTAL: 4,700.00 467339 12/03/2021 PRTD 146436 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-359447 10/31/2021 20211203 1,260.00 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC 045-359528 10/31/2021 20211203 4,200.00 CHECK 467339 TOTAL: 5,460.00 467340 12/03/2021 PRTD 130874 UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA) IN 199589418-001 11/08/2021 20211203 8,548.80 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 42 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET CHECK 467340 TOTAL: 8,548.80 467341 12/03/2021 PRTD 131957 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC, LLC 150-0058314-01 11/04/2021 20211203 199.98 CHECK 467341 TOTAL: 199.98 467342 12/03/2021 PRTD 112118 US BANK 6299604 10/25/2021 20211203 450.00 US BANK 6307445 10/25/2021 20211203 450.00 US BANK 6299606 10/25/2021 20211203 450.00 CHECK 467342 TOTAL: 1,350.00 467343 12/03/2021 PRTD 100050 USPS 30407 11/29/2021 20211203 5,586.53 CHECK 467343 TOTAL: 5,586.53 467344 12/03/2021 PRTD 144209 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2951 11/18/2021 20211203 183.00 CHECK 467344 TOTAL: 183.00 467345 12/03/2021 PRTD 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES 72399 11/05/2021 20211203 146.57 CHECK 467345 TOTAL: 146.57 467346 12/03/2021 PRTD 101066 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY S005244353.001 11/03/2021 20211203 33.36 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY S005248430.001 11/04/2021 20211203 147.96 VIKING ELECTRIC SUPPLY S005244353.002 11/05/2021 20211203 -33.36 CHECK 467346 TOTAL: 147.96 467347 12/03/2021 PRTD 119454 VINOCOPIA INC 0291384-IN 11/15/2021 20211203 127.50 VINOCOPIA INC 0291776-IN 11/18/2021 20211203 296.50 VINOCOPIA INC 0291883-IN 11/18/2021 20211203 121.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0291775-IN 11/18/2021 20211203 421.00 VINOCOPIA INC 0291772-IN 11/18/2021 20211203 597.00 VINOCOPIA INC 0291773-IN 11/18/2021 20211203 363.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 43 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET VINOCOPIA INC 0291771-IN 11/18/2021 20211203 2,191.25 CHECK 467347 TOTAL: 4,117.50 467348 12/03/2021 PRTD 120627 PERFORMANCE FOOD GROUP INC 62502283 11/05/2021 20211203 494.24 CHECK 467348 TOTAL: 494.24 467349 12/03/2021 PRTD 143468 PORTAGE BREWING COMPANY 001251 11/18/2021 20211203 198.00 PORTAGE BREWING COMPANY 001253 11/18/2021 20211203 148.50 CHECK 467349 TOTAL: 346.50 467350 12/03/2021 PRTD 135181 WATERFORD OIL CO INC 136835 11/02/2021 20211203 412.07 WATERFORD OIL CO INC 136855 11/03/2021 20211203 1,421.19 WATERFORD OIL CO INC 136862 11/04/2021 20211203 1,122.49 CHECK 467350 TOTAL: 2,955.75 467351 12/03/2021 PRTD 130574 WATSON COMPANY 120772 11/04/2021 20211203 267.48 CHECK 467351 TOTAL: 267.48 467352 12/03/2021 PRTD 103219 WENDEL ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES IN 353805 10/28/2021 20211203 1,462.50 CHECK 467352 TOTAL: 1,462.50 467353 12/03/2021 PRTD 160253 WINCRAFT 452247 10/01/2021 20211203 7,313.26 CHECK 467353 TOTAL: 7,313.26 467354 12/03/2021 PRTD 101033 WINE COMPANY 189134 11/17/2021 20211203 3,711.25 WINE COMPANY 189133 11/17/2021 20211203 1,986.40 WINE COMPANY 187136 10/26/2021 20211203 -181.65 CHECK 467354 TOTAL: 5,516.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/02/2021 12:58User: STanGeilProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 44 CASH ACCOUNT: 9999 1012 Control BS - CashAP CHECK NO CHK DATE TYPE VENDOR NAME INVOICE INV DATE PO CHECK RUN NET 467355 12/03/2021 PRTD 124503 WINSUPPLY EDEN PRAIRIE MN CO 219109 01 11/03/2021 20211203 15.91 CHECK 467355 TOTAL: 15.91 467356 12/03/2021 PRTD 118395 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC E2123491 11/06/2021 20211203 335.54 CHECK 467356 TOTAL: 335.54 467357 12/03/2021 PRTD 142162 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 3072 11/11/2021 20211203 135.00 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 3073 11/11/2021 20211203 179.10 CHECK 467357 TOTAL: 314.10 467358 12/03/2021 PRTD 160077 YETI HOLDINGS, INC 992331289 11/08/2021 20211203 129.99 CHECK 467358 TOTAL: 129.99 467359 12/03/2021 PRTD 101091 ZIEGLER INC IN000317097 11/06/2021 20211203 516.03 ZIEGLER INC IN000317908 11/08/2021 20211203 3,322.56 CHECK 467359 TOTAL: 3,838.59 NUMBER OF CHECKS 317 *** CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL *** 1,620,641.03 COUNT AMOUNT TOTAL PRINTED CHECKS 317 1,620,641.03 *** GRAND TOTAL *** 1,620,641.03 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram ID: apcshdsb Page 33 JOURNAL ENTRIES TO BE CREATED FUND SUB FUND DUE TO DUE FR 1000 General 212,183.542100 Police Special Revenue 893.002300 Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety 135,490.332500 Conservation & Sustainability 1,980.002600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 12,037.002600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 81,638.142600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 191.252600 Housing & Redvlpmt Authority 148,580.324000 Capital Projects 233,866.384400 PIR Capital Projects 768,066.895200 Braemar Golf Course 10,998.895200 Braemar Golf Course 9,259.245400 Edinborough Park 36,270.275500 Braemar Arena 5,622.645600 Braemar Field 735.835700 Centennial Lakes 4,162.055800 Liquor 241,181.725900 Utility Fund 31,329.975900 Utility Fund 53,925.055900 Utility Fund 55,969.625900 Utility Fund 68,151.796000 Risk Management 24,365.236100 Equipment Operations 7,383.736200 Information Technology 7,777.786300 Facilities Management 9,500.557100 PS Training Facility 317.447200 MN Task Force 1 3,242.009000 Payroll 447,105.359999 Pooled Cash Fund 2,612,226.00 TOTAL 2,612,226.00 2,612,226.00 ** END OF REPORT - Generated by Lonnia Jefferson ** City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467360 12/10/2021 PRTD 160256 WABASHA READY MIX LLC 8623 10/08/2021 20211210 1,380.00 CHECK 467360 TOTAL: 1,380.00 467361 12/10/2021 PRTD 129458 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 9280451 11/01/2021 20211210 -271.73 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 9312042 11/10/2021 20211210 269.99 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 9325347 11/15/2021 20211210 124.27 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 9239174 10/19/2021 20211210 147.99 ACME ELECTRIC MOTOR INC 9241218 10/19/2021 20211210 852.91 CHECK 467361 TOTAL: 1,123.43 467362 12/10/2021 PRTD 133140 ACROSS THE STREET PRODUCTIONS INC INV08964 10/03/2021 20211210 4,500.00 CHECK 467362 TOTAL: 4,500.00 467363 12/10/2021 PRTD 140318 ADVANCED ELEMENTS INC 77511 11/09/2021 20211210 17,104.96 CHECK 467363 TOTAL: 17,104.96 467364 12/10/2021 PRTD 141960 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16L4-P176-DGRF 11/03/2021 20211210 134.38 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1FKM-Y6GT-3619 11/09/2021 20211210 147.50 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1F71-47J9-DPXR 11/10/2021 20211210 8.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 11FT-YWVF-LYKL 11/10/2021 20211210 36.10 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1GJT-KDJX-9YCW 11/10/2021 20211210 119.96 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1MYJ-J3WG-FY1C 11/11/2021 20211210 129.00 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 14L7-JLF9-GLCK 11/11/2021 20211210 34.54 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1MDD-NLDD-DX71 11/12/2021 20211210 122.93 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1RTD-1MM3-KVQ7 11/12/2021 20211210 370.92 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1PGW-11DH-PMYT 11/12/2021 20211210 -100.80 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 16GT-MGG3-6DJK 11/13/2021 20211210 25.99 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1K4J-QDNP-4MN6 11/13/2021 20211210 30.97 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 1NDH-TN73-41KL 11/14/2021 20211210 179.41 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1FDM-P447-FDKQ 11/15/2021 20211210 699.96 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1D47-YH6X-GRL9 11/15/2021 20211210 349.98 CHECK 467364 TOTAL: 2,289.83 467365 12/10/2021 PRTD 101772 APCO INTERNATIONAL INC 819837 11/09/2021 20211210 893.00 CHECK 467365 TOTAL: 893.00 467366 12/10/2021 PRTD 151756 ARBEITER BREWING COMPANY LLC 501 11/18/2021 20211210 174.00 CHECK 467366 TOTAL: 174.00 467367 12/10/2021 PRTD 106304 ASPEN MILLS INC 283623 11/09/2021 20211210 92.90 ASPEN MILLS INC 283617 11/09/2021 20211210 77.85 CHECK 467367 TOTAL: 170.75 467368 12/10/2021 PRTD 100638 BACHMAN'S LANDSCAPING 968602/46 11/05/2021 20211210 639.49 CHECK 467368 TOTAL: 639.49 467369 12/10/2021 PRTD 101355 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092362100 11/18/2021 20211210 858.00 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092337500 11/18/2021 20211210 798.00 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092327400 11/18/2021 20211210 459.50 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0104271900 11/18/2021 20211210 149.18 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092363600 11/18/2021 20211210 4,701.45 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092347900 11/18/2021 20211210 6,159.15 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092342000 11/18/2021 20211210 1,312.00 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092459800 11/24/2021 20211210 505.00 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0104211000 11/04/2021 20211210 -3.45 BELLBOY CORPORATION 0092460000 11/24/2021 20211210 505.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467369 TOTAL: 15,443.83 467370 12/10/2021 PRTD 141961 MIDAMERICAN ENERGY SERVICES LLC 11230532 08/17/2021 20211210 6,258.58 MIDAMERICAN ENERGY SERVICES LLC 11266313 09/24/2021 20211210 5,879.70 CHECK 467370 TOTAL: 12,138.28 467371 12/10/2021 PRTD 126847 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY 871148 11/09/2021 20211210 332.37 CHECK 467371 TOTAL: 332.37 467372 12/10/2021 PRTD 142153 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 15180 11/18/2021 20211210 569.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 15273 11/23/2021 20211210 413.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 15275 11/23/2021 20211210 494.00 BLACK STACK BREWING INC 15272 11/23/2021 20211210 413.00 CHECK 467372 TOTAL: 1,889.00 467373 12/10/2021 PRTD 160243 BLUE, TERI 001 11/09/2021 20211210 1,285.20 CHECK 467373 TOTAL: 1,285.20 467374 12/10/2021 PRTD 105367 BOUND TREE MEDICAL LLC 84282392 11/09/2021 20211210 263.70 CHECK 467374 TOTAL: 263.70 467375 12/10/2021 PRTD 117040 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 007P20535 11/17/2021 20211210 314.85 BOYER FORD TRUCKS INC 008P3934 10/13/2021 20211210 -123.12 CHECK 467375 TOTAL: 191.73 467376 12/10/2021 PRTD 142566 BRASS FOUNDRY BREWING CO E-7544 11/19/2021 20211210 128.00 CHECK 467376 TOTAL: 128.00 467377 12/10/2021 PRTD 100664 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION B273342 11/09/2021 20211210 2,284.75 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION B273391 11/09/2021 20211210 3,741.70 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION B273449 11/09/2021 20211210 5,445.00 BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION B275550 11/30/2021 20211210 7,738.00 CHECK 467377 TOTAL: 19,209.45 467378 12/10/2021 PRTD 124291 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855229 11/17/2021 20211210 11,998.95 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855226 11/17/2021 20211210 5,646.94 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341855246 11/17/2021 20211210 7,999.30 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA WINE 341900500 11/19/2021 20211210 643.70 CHECK 467378 TOTAL: 26,288.89 467379 12/10/2021 PRTD 124529 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE MINNESOTA BEER 341830715 11/16/2021 20211210 11,236.65 CHECK 467379 TOTAL: 11,236.65 467380 12/10/2021 PRTD 100669 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC 51281 11/15/2021 20211210 261.18 CHECK 467380 TOTAL: 261.18 467381 12/10/2021 PRTD 137533 BUSBY, TREVOR 1-11/11/2021 11/11/2021 20211210 680.00 CHECK 467381 TOTAL: 680.00 467382 12/10/2021 PRTD 100648 BERTELSON BROTHERS INC WO-1155782-2 11/09/2021 20211210 25.29 BERTELSON BROTHERS INC WO-1156344-1 11/10/2021 20211210 38.39 BERTELSON BROTHERS INC WO-1156344-2 11/11/2021 20211210 16.98 BERTELSON BROTHERS INC WO-1156393-1 11/11/2021 20211210 98.67 CHECK 467382 TOTAL: 179.33 467383 12/10/2021 PRTD 119455 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2620239 11/16/2021 20211210 10,656.15 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2620827 11/19/2021 20211210 710.67 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2622027 11/19/2021 20211210 58.50 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2622030 11/19/2021 20211210 94.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 CAPITOL BEVERAGE SALES LP 2622029 11/19/2021 20211210 234.00 CHECK 467383 TOTAL: 11,753.32 467384 12/10/2021 PRTD 101515 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2449681 11/08/2021 20211210 1,550.00 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY C2450626 11/09/2021 20211210 818.50 CHECK 467384 TOTAL: 2,368.50 467385 12/10/2021 PRTD 103300 CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT 20349 11/15/2021 20211210 81,638.14 CHECK 467385 TOTAL: 81,638.14 467386 12/10/2021 PRTD 142028 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101672517 11/15/2021 20211210 17.52 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101673027 11/15/2021 20211210 11.78 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101673128 11/15/2021 20211210 23.14 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101672997 11/15/2021 20211210 33.05 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101672956 11/15/2021 20211210 27.65 CINTAS CORPORATION 4101673108 11/15/2021 20211210 35.63 CINTAS CORPORATION 4102153034 11/18/2021 20211210 63.28 CINTAS CORPORATION 4102441253 11/22/2021 20211210 3.69 CINTAS CORPORATION 9155085634 11/22/2021 20211210 -81.48 CINTAS CORPORATION 9155084493 11/22/2021 20211210 -63.28 CHECK 467386 TOTAL: 70.98 467387 12/10/2021 PRTD 140274 CIVICPLUS, LLC 218941 11/11/2021 20211210 750.00 CHECK 467387 TOTAL: 750.00 467388 12/10/2021 PRTD 120433 COMCAST HOLDINGS CORPORATION 0373022-11/2021 11/17/2021 20211210 33.79 CHECK 467388 TOTAL: 33.79 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467389 12/10/2021 PRTD 144092 CONCENTRA 103438282 11/04/2021 20211210 1,011.00 CONCENTRA 103469278 11/10/2021 20211210 228.00 CHECK 467389 TOTAL: 1,239.00 467390 12/10/2021 PRTD 100012 CORE & MAIN P896025 11/10/2021 20211210 2,779.92 CORE & MAIN P917398 11/10/2021 20211210 918.13 CHECK 467390 TOTAL: 3,698.05 467391 12/10/2021 PRTD 140999 CORE-MARK MIDCONTINENT INC 8489095 11/12/2021 20211210 534.75 CHECK 467391 TOTAL: 534.75 467392 12/10/2021 PRTD 160189 COYLE, ANN 1015 11/12/2021 20211210 1,140.00 CHECK 467392 TOTAL: 1,140.00 467393 12/10/2021 PRTD 121267 CREATIVE RESOURCES 80641 11/13/2021 20211210 292.82 CHECK 467393 TOTAL: 292.82 467394 12/10/2021 PRTD 100699 CULLIGAN SOFTWATER SERVICE COMPAN 114X83464905 11/30/2021 20211210 98.00 CULLIGAN SOFTWATER SERVICE COMPAN 114X83584108 11/30/2021 20211210 9.53 CULLIGAN SOFTWATER SERVICE COMPAN 114X83531208 11/30/2021 20211210 401.99 CHECK 467394 TOTAL: 509.52 467395 12/10/2021 PRTD 104020 DALCO ENTERPRISES INC 3855107 11/09/2021 20211210 1,886.66 DALCO ENTERPRISES INC 3856264 11/11/2021 20211210 196.00 DALCO ENTERPRISES INC 3857726 11/15/2021 20211210 588.05 DALCO ENTERPRISES INC 3839769-CM 10/18/2021 20211210 -126.01 CHECK 467395 TOTAL: 2,544.70 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467396 12/10/2021 PRTD 102195 DAY INVESTMENTS LLC P44168350 09/29/2021 20211210 9.99 CHECK 467396 TOTAL: 9.99 467397 12/10/2021 PRTD 102455 DEALER AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES INC 1-117017 11/09/2021 20211210 374.50 CHECK 467397 TOTAL: 374.50 467398 12/10/2021 PRTD 100718 DELEGARD TOOL COMPANY 95378/1 11/10/2021 20211210 190.53 CHECK 467398 TOTAL: 190.53 467399 12/10/2021 PRTD 121103 DIRECTV GROUP INC 051616649X211120 11/20/2021 20211210 97.03 CHECK 467399 TOTAL: 97.03 467400 12/10/2021 PRTD 129718 DREW'S CONCESSIONS LLC 2750 11/10/2021 20211210 680.92 CHECK 467400 TOTAL: 680.92 467401 12/10/2021 PRTD 100049 EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES 88754 11/09/2021 20211210 4,398.75 EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES 88776 11/09/2021 20211210 2,750.00 EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES 88775 11/09/2021 20211210 191.25 EHLERS AND ASSOCIATES 88950 11/09/2021 20211210 7,500.00 CHECK 467401 TOTAL: 14,840.00 467402 12/10/2021 PRTD 104733 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC 2296350 11/10/2021 20211210 217.32 CHECK 467402 TOTAL: 217.32 467403 12/10/2021 PRTD 134730 EXPLORE EDINA 28187 11/02/2021 20211210 42,078.45 EXPLORE EDINA 31279 12/03/2021 20211210 39,639.21 CHECK 467403 TOTAL: 81,717.66 467404 12/10/2021 PRTD 100146 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-433971 11/09/2021 20211210 15.12 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 69-434511 11/15/2021 20211210 219.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 ELLIOTT AUTO SUPPLY CO, INC 1-7248755 11/15/2021 20211210 150.42 CHECK 467404 TOTAL: 384.54 467405 12/10/2021 PRTD 141837 DAIOHS USA INC INV582857 11/15/2021 20211210 684.46 CHECK 467405 TOTAL: 684.46 467406 12/10/2021 PRTD 146238 FRECON, ALEXANDER JEAN 52 07/06/2021 20211210 12,500.00 CHECK 467406 TOTAL: 12,500.00 467407 12/10/2021 PRTD 137554 FRED HOLASEK & SON INC 00022931 11/15/2021 20211210 1,106.89 CHECK 467407 TOTAL: 1,106.89 467408 12/10/2021 PRTD 160257 LAWREMAR INC 12680 10/04/2021 20211210 1,600.00 CHECK 467408 TOTAL: 1,600.00 467409 12/10/2021 PRTD 102456 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1483994 11/09/2021 20211210 111.65 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1486172 11/12/2021 20211210 735.20 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1486301 11/12/2021 20211210 1,119.30 GALLS PARENT HOLDINGS LLC BC1487074 11/15/2021 20211210 1,003.66 CHECK 467409 TOTAL: 2,969.81 467410 12/10/2021 PRTD 101103 WW GRAINGER 9121352943 11/15/2021 20211210 202.00 CHECK 467410 TOTAL: 202.00 467411 12/10/2021 PRTD 160108 GREAT RIVER OFFICE PRODUCTS, INC. 2108035-0 11/11/2021 20211210 54.08 CHECK 467411 TOTAL: 54.08 467412 12/10/2021 PRTD 122093 GROUP HEALTHPLAN INC 108587895 11/08/2021 20211210 447,105.35 GROUP HEALTHPLAN INC 108584033 11/08/2021 20211210 24,365.23 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 CHECK 467412 TOTAL: 471,470.58 467413 12/10/2021 PRTD 129108 HAAG COMPANIES INC 4-435919 11/09/2021 20211210 48.00 CHECK 467413 TOTAL: 48.00 467414 12/10/2021 PRTD 137677 HAMMEL GREEN AND ABRAHAMSON INC 223076 11/09/2021 22100038 20211210 6,500.00 HAMMEL GREEN AND ABRAHAMSON INC 223076-1 11/09/2021 20211210 9.14 CHECK 467414 TOTAL: 6,509.14 467415 12/10/2021 PRTD 100798 HAYDEN-MURPHY EQUIPMENT COMPANY R0098801 09/27/2021 20211210 28,000.00 CHECK 467415 TOTAL: 28,000.00 467416 12/10/2021 PRTD 103085 HENNEPIN COUNTY ACCOUNTING SERVIC 1000172336 10/04/2021 20211210 2,209.50 CHECK 467416 TOTAL: 2,209.50 467417 12/10/2021 PRTD 101871 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEFS ASSN 21-054 11/10/2021 20211210 364.00 CHECK 467417 TOTAL: 364.00 467418 12/10/2021 PRTD 160258 CITY OF COTTAGE GROVE 31005 11/22/2021 20211210 400.00 CHECK 467418 TOTAL: 400.00 467419 12/10/2021 PRTD 143537 JIRIK SOD FARM 48874 11/09/2021 20211210 1,492.00 JIRIK SOD FARM 48876 11/09/2021 20211210 -180.00 CHECK 467419 TOTAL: 1,312.00 467420 12/10/2021 PRTD 100741 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248286 11/17/2021 20211210 12,473.20 JJ TAYLOR DISTRIBUTING CO OF MINN 3248290 11/17/2021 20211210 740.00 CHECK 467420 TOTAL: 13,213.20 467421 12/10/2021 PRTD 100835 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 3507579 11/18/2021 20211210 6,924.80 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 321163 11/19/2021 20211210 -18.48 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY 319910 11/03/2021 20211210 -13.84 CHECK 467421 TOTAL: 6,892.48 467422 12/10/2021 PRTD 100835 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306186 11/18/2021 20211210 360.07 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306185 11/18/2021 20211210 4,307.38 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306176 11/18/2021 20211210 832.76 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6306170 11/18/2021 20211210 3,107.69 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6307095 11/18/2021 20211210 635.95 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6307096 11/18/2021 20211210 1,399.09 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6307097 11/19/2021 20211210 3,434.13 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 6307281 11/21/2021 20211210 262.38 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 649771 11/12/2021 20211210 -45.19 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS 649770 11/12/2021 20211210 -24.00 CHECK 467422 TOTAL: 14,270.26 467423 12/10/2021 PRTD 100835 WINE MERCHANTS 7356249 11/18/2021 20211210 2,312.25 WINE MERCHANTS 7356252 11/18/2021 20211210 811.90 WINE MERCHANTS 7356250 11/18/2021 20211210 212.96 WINE MERCHANTS 7356251 11/18/2021 20211210 3,642.50 WINE MERCHANTS 7356256 11/18/2021 20211210 10,745.89 WINE MERCHANTS 7356579 11/18/2021 20211210 2,419.14 WINE MERCHANTS 7356580 11/18/2021 20211210 3,573.52 WINE MERCHANTS 740824 11/05/2021 20211210 -11.17 WINE MERCHANTS 740825 11/05/2021 20211210 -9.33 WINE MERCHANTS 7356665 11/21/2021 20211210 1,418.38 WINE MERCHANTS 7356893 11/22/2021 20211210 1,416.00 WINE MERCHANTS 7356894 11/22/2021 20211210 1,416.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467423 TOTAL: 27,948.04 467424 12/10/2021 PRTD 100835 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934734 11/18/2021 20211210 1,816.37 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934755 11/18/2021 20211210 2,567.79 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934753 11/18/2021 20211210 2,453.09 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934754 11/18/2021 20211210 1,914.88 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934759 11/18/2021 20211210 1,244.93 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934758 11/18/2021 20211210 461.20 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934757 11/18/2021 20211210 2,122.04 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934756 11/18/2021 20211210 29.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934752 11/18/2021 20211210 1,506.95 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934751 11/18/2021 20211210 451.00 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934750 11/18/2021 20211210 1,294.50 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934749 11/18/2021 20211210 1,335.50 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934748 11/18/2021 20211210 1,525.61 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934747 11/18/2021 20211210 628.76 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934746 11/18/2021 20211210 2,311.59 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934745 11/18/2021 20211210 271.19 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934744 11/18/2021 20211210 2,554.67 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934743 11/18/2021 20211210 2,192.79 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934722 11/18/2021 20211210 6,587.48 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934738 11/18/2021 20211210 9,186.05 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934723 11/18/2021 20211210 6,587.51 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934720 11/19/2021 20211210 1,876.74 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 173781 11/05/2021 20211210 -3.33 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934735 11/19/2021 20211210 1,876.74 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1936938 11/22/2021 20211210 13,699.87 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 176312 11/19/2021 20211210 -31.00 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 175018 11/12/2021 20211210 -37.33 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO 1934767 11/18/2021 20211210 955.90 CHECK 467424 TOTAL: 67,380.68 467425 12/10/2021 PRTD 142504 JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROTECTION 22485296 09/01/2021 20211210 1,629.89 CHECK 467425 TOTAL: 1,629.89 467426 12/10/2021 PRTD 145396 JUNKYARD BREWING COMPANY LLC 003330 11/24/2021 20211210 751.00 JUNKYARD BREWING COMPANY LLC 003332 11/24/2021 20211210 1,209.00 JUNKYARD BREWING COMPANY LLC 003331 11/24/2021 20211210 751.00 CHECK 467426 TOTAL: 2,711.00 467427 12/10/2021 PRTD 103409 KELBRO COMPANY 2698487 11/18/2021 20211210 40.16 KELBRO COMPANY 2698489 11/18/2021 20211210 65.72 CHECK 467427 TOTAL: 105.88 467428 12/10/2021 PRTD 135234 KELLEHER, KEVIN J 9210 10/01/2021 20211210 885.00 CHECK 467428 TOTAL: 885.00 467429 12/10/2021 PRTD 113212 KENDELL INTERMEDIATE CORPORATION IN040902 11/15/2021 20211210 61.00 CHECK 467429 TOTAL: 61.00 467430 12/10/2021 PRTD 160105 KILLMER ELECTRIC CO., INC. W16865 11/11/2021 20211210 500.78 CHECK 467430 TOTAL: 500.78 467431 12/10/2021 PRTD 100944 KIWI KAI IMPORTS INC 146682 11/19/2021 20211210 6,015.15 CHECK 467431 TOTAL: 6,015.15 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467432 12/10/2021 PRTD 144983 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 53922 11/11/2021 20211210 3,375.00 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 53924 11/15/2021 20211210 9,475.00 KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC 53923 11/12/2021 20211210 9,950.00 CHECK 467432 TOTAL: 22,800.00 467433 12/10/2021 PRTD 151024 LA DONA SBC 5119 11/17/2021 20211210 300.00 CHECK 467433 TOTAL: 300.00 467434 12/10/2021 PRTD 100852 LAWSON PRODUCTS INC 9309005033 11/15/2021 20211210 1,088.22 CHECK 467434 TOTAL: 1,088.22 467435 12/10/2021 PRTD 145377 LEADSONLINE LLC 323731 11/15/2021 20211210 3,227.00 CHECK 467435 TOTAL: 3,227.00 467436 12/10/2021 PRTD 100839 KAMAN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES R769601 11/11/2021 20211210 78.59 CHECK 467436 TOTAL: 78.59 467437 12/10/2021 PRTD 146427 LUCID BREWING LLC 12448 11/17/2021 20211210 184.00 CHECK 467437 TOTAL: 184.00 467438 12/10/2021 PRTD 141916 LUPULIN BREWING COMPANY 41414 11/16/2021 20211210 518.05 CHECK 467438 TOTAL: 518.05 467439 12/10/2021 PRTD 100864 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT LLC P38401 11/09/2021 20211210 596.23 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT LLC P38466 11/15/2021 20211210 546.81 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT LLC P05402 07/08/2021 20211210 -119.80 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT LLC P05400 07/09/2021 20211210 -79.90 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT LLC P05392 07/08/2021 20211210 119.80 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467439 TOTAL: 1,063.14 467440 12/10/2021 PRTD 122554 MATHESON TRI-GAS INC 0024118708 08/31/2021 20211210 2,955.00 CHECK 467440 TOTAL: 2,955.00 467441 12/10/2021 PRTD 142503 MCNAMARA CONTRACTING INC ENG 21-1 #4 11/16/2021 20211210 529,616.09 CHECK 467441 TOTAL: 529,616.09 467442 12/10/2021 PRTD 101483 MENARDS 56329 11/15/2021 20211210 187.92 CHECK 467442 TOTAL: 187.92 467443 12/10/2021 PRTD 101483 MENARDS INC 50240 11/09/2021 20211210 81.81 MENARDS INC 50291 11/10/2021 20211210 29.17 MENARDS INC 50441 11/12/2021 20211210 59.96 CHECK 467443 TOTAL: 170.94 467444 12/10/2021 PRTD 100885 METRO SALES INC INV1926540 11/10/2021 20211210 1,507.90 CHECK 467444 TOTAL: 1,507.90 467445 12/10/2021 PRTD 102507 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS ASSOCI 1201 11/13/2021 20211210 496.00 CHECK 467445 TOTAL: 496.00 467446 12/10/2021 PRTD 102729 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 402016 11/10/2021 20211210 89.95 METROPOLITAN FORD LLC 526184 11/15/2021 20211210 4.96 CHECK 467446 TOTAL: 94.91 467447 12/10/2021 PRTD 104650 MICRO CENTER 8953078 11/12/2021 20211210 224.98 CHECK 467447 TOTAL: 224.98 467448 12/10/2021 PRTD 100890 HILLTOP ENTERPRISES INC 1204 11/15/2021 20211210 430.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 CHECK 467448 TOTAL: 430.00 467449 12/10/2021 PRTD 101161 MIDWEST CHEMICAL SUPPLY INC 44135 11/12/2021 20211210 718.50 CHECK 467449 TOTAL: 718.50 467450 12/10/2021 PRTD 127062 MINNEHAHA BUILDING MAINTENANCE IN 180191901 10/31/2021 20211210 6.45 MINNEHAHA BUILDING MAINTENANCE IN 18019103 10/31/2021 20211210 18.28 MINNEHAHA BUILDING MAINTENANCE IN 180191902 10/31/2021 20211210 49.46 CHECK 467450 TOTAL: 74.19 467451 12/10/2021 PRTD 144364 DVS RENEWALS 31287 12/03/2021 20211210 28.50 CHECK 467451 TOTAL: 28.50 467452 12/10/2021 PRTD 101471 MINNESOTA GOLF COURSE SUPERINTEND 05519 11/09/2021 20211210 150.00 CHECK 467452 TOTAL: 150.00 467453 12/10/2021 PRTD 117837 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION 31252 10/20/2021 20211210 275.00 CHECK 467453 TOTAL: 275.00 467454 12/10/2021 PRTD 123909 MINNESOTA SODDING COMPANY LLC 10966 11/15/2021 20211210 706.66 CHECK 467454 TOTAL: 706.66 467455 12/10/2021 PRTD 120604 MINT CONDITION DETAILING INC 67090 11/12/2021 20211210 200.00 CHECK 467455 TOTAL: 200.00 467456 12/10/2021 PRTD 128914 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 32035 11/10/2021 20211210 11.00 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 32043 11/11/2021 20211210 102.71 BJKK DEVELOPMENT 32044 11/11/2021 20211210 57.71 CHECK 467456 TOTAL: 171.42 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467457 12/10/2021 PRTD 143339 MR CUTTING EDGE 3963 11/15/2021 20211210 168.00 CHECK 467457 TOTAL: 168.00 467458 12/10/2021 PRTD 100906 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC 1319485-01 11/12/2021 20211210 2,167.43 CHECK 467458 TOTAL: 2,167.43 467459 12/10/2021 PRTD 101390 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES INC IN1642496 11/10/2021 20211210 53.50 CHECK 467459 TOTAL: 53.50 467460 12/10/2021 PRTD 160072 NORTHERN AIR CORPORATION FC 20-17 #4 09/30/2021 20211210 196,998.65 CHECK 467460 TOTAL: 196,998.65 467461 12/10/2021 PRTD 100920 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY 5429-366017 11/10/2021 20211210 268.56 CHECK 467461 TOTAL: 268.56 467462 12/10/2021 PRTD 100076 NEW FRANCE WINE CO 181021 11/23/2021 20211210 552.00 CHECK 467462 TOTAL: 552.00 467463 12/10/2021 PRTD 100922 NEWMAN SIGNS INC TRFINV035599 11/11/2021 20211210 3,124.14 CHECK 467463 TOTAL: 3,124.14 467464 12/10/2021 PRTD 142201 NLSC PRODUCTS INC 122962 11/09/2021 20211210 49.00 CHECK 467464 TOTAL: 49.00 467465 12/10/2021 PRTD 133373 NOREX INC 643807 11/12/2021 20211210 4,125.00 CHECK 467465 TOTAL: 4,125.00 467466 12/10/2021 PRTD 121497 NORTHWEST ASPHALT INC ENG 21-12 #1 11/09/2021 20211210 115,896.21 CHECK 467466 TOTAL: 115,896.21 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467467 12/10/2021 PRTD 139023 NUSS TRUCK GROUP INC 7176851P 11/11/2021 20211210 2,196.39 CHECK 467467 TOTAL: 2,196.39 467468 12/10/2021 PRTD 129348 SAFETY ON SITE LLC 102521 10/25/2021 20211210 4,320.00 CHECK 467468 TOTAL: 4,320.00 467469 12/10/2021 PRTD 999998 Laurelle Clarke 273-21-0995-REFUND 12/02/2021 20211210 1,173.89 CHECK 467469 TOTAL: 1,173.89 467470 12/10/2021 PRTD 999995 CENTERPOINT ENERGY ED193804-REFUND 11/30/2021 20211210 179.24 CHECK 467470 TOTAL: 179.24 467471 12/10/2021 PRTD 999995 ORION 4500 FRANCE LLC 31041 12/01/2021 20211210 35,000.00 CHECK 467471 TOTAL: 35,000.00 467472 12/10/2021 PRTD 999995 ZEHNDER HOMES INCS ED164770-REFUND 11/30/2021 20211210 7,167.55 CHECK 467472 TOTAL: 7,167.55 467473 12/10/2021 PRTD 999996 GOULD, SHERRI 1176535.1-REFUND 06/01/2020 20211210 1,250.00 CHECK 467473 TOTAL: 1,250.00 467474 12/10/2021 PRTD 999996 AEON ED179787-REFUND 11/02/2021 20211210 20,000.00 CHECK 467474 TOTAL: 20,000.00 467475 12/10/2021 PRTD 999993 Debra Fields 31269 12/07/2021 20211210 62.93 CHECK 467475 TOTAL: 62.93 467476 12/10/2021 PRTD 999997 AREO RACE WHEELS 30454 11/29/2021 20211210 1,231.22 CHECK 467476 TOTAL: 1,231.22 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467477 12/10/2021 PRTD 999997 HIGHCROFT TOWNHOMES ASSN 30149 11/22/2021 20211210 2,888.59 CHECK 467477 TOTAL: 2,888.59 467478 12/10/2021 PRTD 999997 JUNE M. PEARSON REV TRUST 00086399-09/16/2021 09/30/2021 20211210 199.47 CHECK 467478 TOTAL: 199.47 467479 12/10/2021 PRTD 100940 OWENS TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES INC 95656 11/11/2021 20211210 819.00 CHECK 467479 TOTAL: 819.00 467480 12/10/2021 PRTD 100945 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 00492502 11/23/2021 20211210 353.34 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY 00931304 11/19/2021 20211210 379.72 CHECK 467480 TOTAL: 733.06 467481 12/10/2021 PRTD 149249 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-125419 11/19/2021 20211210 687.00 PEQUOD DISTRIBUTING W-125420 11/18/2021 20211210 741.75 CHECK 467481 TOTAL: 1,428.75 467482 12/10/2021 PRTD 138081 PETERSON SALT & WATER TREATMENT 192387 11/03/2021 20211210 677.82 CHECK 467482 TOTAL: 677.82 467483 12/10/2021 PRTD 100119 PING INC 16028583 11/02/2021 20211210 70.66 CHECK 467483 TOTAL: 70.66 467484 12/10/2021 PRTD 130926 PLANTSCAPE INC 366779 11/15/2021 20211210 2,223.86 CHECK 467484 TOTAL: 2,223.86 467485 12/10/2021 PRTD 100958 PLUNKETT'S PEST CONTROL 7320862 11/11/2021 20211210 96.55 CHECK 467485 TOTAL: 96.55 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467486 12/10/2021 PRTD 143618 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-29723 11/19/2021 20211210 147.00 PRYES BREWING COMPANY LLC W-29725 11/19/2021 20211210 98.00 CHECK 467486 TOTAL: 245.00 467487 12/10/2021 PRTD 138267 QUALITY LOCKSMITH INC QLS21318 11/09/2021 20211210 395.84 QUALITY LOCKSMITH INC QLS21362 11/15/2021 20211210 471.94 CHECK 467487 TOTAL: 867.78 467488 12/10/2021 PRTD 160142 QUINLIVAN & HUGHES, PA 152610 11/05/2021 20211210 164.50 CHECK 467488 TOTAL: 164.50 467489 12/10/2021 PRTD 110777 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 416295 11/11/2021 20211210 914.50 RAINBOW TREE COMPANY 416296 11/10/2021 20211210 1,414.40 CHECK 467489 TOTAL: 2,328.90 467490 12/10/2021 PRTD 100975 MULTI SERVICE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTION 20211110033928-1 11/10/2021 20211210 169.64 MULTI SERVICE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTION 20211110033928-2 11/10/2021 20211210 169.99 CHECK 467490 TOTAL: 339.63 467491 12/10/2021 PRTD 133627 REPUBLIC SERVICES #894 0894-005540138 10/31/2021 20211210 68,151.79 REPUBLIC SERVICES #894 0894-005543106 11/25/2021 20211210 2,337.54 CHECK 467491 TOTAL: 70,489.33 467492 12/10/2021 PRTD 160106 RESTORATION & CONSTRUCTION SERVIC ENG 21-6 #3 11/10/2021 20211210 160,795.57 CHECK 467492 TOTAL: 160,795.57 467493 12/10/2021 PRTD 100977 RICHFIELD PLUMBING COMPANY 83317 11/09/2021 20211210 759.00 CHECK 467493 TOTAL: 759.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467494 12/10/2021 PRTD 102011 RIVER CITY JAZZ ORCHESTRA 21EP1121 11/15/2021 20211210 150.00 CHECK 467494 TOTAL: 150.00 467495 12/10/2021 PRTD 101659 ORKIN 218358133 11/09/2021 20211210 63.00 CHECK 467495 TOTAL: 63.00 467496 12/10/2021 PRTD 134173 SAFE-FAST INC INV253286 11/12/2021 20211210 429.80 SAFE-FAST INC INV253287 11/12/2021 20211210 40.95 CHECK 467496 TOTAL: 470.75 467497 12/10/2021 PRTD 144553 SALTCO LLC 74830 11/15/2021 20211210 70.00 CHECK 467497 TOTAL: 70.00 467498 12/10/2021 PRTD 132210 RUSCIANO GROUP INC 67408 11/11/2021 20211210 755.00 CHECK 467498 TOTAL: 755.00 467499 12/10/2021 PRTD 100995 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 415365 11/09/2021 20211210 223.40 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 415561 11/10/2021 20211210 3,502.73 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 415826 11/11/2021 20211210 240.03 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 415827 11/11/2021 20211210 3,573.43 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 415825 11/11/2021 20211210 279.04 SHORT-ELLIOT-HENDRICKSON INCORPOR 415148 11/09/2021 20211210 277.24 CHECK 467499 TOTAL: 8,095.87 467500 12/10/2021 PRTD 120784 WALSH GRAPHICS INC 16663 11/11/2021 20211210 185.00 CHECK 467500 TOTAL: 185.00 467501 12/10/2021 PRTD 149239 SLEEP NUMBER SELECT COMFORT CORPO 95012329656 11/05/2021 20211210 2,670.05 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467501 TOTAL: 2,670.05 467502 12/10/2021 PRTD 101000 RJM PRINTING INC 118576012 11/15/2021 20211210 60.65 RJM PRINTING INC 118575012 11/15/2021 20211210 60.65 RJM PRINTING INC 118574013 11/15/2021 20211210 79.79 CHECK 467502 TOTAL: 201.09 467503 12/10/2021 PRTD 143698 STORM COMBATIVES TRAINING AND CON 0000141 07/08/2021 20211210 799.00 CHECK 467503 TOTAL: 799.00 467504 12/10/2021 PRTD 102390 STRAND MANUFACTURING COMPANY INC 31540 11/15/2021 20211210 159.50 CHECK 467504 TOTAL: 159.50 467505 12/10/2021 PRTD 101015 STREICHERS INC I1533767 11/09/2021 20211210 483.99 STREICHERS INC I1534165 11/11/2021 20211210 218.00 CHECK 467505 TOTAL: 701.99 467506 12/10/2021 PRTD 101017 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET 309955 11/11/2021 20211210 240.39 CHECK 467506 TOTAL: 240.39 467507 12/10/2021 PRTD 105874 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10182953 11/10/2021 20211210 422.04 SUBURBAN TIRE WHOLESALE INC 10182971 11/11/2021 20211210 606.00 CHECK 467507 TOTAL: 1,028.04 467508 12/10/2021 PRTD 133512 SUDDATH RELOCATION SYSTEMS OF MIN 714540 11/09/2021 20211210 1,522.50 CHECK 467508 TOTAL: 1,522.50 467509 12/10/2021 PRTD 111002 TEE JAY NORTH INC 42773 11/12/2021 20211210 5,031.00 CHECK 467509 TOTAL: 5,031.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467510 12/10/2021 PRTD 129923 CONTEMPORARY INC V808571 11/10/2021 20211210 52.37 CONTEMPORARY INC V808698 11/10/2021 20211210 38.14 CONTEMPORARY INC V808700 11/10/2021 20211210 17.98 CONTEMPORARY INC V809080 11/11/2021 20211210 17.98 CHECK 467510 TOTAL: 126.47 467511 12/10/2021 PRTD 123129 TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL IN M26864 11/12/2021 20211210 777.00 CHECK 467511 TOTAL: 777.00 467512 12/10/2021 PRTD 151773 TOP GOLF USA INC 5498 11/15/2021 20211210 9,162.21 CHECK 467512 TOTAL: 9,162.21 467513 12/10/2021 PRTD 134673 TOTAL MECHANICAL SYSTEMS INC S1856 11/14/2021 20211210 1,500.00 CHECK 467513 TOTAL: 1,500.00 467514 12/10/2021 PRTD 100689 ULTIMATE SAFETY CONCEPTS INC 194264 04/28/2021 20211210 455.25 CHECK 467514 TOTAL: 455.25 467515 12/10/2021 PRTD 142790 UNDERGROUND UTILITY SPECIALTIES I 465 11/09/2021 20211210 3,335.00 CHECK 467515 TOTAL: 3,335.00 467516 12/10/2021 PRTD 146513 URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NE 2004 11/11/2021 20211210 1,980.00 CHECK 467516 TOTAL: 1,980.00 467517 12/10/2021 PRTD 146160 SERVING THE AMERICAN RINKS 737 11/12/2021 20211210 275.00 CHECK 467517 TOTAL: 275.00 467518 12/10/2021 PRTD 140009 US KIDS GOLF LLC IN2032951 11/12/2021 20211210 319.08 CHECK 467518 TOTAL: 319.08 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467519 12/10/2021 PRTD 114236 USA BLUE BOOK 792118 11/15/2021 20211210 41.95 CHECK 467519 TOTAL: 41.95 467520 12/10/2021 PRTD 103500 VALLEY PAVING INC ENG 21-2 #10 11/04/2021 20211210 345,822.25 CHECK 467520 TOTAL: 345,822.25 467521 12/10/2021 PRTD 102275 VAN ZYVERDEN INC 7089679 10/06/2021 20211210 37.31 VAN ZYVERDEN INC 7140930 10/26/2021 20211210 220.61 CHECK 467521 TOTAL: 257.92 467522 12/10/2021 PRTD 101058 VAN PAPER COMPANY 593350-00 11/09/2021 20211210 843.80 CHECK 467522 TOTAL: 843.80 467523 12/10/2021 PRTD 144209 VENN BREWING COMPANY LLC 2952 11/18/2021 20211210 183.00 CHECK 467523 TOTAL: 183.00 467524 12/10/2021 PRTD 101063 VERSATILE VEHICLES 72800 11/15/2021 20211210 207.17 CHECK 467524 TOTAL: 207.17 467525 12/10/2021 PRTD 119454 VINOCOPIA INC 0291781-IN 11/18/2021 20211210 466.75 VINOCOPIA INC 0291779-IN 11/18/2021 20211210 597.00 VINOCOPIA INC 0291778-IN 11/18/2021 20211210 711.45 VINOCOPIA INC 0291780-IN 11/18/2021 20211210 192.75 VINOCOPIA INC 0291933-IN 11/19/2021 20211210 1,368.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0292285-IN 11/23/2021 20211210 606.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0292287-IN 11/23/2021 20211210 606.25 VINOCOPIA INC 0292286-IN 11/23/2021 20211210 606.25 CHECK 467525 TOTAL: 5,154.95 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467526 12/10/2021 PRTD 120627 PERFORMANCE FOOD GROUP INC 62581238 11/12/2021 20211210 480.36 PERFORMANCE FOOD GROUP INC 62581239 11/12/2021 20211210 266.38 CHECK 467526 TOTAL: 746.74 467527 12/10/2021 PRTD 143468 PORTAGE BREWING COMPANY 001252 11/18/2021 20211210 247.50 CHECK 467527 TOTAL: 247.50 467528 12/10/2021 PRTD 101033 WINE COMPANY 189135 11/17/2021 20211210 6,977.10 WINE COMPANY 189521 11/19/2021 20211210 1,350.15 WINE COMPANY 189520 11/19/2021 20211210 1,673.45 WINE COMPANY 189522 11/19/2021 20211210 1,441.80 WINE COMPANY 190085 11/24/2021 20211210 189.65 CHECK 467528 TOTAL: 11,632.15 467529 12/10/2021 PRTD 118395 WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC E2110524 11/09/2021 20211210 386.35 CHECK 467529 TOTAL: 386.35 467530 12/10/2021 PRTD 142162 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 3088 11/19/2021 20211210 104.70 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 3087 11/19/2021 20211210 51.00 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 3084 11/19/2021 20211210 262.80 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 3085 11/19/2021 20211210 519.90 WOODEN HILL BREWING COMPANY LLC 3086 11/19/2021 20211210 51.00 CHECK 467530 TOTAL: 989.40 467531 12/10/2021 PRTD 103266 YORKDALE SHOPPES PARTNERS, LLC DEC-2021 11/16/2021 20211210 1,079.25 CHECK 467531 TOTAL: 1,079.25 467532 12/10/2021 PRTD 101091 ZIEGLER INC IN000322059 11/11/2021 20211210 589.24 ZIEGLER INC IN000326484 11/15/2021 20211210 1,660.00 City of Edina, MN A/P CASH DISBURSEMENTS JOURNAL Report generated: 12/09/2021 13:21User: LJeffersonProgram 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 467532 TOTAL: 2,249.24 NUMBER OF CHECKS 173 *** CASH ACCOUNT TOTAL *** 2,612,226.00 COUNT AMOUNT TOTAL PRINTED CHECKS 173 2,612,226.00 *** GRAND TOTAL *** 2,612,226.00 Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.C. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Alisha McAndrews, Finance Director Item Activity: Subject:Odinance No. 2021-16: Amending Chapter 2 of the City Code, Setting Fees for 2022 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Ordinance No. 2021-16 Amending City Code Chapter 2, Section 2-724 Schedule A, Setting Fees for 2022 and grant second reading. INTRODUCTION: Attached is a schedule of fees and charges to be adopted by Ordinance No. 2021-16, proposed for 2022. In summary, fee charges are in the following chapters of the City Code: Chapter 8 - Redemption of impounded animals, a $5 increase per fee is proposed. Chapter 10 - P ools and whirlpool license proposed increase of 4-5%. Chapter 12 - Includes proposed fee increase of $10 for refuse/recycling hauler's license and health service/salon/massage parlor/escort service license and $20 for tobacco sale license. Chapter 20 - Recycling service proposed increase from $11.10 to $12.90. Organics recycling service proposed increase from $13.50 to $16.50 effective July 2022. Food establishment and body art establishment licenses proposed 4-6% increases. Chapter 24 - P roposed increase of $100 per sidewalk panel replacement. Chapter 28 - Utilities: T he updated rate study recommended an increase of 5% for water and sanitary sewer charges and 8% for storm sewer charges for 2022. The increases are consistent with previous annual increases. Rates in the Morningside district will be set once we receive the 2022 water rates from the City of Minneapolis. First reading was granted December 7, 2021. ATTACHMENTS: Description Ord 2021-16 Amending Chap 2 of City Code: Setting Fees for 2022 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-16 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 2 OF THE EDINA CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Only the following described fees of Schedule A to City Code Chapter 2, Section 2-724 are amended to read as follows: Ordinance No. 2021-16 Page 2 The effective date of this Ordinance shall be January 1, 2022. Section 2. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: December 7, 2021 December 21, 2021 Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE EDINA SUN CURRENT _____________________ SEND ONE AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION BILL TO EDINA CITY CLERK Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.D. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Tracy Petersen, Assistant Director-Recreation & Facilities Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-121: Setting Parks & Recreation Fees for 2022 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-121 setting Parks and Recreation Department fees for 2022. INTRODUCTION: See attached report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: Resolution No. 2021-121 Setting Parks and Recreation Fees for 2022 Resolution No. 2021-121 Setting Parks and Recreation Fees for 2022 December 21, 2021 Mayor & City Council Tracy Petersen, Assistant Director-Recreation & Facilities Resolution No. 2021-121: Setting Parks & Recreation Fees for 2022 Information / Background: Annually the City Council is asked to review and adopt by resolution recommended fees established by the Parks & Recreation Department for 2022. Fee Philosophy Traditionally fees are set based upon several factors such as a corresponding market comparison of similar or like offerings at neighboring communities, fee history, customer satisfaction, operating budget and cost recovery expectations. The blend of these philosophies establishes a fee range that provides equal opportunity, affordability, and accessibility to users and guests that utilize our facilities. It also provides an opportunity to cover costs whenever possible. Factors impacting Costs Several factors are considered when establishing cost increases to the proposed 2022 rates. Among the most notable are: Ability to recruit, train and retain high quality and adequate number of staff for programs and facilities. Maintain a high level of customer service at each of our facilities. Ability to navigate cost pressures, supply chain issues and increased costs with contracting and specialty repairs due to high demand for trade providers/vendors. Maintain a quality and valued product that is well operated and maintained. STAFF REPORT Page 2 Revenue Sources Each facility’s revenue sources are unique and are highlighted below in greater detail: Aquatic Center Increases are being proposed for season passes and the Flowrider. These rates have not been increased since 2020. Increases are also being proposed for daily admission and lane rentals. These rates have not been increased since 2018. Cost of continued repairs to mechanical and operational items at the aquatic center continue to be a key factor. On-going challenges with seasonal pay will continue to impact our operational pricing structure. Braemar Golf Operations The League Prepayment categories were presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission and approved with a slight increase for the 2022 season. After further review, staff has updated and proposes all of the prepayment league rates with no change for 2022. A member in a league will pay the same rate as they did in 2021. These rates have been determined utilizing a standard season duration of either 17 weeks or 21 weeks. Increases are being recommended for the player’s card due to an upgraded product and service. This includes additional player’s card events and a remodeled golf course. This is the first price increase since the remodel. There is a new dome online reservation and prepayment fee being recommended for use at the golf dome. Braemar Ice Arena/Field An increase of the prime-time, non-prime-time and holiday ice rates at the arena is being recommended. These rates have not been increased since 2020. An increase in the prime rate for Braemar Field is also being recommended as well as an increase in the youth athletic association rental rates. Both of these rates have not been increased since 2020. Braemar Field fee increases for youth athletic associations will go into effect for the fall of 2022 season. On-going challenges with seasonal pay will continue to impact our operational pricing structure. Centennial Lakes Park Some market comparison increases are being proposed for amenity rentals, building and amphitheater rentals for the coming season. On-going challenges with seasonal pay will continue to impact our operational pricing structure. STAFF REPORT Page 3 Edinborough Park Various increases are being proposed for admissions, passes, memberships, building rentals and birthday party packages for 2022. Birthday party package proposed rates are more in line with other facilities offering similar type packages. On-going challenges with seasonal pay will continue to impact our operational pricing structure. Parks and Recreation Many of the rental fees for athletic fields, park buildings and picnic shelters are proposed with a minimal increase for the upcoming season. These proposed fees have been adjusted for consistency and more in-line with current practices. Staff is not recommending any increase to the per participant user fee for athletic fields, gymnasiums, or outdoor rinks. Staff is recommending the discontinuation of the membership fee at the Senior Center and moving to a more equitable fee-based program approach. Staff is recommending small changes to the building rental fees at the Senior Center to be more consistent with other park building rentals throughout our system. Action Requested: Staff requests that the City Council review and adopt resolution 2021-121 approving the proposed 2022 Parks and Recreation Department fees with a revision to the Braemar Golf League Prepayment Fees. The Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed and recommended the proposed fees at the December 14, 2021, meeting with the exception of the golf league rate that was revised since their review. This fee structure includes Braemar Arena & Field, Braemar Golf Course & Golf Dome, Centennial Lakes Park, Edinborough Park, Edina Aquatic Center and Recreation. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-121 SETTING PARKS & RECREATION FEES FOR 2022 BEHALF OF THE CITY OF EDINA WHEREAS, annually the City Council is asked to review and adopt by resolution recommended fees established by the Parks and Recreation Department for 2022. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council does hereby approve and set the following Parks and Recreation fees for 2022. PARKS & RECREATION PROGRAMS ADULT ACTIVITIES Garden Plot 2021 2022 Community Garden Plot: 10 X 10 $45 $45 Community Garden Plot: 10 X 15 $50 $50 AQUATIC CENTER Season Tickets 2021 2022 Resident Purchased by April 30, 2022 (Early Bird Rate): Individual or First Family Member $69 $78 Each Additional Member $63 $71 Resident Purchased After April 30, 2022 (Regular Rate): Individual or First Family Member $76.50 $88 Each Additional Member $70.25 $81 Non-Resident Purchased by April 30, 2022 (Early Bird Rate): Individual or First Family Member $88.50 $100 Each Additional Member $80.50 $91 Non-Resident Purchased After April 30, 2022 (Regular Rate): Individual or First Family Member $96 $110 Each Additional Member $88.50 $101 FlowRider 2021 2022 Daily Admission FlowRider Additional/per person $5.58 $6.50 Rental and Instruction: 30 minutes $60 $80 Rental and Instruction: 1 hour $110 $150 Daily Admissions 2021 2022 Daily Admission (resident & non-resident) $10.70 $12.10 Admission after 5 p.m. $8.40 $9.25 Daily Admission FlowRider Additional/per person $5.58 $6.50 Group Reservation Rate $9.50 $10 Lane Rentals 2021 2022 Aqua Jets $16.75/hr $19/hr Edina Swim Club Only $12/hr $14/hr Birthday Party Packages - 2 hours 2021 2022 High Seas Package $235 TBD Twilight Package (to be renamed) $210 TBD BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Green Fees 2021 2022 Weekday 18 Hole Daily Fee "Prepayment Online" $49.50 $49.50 Weekday 18 Hole Daily Fee $55 $55 Weekday 18 Hole Player's Club Member "Prepayment Online" $36.90 $36.90 Weekday 18 Hole Player's Club Member $41 $41 Weekday 18 Hole Daily Fee: Senior "Prepayment Online" $44.10 $44.10 Weekday 18 Hole Daily Fee: Senior $49 $49 Weekday 18 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior "Prepayment Online" $34.20 $34.20 Weekday 18 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior $38 $38 Weekday 18 Hole Daily Fee: Junior "Prepayment Online" $24.30 $24.30 Weekday 18 Hole Daily Fee: Junior $27 $27 Weekday 9 Hole Daily Fee "Prepayment Online" $27 $27 Weekday 9 Hole Daily Fee $30 $30 Weekday 9 Hole Player's Club Member "Prepayment Online" $21.60 $21.60 Weekday 9 Hole Player's Club Member $24 $24 Weekday 9 Hole Daily Fee: Senior "Prepayment Online" $25.20 $25.20 Weekday 9 Hole Daily Fee: Senior $28 $28 Weekday 9 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior "Prepayment Online" $18.90 $18.90 Weekday 9 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior $21 $21 Weekday 9 Hole Daily Fee: Junior "Prepayment Online" $16.20 $16.20 Weekday 9 Hole Daily Fee: Junior $18 $18 Weekend 18 Hole Daily Fee "Prepayment Online" $54.90 $54.90 Weekend 18 Hole Daily Fee $61 $61 Weekend 18 Hole Player's Club Member "Prepayment Online" $41.40 $41.40 Weekend 18 Hole Player's Club Member $46 $46 Weekend 18 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior "Prepayment Online" $38.70 $38.70 Weekend 18 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior $43 $43 Weekend 18 Hole Daily Fee: Junior after 1 p.m. "Prepayment Online" $27 $27 Weekend 18 Hole Daily Fee: Junior after 1 p.m. $30 $30 Weekend 9 Hole Daily Fee "Prepayment Online" $30.60 $30.60 Weekend 9 Hole Daily Fee $34 $34 Weekend 9 Hole Player's Club Member "Prepayment Online" $25.20 $25.20 Weekend 9 Hole Player's Club Member $28 $28 Weekend 9 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior "Prepayment Online" $23.40 $23.40 Weekend 9 Hole Player's Club Member: Senior $26 $26 Weekend 9 Hole Daily Fee: Junior after 1 p.m. "Prepayment Online" $18 $18 Weekend 9 Hole Daily Fee: Junior after 1 p.m. $20 $20 League Prepayment Weekday Morning 9-Holes – 21 weeks/standard league season $360 $360 League Prepayment Weekday Evening 9-Holes – 17 weeks/standard league season $300 $300 League Prepayment Weekday Morning 18-Holes – 21 weeks/standard league season $639 $639 League Prepayment Weekend Mornings 18-Holes – 21 weeks/standard league season $711 $711 Player's Club 2021 2022 Platinum Player's Club: Edina Resident $90 $99 Gold Player's Club: Non-Resident $125 $139 League $90 $99 Computerized Handicaps 2021 2022 Player's Club Member $36 $41 Non-Player's Club Member $44 $49 Club Rental and Push Carts 2021 2022 Championship 18 Club Rental: Premium $45 $45 Academy 9 Club Rental $10 $10 Push Carts - 9 Hole $5 $5 Push Carts - 18 Hole $9 $9 Golf Cars 2021 2022 18 Hole Daily Fee $33 $33 18 Hole Player's Club Member $31 $31 9 Hole Daily Fee $20 $20 Hole Player's Club Member $19 $19 Golf Outing 2021 2022 Monday Morning Shotgun $81.50 $81.50 Friday Morning Shotgun $85 $85 Monday & Friday Afternoon Shotgun $99 $99 Monday-Thursday Tee Time Start Outing $66.50 $66.50 Friday-Sunday Tee Time Start Outing $70.50 $70.50 Drive, Chip and Putt Clinics $49 $49 Braemar Courtyard 2021 2022 Single Lane: Edina Resident $20/hr $20/hr Single Lane: Player's Club Member $20/hr $20/hr Single Lane: Non-Resident $25/hr $25/hr Half Court $75/hr $75/hr Full Court $150/hr $150/hr Contracted Programs 2021 2022 Golf Professionals Varies Varies Braemar Room 2021 2022 Cooper Conference Room: M-Th 9 a.m.-5 p.m. $40/hr $40/hr Cooper Conference Room: M-Th after 5 p.m. $50/hr $50/hr Cooper Conference Room: Fri-Sun and Holidays $50/hr $50/hr Hoyt Blanchard Room: M-Th 9 a.m.-5 p.m. $75/hr $75/hr Hoyt Blanchard Room: M-Th after 5 p.m. $85/hr $85/hr Hoyt Blanchard Room: Fri-Sun and Holidays $85/hr $85/hr Braemar Driving Range 2021 2022 Large Bucket: Daily Fee $10 $10 Large Bucket: Player's Club Member $9 $9 Small Bucket $6 $6 ACADEMY 9 COURSE Greens Fees 2021 2022 Academy 9 Daily Fee "Prepayment Online" $17.10 $17.10 Academy 9 Daily Fee $19 $19 Academy 9 Player's Club Member "Prepayment Online" $14.40 $14.40 Academy 9 Player's Club Member $16 $16 Junior "Prepayment Online" $10.80 $10.80 Junior $12 $12 Youth on Course - MGA $5 $5 League Prepayment Academy 9 – 17 weeks/standard league season $196 $196 Golf Cars 2021 2022 Academy 9 Daily Fee $16 $16 Academy 9 Players Club Member $15 $15 Push Carts $5 $5 Player's Club 2021 2022 Resident Player's Club $30 $30 Non-Resident Player's Club $50 $50 League $30 $30 Adult Annual Pass $425 NA Junior Annual Pass $350 NA GOLF DOME 2021 2022 Large Bucket Daily Fee $11 NA Large Bucket Player's Club Member $10 NA Time Golf 1/2 hour $16 $16 Time Golf 1/2 hour Player's Club Member $15 $15 Time Golf 1/4 hour: Additional Time Only $8 $8 Hourly Field Rental $175 $175 Promotional Bucket (senior, youth, special, etc.) $8 NA Monday-Thursday Time Golf 1/2 hour: Senior Player's Club $8 $8 Golf Dome Guest Professional Instruction Fee: 1/2 hour $25 $25 Golf Dome Guest Professional Instruction Fee: 1 hour $40 $40 Golf Dome Legacy Professional Instruction Fee $11/lesson $11/lesson Time Golf 1 hour $30 $30 Time Golf 2 hours $56 $56 Time Golf 1 hour Player's Club Member $28 $28 Time Golf 2 hours Player's Club Member $52 $52 Promotional Time Golf 1 hour $25 $25 High School Time Golf 1 hour per bay $25 $25 Online Reservation and Prepayment NA $65 Online Reservation and Prepayment Player’s Club NA $55 Player's Club 2021 2022 Resident Golf Dome Player's Club $30 $30 Non-Resident Golf Dome Player's Club $50 $50 EDINBOROUGH PARK Pool & Track Daily Admission 2021 2022 Residents and Non-Residents $7.44 $8.37 Pool & Track 10 Admission Pass 2021 2022 Residents and Non-Residents $69.75 $75 Pool & Track Annual Membership 2021 2022 Resident Individual $300 $330 Each Additional Member $120 $135 Non-Resident Individual $335 $370 Each Additional Member $135 $155 Locker Rental $0.25 $0.25 Birthday Party Packages/2 Hours 2021 2022 The Peak Package $100 $150 The Adventure Package $180 $225 Fam Jam Package $280 $325 The BIG Birthday Adventure Package $360 $425 The Ultimate Birthday Adventure Package $540 NA Building Rentals/Non-Exclusive Rentals/Hr 2021 2022 Theater $250 $300 Theater with Audio-Visual Equipment $300 $350 Pool (swim team only) $60 $66 Pool Other $65 $72 Commercial Photo Shoot (hourly) 2021 2022 Any Park Area Blocked Off $250 NA Theater $250 NA EDINBOROUGH PARK "PLAYPARK" Playpark Daily Admission 2021 2022 Resident and Non-Resident $7.44 $8.37 Children Under 1 year-old Free Free Adults Free w/paid child Free w/paid child Group Reservation Rate $6 $7 Admission After 5 p.m. (summer only) $5.50 $6 Playpark - 10 Admission Pass 2021 2022 Resident and Non-Resident $69.75 $75 Playpark Annual Membership 2021 2022 Resident Individual $95 $110 Each Additional Member $72.25 $87.25 Non-Resident Individual $122.50 $137.50 Each Additional Member $100 $115 Total Facility Daily Admission 2021 2022 Resident $12.55 $15 Non-Resident $12.55 $15 CENTENNIAL LAKES PARK Rental Concession Items 2021 2022 Paddle Boats: 4 -person boat /per 45 minutes $15 $20 Winter Sled/Trainer per hour $8 $8 Ice Skate $6 $8 Fishing Pole NA $3 Building Rentals 2021 2022 1/2 room, Monday-Thursday, 6 hours $300 $425 1/2 day room, Sunday, 6 hours $450 $600 Full room Friday or Saturday, 10 hours $1,250 $1,625 Full room Monday-Thursday, 6 hours NA $600 Full room, Sunday, 6 hours NA $900 Amphitheater Rental (3-hour rental) $300 $425 Commercial Photo Shoot $50/hr $50/hr Lawn Games 2021 2022 9 Hole $6 $6 18 Hole $10 $10 Lawn Bowling Court $20/hr $20/hr Croquet Court $35/hr $35/hr Scottish Links $5 $5 ARENA Rates 2021 2022 Prime Hourly Rate (9/16 - 3/15) $248 $255 Prime Season Late Night: After 9 p.m. $185 $190 Off-Season $185 $190 Off-Season Late Night: After 9 p.m. $145 $150 Off-Season Tournament $200 $200 In-Season Early Morning $170 $170 Early Morning Training Ice (6-8 a.m.) $105 $115 Backyard Rink Early Morning/Undesireable Ice $75 $75 Backyard Rink - Prime - EHA Day/Late Night $150 $155 Open Skating (youth and adult) $5 $5 Skate Rental $5 $5 Birthday Party Open Skating $99 $99 Room Rental $30/hr $30/hr Futsal $35 $35 Holiday Ice: Arena $291 $300 Holiday Ice: Backyard $205 $220 Tournament Headquarter Room $75/day $75/day Event Vendor Fee $50/event $50/event Fire Ice 10% discount 10% discount Equipment Storage $25/day; $50/wknd $25/day; $50/wknd Memberships (set the first week of September) 2021 2022 Open Skating Membership Resident Family: First 2 Members $120 $120 Each Additional Member $10 $10 Maximum (7 persons) $165 $165 Resident Individual $110 $110 Non-Resident Family: First 2 Members $130 $130 Each Additional Member $10 $10 Maximum (7 persons) $180 $180 Non-Resident Individual $120 $120 Open Skating Punch Card $50 $50 Skate Rental Punch Card (buy 10 get 1) $50 $50 Arena - Activity Admissions 2021 2022 Non-School Day Youth Open Hockey $5/child $5/child Developmental Ice for Hockey and Figure Skating: Resident $10 $10 Developmental Ice for Hockey and Figure Skating: Non-Resident $12 $12 Developmental Skating Resident Punch Card (buy 10 get 1) $100 $100 Developmental Skating Non-Resident Punch Card (buy 10 get 1) $120 $120 Pro's Ice $15 $15 Pro's Ice Unlimited Pass $300/month $300/month Pro's Ice Punch Card (buy 20 sessions get 1 free) $300 $300 Braemar Ice Show $7/child & senior; $12/adult $7/child & senior; $12/adult Arena - Adult Activities 2021 2022 Adult Open Hockey $5 $5 Adult Open Hockey Punch Card (buy 10 get 1free) $50 $50 BRAEMAR FIELD (Dome) Hourly Rates 2021 2022 Full Field Prime (M-F 4-10 p.m./Sat and Sun 7 a.m.-10 p.m.) $400 $410 1/2 Field Prime (M-F 4-10 p.m./Sat and Sun 7 a.m.-10 p.m.) $200 $205 1/4 Field Prime (M-F 4-10 p.m./Sat and Sun 7 a.m.-10 p.m.) $100 $110 Early Morning/Late Night $325 $335 1/2 Field Early Morning/Late Night $190 $200 1/4 Field Early Morning/Late Night $100 $125 70' Batting Cage: 1/2 hour $30 $30 50' Batting Cage: 1/2 hour $25 $25 Full Field Non-Prime $175 $175 1/2 Field Non-Prime $80 $80 1/4 Field Non-Prime $40 $40 Open Turf Time $5 $5 Fire Dome 10% discount 10% discount Individual Season Pass $125 $125 Field Punch Card $50 $50 Birthday Party (1 hour) $99 $99 Edina Athletic Association Rentals Hourly Rates (Baseball, Football, Lacrosse and Soccer) 2021 2022 Primetime: 5-10 p.m. (Jan. - April)/Monday-Friday $371 $380 1/2 Field Primetime: 5-10 p.m. (Jan. - April)/Monday-Friday $186 $190 Primetime: 8 a.m.-10 p.m. (Jan. - April)/Saturdays $371 $380 1/2 Field Primetime: 8 a.m.-10 p.m. (Jan. - April)/Saturdays $186 $190 Primetime: 8 a.m.-5 p.m. (Jan. - April)/Sundays $371 $380 1/2 Field Primetime: 8 a.m.-5 p.m. (Jan. - April)/Sundays $186 $190 Off Hours: All Other (Jan. - April)/All $299 $305 1/2 Field Off Hours: All Other (Jan. - April)/All $150 $153 Shoulder Season: All Hours October-December $348 $355 1/2 Field Shoulder Season: All Hours October-December $174 $178 No Dome Public Field Rental (May 1 - Oct. 15) 2021 2022 Resident: Full Field $65 $65 Resident: 1/2 Field $35 $35 Non-Resident: Full Field $100 $100 Non-Resident: 1/2 Field $50 $50 Braemar Field - Activities and Events 2021 2022 Tot Time $5/person/per session $5/person/per session Open Soccer $5/person/per session $5/person/per session Family Time at Braemar Field $5/person/per session $5/person/per session Open Dome Time at Braemar Field $5/person/per session $5/person/per session PARK DEPARTMENT RENTALS General Park Areas 2021 2022 Resident Use/per hour $55 $60 Resident Use/per day $145 $180 Non-Resident Use/per hour NA $70 Non-Resident Use/per day NA $210 Commercial Use (i.e. TV)/per hour Varies Varies Commercial Use with Light/per hour Varies Varies Mobile Food Unit $30 $30 Mobile Food Unit Annual Pass $550 $550 Maintenance/Custodial/per hour $55 $55 Athletic Fields 2021 2022 Resident Per Field/per day $142 $180 Non-Resident Per Field/per day NA $210 Per Field/Per Hour: Resident $55 $60 Per Field/Per Hour: Non-Resident $65 $70 Per Field/Per hour with Lights $79 NA Lights add-on NA $15/hr Turf Full Field (Pamela & Braemar)/Per Hour: Resident $65 $70 Turf Full Field (Pamela & Braemar)/Per Hour: Non-Resident $100 $100 Turf Half Field (Pamela & Braemar)/Per Hour: Resident $40 $45 Turf Half Field (Pamela & Braemar)/Per Hour: Non-Resident $55 $65 Maintenance/Custodial: per hour $55 $55 Athletic Association Clinics and Camps/per day/per field $50 $50 Athletic Association Tournaments Varies $180 Sand Volleyball Court/per day $70 NA Sand Volleyball Court/per hour $15 $15 Van Valkenburg/Courtney Fields 2021 2022 Per Field/Per Day: Includes Building - Residents $170 $200 Per Field/Per Day: Includes Building - Non-Residents $200 $235 Rosland Park Pathway (Scheduled Walk/Run Events) 2021 2022 Per Day $250 $275 ARNESON ACRES 2021 2022 Terrace Room & Gazebo Half-Day (8 a.m.-2 p.m.; 4-10 p.m.) $280 $280 Full-Day (8 a.m.-10 p.m.) $380 $380 PICNIC SHELTER RENTALS 2021 2022 Chowen Park: Half-Day $30 $35 Chowen Park: Full-Day $46 $51 Fred Richards Park: Half-Day $30 $35 Fred Richards Park: Full-Day $46 $51 Sherwood Park: Half-Day $30 $35 Sherwood Park: Full-Day $46 $51 Wooddale Park: Half-Day $30 $35 Wooddale Park: Full-Day $46 $51 Utley Park: Half-Day $30 $35 Utley Park: Full-Day $46 $51 Rosland Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Rosland Park: Full-Day $150 $155 PARK SHELTER BUILDINGS RENTALS 2021 2022 Arden Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Arden Park: Full-Day $110 $115 Cornelia School Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Cornelia School Park: Full-Day $110 $115 Countryside Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Countryside Park: Full-Day $110 $115 Pamela Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Pamela Park: Full-Day $110 $115 Todd Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Todd Park: Full-Day $110 $115 Walnut Ridge Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Walnut Ridge Park: Full-Day $110 $115 Weber Park: Half-Day $75 $80 Weber Park: Full-Day $110 $115 EDINA ATHLETIC ASSOCIATIONS 2021 2022 Field User Fee/per participant $13 $13 Gymnasium User Fee/per Participant $13 $13 Outdoor Hockey Rink User Fee/per participant $13 $13 Inclusion Fee/per participant $1 $1 EDINA SENIOR CENTER Fees 2021 2022 Edina Senior Center Membership $20/$30 NA Room Rental 2021 2022 Aquarium Room: Resident $25/hr $25/hr Aquarium Room: Non-Resident $30/hr $30/hr Classroom 1, 2, 3 or 4: Resident (2 hr. minimum) $45/hr $45/hr Classroom 1, 2, 3 or 4: Non-Resident (2 hr. minimum) $50/hr $50/hr Classroom 1, 2, 3 or 4: Resident more than 4 hours $170 NA Classroom 1, 2, 3 or 4: Non-Resident more than 4 hours $220 NA Grandview Room: Resident (2 hr. minimum) $65/hr $65/hr Grandview Room: Non-Resident (2 hr. minimum) $70/hr $70/hr Fireside Room: Per Day - Resident $300/4-hr $480 Fireside Room: Per Day - Non-Resident $330/4-hr $720 Fireside Room: Per Hour - Resident (2 hr. minimum) $80/hr NA Fireside Room: Per Hour - Non-Resident (2 hr. minimum) $85/hr NA Wall Art Display Rental 15% of sale 15% of sale Dated: December 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 Dec. 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: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.E. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Joe Abood, General Manager - Braemar Golf Course Item Activity: Subject:Approve Braemar Golf Course Restaurant Lease Second Amendment Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the second lease amendment for Lancer Food and Beverage, LLC. INTRODUCTION: The City of Edina and Lancer Food and Beverage, LLC (DBA Red River Kitchen) entered into a lease agreement for the Braemar Golf Course restaurant operations on June 1, 2018. The original agreement was first amended on December 15, 2020. Operations include catering and events, restaurant services and beverage cart sales for the course and patrons. The 2020/2021 operating seasons have been substantially disrupted due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions for restaurants. In June of 2020 during the joint City Council and Park Commission meeting, staff asked the City Council if they were open to providing certain aspects of relief to our tenant partners. T he City Council provided informal feedback that they were open to providing some type of relief. Staff has negotiated a second amendment to the original lease. This amendment will assist Red River Kitchen in maintaining a sustainable food and beverage operation at the Braemar Golf Course and strengthen its partnership for the future. T here are three key elements to this amendment. I. The City is willing to reduce the base rent for the lease during the off-peak season when traffic at the Braemar Golf Course is minimal, provided the tenant agrees to an increase in the base rent during the peak season. II. The City and Tenant are willing to extend the initial term of the lease to a date during the off-peak season to avoid a possible change in food and beverage service during the peak season. III. T he City and Tenant are willing to remove the Banquet Deck from the Leased Premises space and now provide the space as Common Area for all patrons. These amendments best position our tenant partner to continue to operate a valued service to our golf patrons as well as provides a revenue share that increases during peak times and decreases during off-peak times. T he City Attorney has drafted the attached lease amendment and all parties agree to the terms. ATTACHMENTS: Description Second Lease Amendment 1 218891v4 SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT This SECOND AMENDMENT TO LEASE AGREEMENT (“Amendment”) dated ___________, 20__ is entered into, by and between the CITY OF EDINA, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (“City”) and LANCER FOOD AND BEVERAGE, LLC, an Oklahoma limited liability company, doing business as Red River Kitchen (“Tenant”). R E C I T A L S: WHEREAS, the City and Tenant’s predecessor, O’Reilly Custom 4, LLC (“O’Reilly”), entered into a “Lease Agreement” commencing on June 1, 2018 (the “Original Lease”) which Lease was amended by a First Amendment to Lease Agreement as approved by the City Council on December 15, 2020 (“First Amendment”) (collectively the “Original Lease” and the “First Amendment” are collectively referred to herein as the “Lease”); and WHEREAS, the City recognizes the challenges faced in the restaurant industry during the Covid-19 pandemic as well as the off-peak season at a golf course establishment; and WHEREAS, the City would like to assist Tenant in maintaining a sustainable food and beverage operation at the Braemar Golf Course and continue its partnership in the future; and WHEREAS, to provide the necessary assistance in maintaining the food and beverage service at Braemar Golf Course the City is willing to reduce the base rent for the lease during the off-peak season when traffic at the Braemar Golf Course is minimal, provided the tenant agrees to an increase in the base rent during the peak season; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the initial term of the lease to a date during the off- peak season to avoid a possible change in food and beverage service during the peak season; and WHEREAS, the City and Tenant also desire to remove Banquet Deck from the Leased Premises space and providing the space as Common Area; WHEREAS, the Tenant and the City desire to amend the current Lease Agreement to reflect the foregoing terms. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, covenants and conditions herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by the Tenant and the City, the Tenant and the City agree that the Lease Agreement is hereby modified and amended as follows: 1. Amendment to Lease Reference Pages. The Leased Premises Area, Tenant’s Proportionate Share, Termination Date, Term of Lease and Base Rent in the Lease Reference Pages are amended to read as follows: 2 218891v4 LEASED PREMISES AREA: 6,043 sq. ft. TENANT’S PROPORTIONATE SHARE: 25% TERMINATION DATE: December 31, 2023 TERM OF LEASE: Sixty-seven (67) months beginning on the Commencement Date and ending on the Termination Date (unless sooner terminated pursuant to this Lease) with options for two (2) additional 5-year terms BASE RENT: April 1-September 30th: 12.5% or gross sales October 1st – March 31st: 10.5% of gross sales See Article 4 for Rent, for adjustments to Base Rent 2. Amendment to Article 1. Article 1 of the Lease Agreement is amended to read as follows: Subject to the terms, covenants and conditions of this Lease, the City does hereby lease and let unto Tenant, and Tenant does hereby hire, lease and take from the City, approximately 6,043 square feet of upper level space in the Clubhouse containing the commercial kitchen, customer service counters, Banquet Room, and areas specifically marked on said Exhibit B (the “Premises”). The Premises consists of approximately twenty-five percent (25%) of the total Clubhouse area, excluding patio areas. 3. Amendment to Article 2. Article 2.F. of the Lease Agreement is amended to read as follows: F. Tenant, its employees, agents, guests and invitees shall have the reasonable non- exclusive right to use the Common Areas (as hereinafter defined) of the Facility, including, but not limited to, upper level circulation corridors, lower and upper level restrooms, Club Room seating area, outdoor patio near front entrance of Clubhouse, upper level of Academy 9 Clubhouse, Banquet Deck, outdoor deck abutting restaurant, parking facilities, sidewalks, driveways, access ways, and common hallways as shown on Exhibit “C” (“Common Areas”) and as further detailed under Article 7 and the City shall have the full control, management and direction of the Common Areas. The Club Room will be the primary restaurant patron seating area. 3 218891v4 4. Amendment to Article 3. Article 3.A. of the Lease Agreement is amended to read as follows: A. The Initial term of this lease shall be sixty-seven (67) months as set forth in the Reference Pages (hereafter referred to as the “Initial Term”) upon the rentals and subject to the conditions set forth in this Lease, and the Exhibits attached hereto. The Commencement Date and the Termination Date are specifically subject to the provisions of Article 6 hereof. 5. Amendment to Article 3. Article 3.A.4 of the Lease Agreement is amended to read as follows: 4. If the Renewal Options are exercised, the parties will review and renegotiate Rent, CAM and other fees under the Renewal Term to better reflect taxes and actual costs and usage at the time the renewal is exercised, not to exceed 10% of the unadjusted base rates. If the parties cannot agree on these terms, no renewal will take effect. 6. Amendment to Article 4. Article 4.B. of the Lease Agreement is amended to read as follows: B. The Rent shall be adjusted for the remainder of the Initial Term (beginning on January 1, 2022) only as follows: Peak Months April 1 – September 30th: thirteen and a half percent (13.5%) of Tenant’s gross sales Off-Peak Months October 1 – March 31st: zero percent (0.0%) of Tenant’s gross sales up to $50,000.00 and six percent (6%) of Tenant’s gross sales over and above $50,000.00 7. Amendment to Exhibits. Exhibits B and C of the Lease Agreement are amended as provided in Exhibits B and C attached (no Exhibit A to the Amendment is provided). 8. Lease Terms. Except as specifically modified or amended by this Amendment, the City and Tenant agree that all of the terms and conditions of the Lease are in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the day and year first above written. [The remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank. Signature pages follow.] 4 218891v4 CITY OF EDINA By:________________________________ James Hovland, Mayor By:_________________________________ Scott Neal, City Manager 5 218891v4 LANCER FOOD AND BEVERAGE, LLC By: Matt King, Its Managing Director THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Campbell, Knutson Professional Association Grand Oak Office Center I 860 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 290 Eagan, MN 55121 Telephone: (651) 452-5000 AMP 6 218891v4 EXHIBIT B Premises Tenant Premises – Main Level Restaurant Kitchen – 1,978 square feet – Green Banquet Kitchen – 364 square feet – Red Banquet Room & Bar – 3,452 square feet – Orange Total Tenant Premises – Main Level – 5,794 square feet Banquet Deck – Blue (removed from Tenant Premises and added to Common Areas, Exhibit C) 7 218891v4 Tenant Premises – Lower Level Dry Storage Kitchen – 108 square feet – Green Dry Storage Beverage Cart – 91 square feet – Green Walk-in Cooler Beverage Cart – 50 square feet – Green Total Tenant Premises – Lower Level – 249 square feet 8 218891v4 EXHIBIT C Common Areas Common Areas – Main level Restrooms – 33 square feet - Pink Banquet Entrance – 670 square feet - Pink Restaurant Front Patio – 920 square feet - Pink Clubroom – 1,140 square feet - Pink Restaurant Deck – 2,241 - square feet – Pink Banquet Deck – 1,118 - square feet – Orange Total Common Areas – Main Level 6,519 square feet Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.F. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Josh Furbish, Edina Liquor General Manager Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Edina Liquor Store Study Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve request for purchase for a store location study for Edina Liquor with Dakota Worldwide Corporation for $30,500. INTRODUCTION: The Edina Liquor store space study will include a competitive market analysis of multiple retail liquor stores in the metro area including municipal operations, neighboring independent competitors, and big box retailers. The study will include store sizes & square footage, amenities offered such as private tasting/educational spaces and register counts as well as product selection including non-alcohol offerings like barware and home bar tools supplies to identify additional revenue opportunities. Through the study Edina Liquor will gain insights and data for potential geographic opportunities to expand our operation in addition to recommendations on current locations and store footprint. We will also receive a mathematical model for the revenue impact that a new location may have on existing locations as well as potential market share gained from competitors. This study will help Edina Liquor ensure that we are offering a positive, comfortable and accessible customer experience to our residents and bordering communities residents to maintain and grow a best in class operation within our industry. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Edina Liquor Store Location Study Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12200009 Department:Edina Liquor - Grandview Buyer:Josh Furbish Date: 12/15/2021 Requisition Description:Edina Liquor Store Space Study Vendor:DAKOTA WORLDWIDE CORPORATION INC Cost:$30,500.00 REPLACEMENT or NEW:NEW - NEW PURCHASE SOURCE:QUOTE/BD - QUOTE/BID DESCRIPTION:Liquor store location, size and market analysis. BUDGET IMPACT: Edina Liquor Fund, within budget Environmental Impact - item specific: 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT:Analysis of location convenience & size compared to market competition ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:NA Vehicle - Make/Model/Year requested vehicle:N/A Vehicle - Make/Model/Year current vehicle (if replacement): N/A Vehicle - Does purchase meet Green Fleet Recommendations? - Vehicle - If does not meet Green Fleet Recommendations, justification: - MPG: Carbon Emissions: Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.G. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Jeff Elasky, Deputy Chief Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Three 2022 Toyota Hybrid Highlanders for Investigations Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase for three 2022 Toyota Hybrid Highlanders for Investigations from Burnsville Automotive for $117,981.00. INTRODUCTION: The three Toyota Hybrid Highlanders are replacements for three 2022 Hyundai Hybrid Santa Fe's that were approved at the November 16, 2021 Council meeting. When the order was placed for the Santa Fe's, the dealership informed me that Hyundai was no longer accepting new vehicle orders. I was able to find a Toyota dealership that was still honoring state contract pricing and was accepting new vehicle orders. The cost difference between the Hyundai Santa Fe and Toyota Highlander is $6,738.00 per vehicle. The cost difference will be split between the police department and Sustainability. These vehicles are on the equipment replacement schedule and will not increase the allotted fleet. Funding is through the Equipment Replacement account/Sustainability and are in budget. All vehicles meet the Green Fleet recommendations of better MPG than the previous models. This order was reviewed by Sustainability and approved to meet the Green Fleet recommendations. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request to Purchase: Three 2022 Toyota Hybrid Highlanders Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12200008 Department:Police Buyer:Jeffrey Elasky Date: 12/03/2021 Requisition Description:Three (3) Hybrid Toyota Vehicles Vendor:BURNSVILLE AUTOMOTIVE INC Cost:$117,981.00 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:STATE K - STATE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION:Hybrid vs. gas engine, but fuel economy, lower C02 BUDGET IMPACT: Equipment replacement Environmental Impact - item specific: 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:Less Co2 gasses Vehicle - Make/Model/Year requested vehicle:2022 Toyota Hybrid Highlander Vehicle - Make/Model/Year current vehicle (if replacement): 2015 Chevy Traverse Vehicle - Does purchase meet Green Fleet Recommendations? YES - YES Vehicle - If does not meet Green Fleet Recommendations, justification: - MPG:35 vs. 19 Carbon Emissions: Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.H. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Aaron White, Lieutenant Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: E911 Call Handling System Hardware Refresh Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Request for Purchase of hardware refresh for dispatch E911 Call Handling System (CHS-1) with Independent Emergency Services LLC for $99,947. INTRODUCTION: This purchase represents Edina’s share of required system maintenance on our E911 Call Handling System (CHS-1). The system is used for answering 911 calls in our dispatch center and is a resource shared by Allina Health, Hennepin County, Hennepin Healthcare, the City of Minneapolis, and the City of Edina with project management oversight provided by the Metropolitan Emergency Services Board. This project involves the replacement of computing and networking hardware in each of the 911 dispatch centers and the two shared data centers. T his maintenance will extend the useful life of the system and assure reliable 911 call handling. Edina’s share of $99,947 represents approximately 7% of the total system upgrade cost of $1,500,510. T his project will be funded entirely with E911 funds and is within budget. Staff recommends approval of this request for purchase and associated agreements. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: E911 Call Handling System Hardware Refresh CHS-1 Hardware Refresh Agreement Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100245 Department:Police Buyer:Aaron White Date: 12/07/2021 Requisition Description:E911 Call Handling System Hardware Refresh Vendor:INDEPENDENT EMERGENCY SERVICES LLC Cost:$99,947.00 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:SERVIC K - SERVICE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION:Share of required maintenance on E911 call handling system BUDGET IMPACT: Funded with E911 budget, within budget Environmental Impact - item specific: 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT:Critical public safety (911) infrastructure ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:No new impact, possible improvement in electronic equipment efficiency 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: PURCHASE AGREEMENT for a HARDWARE REFRESH / UPGRADE FOR THE FIVE-AGENCY CONSORTIUM SHARED / HOSTED VESTA 9-1-1 CALL HANDLING SYSTEM THIS PURCHASE AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), made this _____ day of _______________ , 2021, by and between INDEPENDENT EMERGENCY SERVICES, LLC, a limited liability corporation (the “Contractor”), and Allina Health System d/b/a Allina Health Emergency Medical Services, Hennepin County, City of Edina, City of Minneapolis, and Hennepin Healthcare System, Inc. d/b/a Hennepin County Medical Center (individually, “Buyer” and collectively, "Buyers"), which own and operate individual Public Safety Answering Points ("PSAPs"), and the Metropolitan Emergency Services Board ("MESB") which will serve as Contract Manager for the Buyers. WHEREAS, on May 12, 2014 the Contractor and the Buyers entered into a Purchase Agreement for a Five-Agency Consortium Shared / Hosted Next Generation 9-1-1 Call Handling System Solution (the “System”); and WHEREAS, the Buyers wish to purchase upgrades to the System; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements and promises contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. The Contractor will provide a systemwide Hardware Refresh / Upgrade to the existing VESTA 9-1-1 telephone system including all planning, liaison, design, project management services, hardware, software, licenses, integration, conversion assistance, installation labor, travel, and one-year warranty (maintenance) as per the Equipment and Services List herein included as Exhibit 1. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this Agreement, the following terms shall be defined as follows: (a) System Final Acceptance. At completion of implementation at all Data Centers and PSAPs, the system shall be tested using Contractor’s Acceptance Test Plan with results documented. After successful testing, the system will be accepted and final payment shall be requested. (b) Call Handling System 1. The current VESTA 9-1-1 telephone system which is owned and shared by the Buyers and is being upgraded per this Agreement. (c) Acceptance Test Plan. The Contractor shall provide a written Acceptance Test Plan for use and documentation as each entity is implemented and tested. The testing shall take place, and upon successful completion at each entity, respectively, each will attain Beneficial Use Acceptance. 2 (d) Furnished System. Furnished System means the entire suite of equipment, software, and services required by this Agreement and offered both collectively and individually to the Buyers. (e) Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP). A physical location where a Public Safety Agency answers 9-1-1 calls. A PSAP may be Primary or Secondary. A Primary PSAP receives 9-1-1 calls direct from the public and is usually a Law Enforcement Agency. A Secondary PSAP (e.g., Fire, Emergency Medical Services, etc.) receives 9-1-1 calls on a conference or transfer basis from other PSAPs. PSAPs are operated by government jurisdictions, agencies or authority agents responsible for handling 9-1-1 emergencies. (f) Maintenance. The definition of maintenance and its related elements are listed in Exhibit 2. (g) Beneficial Use Acceptance. Beneficial Use Acceptance shall be deemed to occur upon completion of the individual entity implementation (i.e., Data Centers and PSAPs) and successful completion of each respective Acceptance Test Plan. Because the implementation will occur on a Phased Approach, the individual entities will have separate Beneficial Use Acceptance dates. Beneficial Use Acceptance is a milestone which allows Contractor invoicing as per Invoicing and Payment Terms below. 3. Obligations of the Contractor. The Contractor shall: (a) System updates to be provided. Deliver to Buyer the System updates as described on Exhibit 1. (b) Equipment and Software. Deliver to Buyer the equipment and software specified on Exhibit 1, in good working order and free of physical defects. (c) Installation. Install the equipment and software on a date to be determined and at the location(s) set forth in Exhibit 1. (d) Hotline Support. Have adequate personnel available in an advisory capacity who will be accessible by telephone within one hour after being called. (e) Invoicing. Contractor agrees that it shall invoice each Buyer directly for its share of the Common Equipment, and for each Buyer's individual PSAP Equipment. Contractor shall send copies of all invoices to the Contract Manager. Contractor shall invoice each Buyer for its share of the Common Equipment in accordance with the information provided by the Contract Manager as to each Buyer's ownership share. Contractor shall submit its invoices and Buyers shall remit payment within forty-five (45) calendar days of receipt. 4. Obligations of Buyer. Buyer shall: (a) Purchase Price. Pay for the goods and services which the Contractor has undertaken to provide as detailed in Exhibit 1. 3 (b) Payment Terms. Pay the Purchase Price as follows: (i) 20% upon delivery of Official Project Timeline, Project Management Plan and written Assignment of Resources subsequent to contract execution. (ii) 60% upon completed installation of equipment, including testing, on a per Data Center and PSAP site attaining Beneficial Use Acceptance. (iii) 20% upon System Final Acceptance by the Buyers, of the complete Furnished System, but in no event less than 45 calendar days following conversion of the last PSAP to the Furnished System acquired under this Agreement. (c) Late Payments. If payments set forth above are late, interest shall accrue at the rate of 1.5% (one and one-half percent) per month on any unpaid balance of a payment not received by the Contractor within thirty (30) days of the date that said payment is due. (d) Taxes and Fees. In the event any federal, state, or local sales or use taxes become due as a result of this Agreement, or are imposed as a consequence of the Contractor doing business with the Buyer, the Equipment Purchase Price shall be increased by a like amount. (e) Risk of Loss. Upon delivery to Buyer, the risk of loss passes to Buyer and Buyer shall own the equipment and software. Prior thereto, the risk of loss shall be upon the Contractor. Prior to delivery to the Buyer, the Contractor shall carry sufficient insurance insuring the equipment and software against fire, theft and other casualty. After delivery to the Buyer, the Buyer shall carry such similar insurance. (f) Delivery. Buyer shall ensure that personnel are available to receive delivery of equipment at the location for installation, at a date and time determined, upon thirty (30) days notice to Buyer by the Contractor that the equipment is ready to be delivered. (g) Access. Buyer agrees to grant or cause other agencies of Buyer to grant reasonable right of entry to the Contractor, to enable it to deliver and install the products or equipment, and/or perform all services contemplated by this Agreement, and will direct agencies of Buyer to make available a reasonable amount of secure storage space for said products or equipment until installation, and the live testing period have all been accomplished or completed. Contractor and its subcontractors shall comply with any health or safety rules applicable to each Buyer’s facilities. (h) Site Conditions. Buyer shall be responsible for meeting and maintaining proper environmental conditions, including an asbestos free working environment, temperature (60º to 75º F), humidity (20 to 95% non-condensing), and shelter from the elements, appropriate for the installation, and testing of the equipment and software described in Exhibit 1. Following installation and testing, Buyer shall meet and maintain temperature (40º to 75º F), humidity (20 to 80% non-condensing), and electrical (115 to 125 VAC on an uninterrupted power supply to be 4 supplied by Buyer unless specified otherwise in Exhibit 1.) conditions as necessary for the proper operation of equipment and software described in Exhibit 1. Buyer shall provide necessary roof or wall penetrations for installation of NetClock GPS Antenna Cable as described on Exhibit 1. Buyer shall provide sufficient space for mounting of NetClock GPS Outdoor Antenna at a location to be determined at site walk through to be performed jointly by the Buyer and Contractor. 5. Software License. The equipment provided by the Contractor pursuant to this Agreement may contain software, including that which the manufacturer may have embedded into the hardware as an integral part of the equipment. All such software shall remain the property of the creator, developer, manufacturer, or copywriter, as the case may be. The Contractor shall provide to all of the Buyers a fully paid-up, royalty-free, nontransferable, non- exclusive license in the software, in object code form only, one copy per single CPU, required for use of the Common Equipment. The Contractor shall provide to each individual Buyer a non-transferable license in the software, in object code form only, one copy per single CPU, required for use of each Buyer’s individual PSAP Equipment. 6. Contractor’s Right to Rely. The Contractor generally shall be entitled to rely upon as accurate the information provided by Buyer and any agency thereof, and the various telephone companies providing service within the area being provided 9-1-1 service pursuant to this Agreement, or any agent, employee, or affiliate thereof; provided, however, the Contractor shall not be excused from reasonably verifying such information and in no event shall Contractor be entitled to rely upon information which the Contractor reasonable knows or should know is erroneous or subject to question. 7. Time of Performance. The time for performance for the Contractor may be extended by Buyer without cost or detriment to the Contractor if such extension is requested on account of fires, embargoes, earthquakes, floods, wars, water, the elements, labor disputes, government requirements, actions of civil or military authorities, or acts of God or public enemy. The Contractor may extend the time for its performance without cost or detriment if such extension is requested on account of circumstances beyond its control, including, but not limited to, inability to secure transportation facilities, acts or omissions of suppliers, tardy completion of the Database Management System, or tardy completion of the networks of the various telephone companies. Should the time for performance be so delayed, Buyer or the Contractor, as the case may be, shall give the other party reasonable notice of such extension and the balance of the terms of this Agreement, to the extent necessary, shall automatically be modified to accomplish the intent of the parties. 8. Default and Remedy. Failure of the Contractor (including the failure of any employee or agent of the Contractor) to abide by any of the terms, conditions, or requirements expressed in the Agreement shall constitute a default if not properly corrected by the Contractor in a reasonable time upon receipt of a notice of deficiency and a request for compliance from the County. In the event of a default by the Contractor, the Buyer may cancel this Agreement by sending a written notice of cancellation to the Contractor at the address stated herein, and may recover from the Contractor, as limited by this Agreement, damages sustained by the Buyer which may arise out of the breach of this Agreement by the Contractor. 5 9. Warranties. (a) Manufacturers’ Warranties. The Contractor shall use its best, good faith efforts to cause the manufacturer’s warranties covering all equipment to be supplied pursuant to this Agreement to extend to the benefit of Buyer. Should there be a need created therefor, the Contractor shall be entitled to an assignment of any manufacturer’s warranty coverage from Buyer and Buyer shall execute appropriate documents to obtain the benefit of any manufacturer’s warranty of equipment provided herein during the period any applicable manufacturer’s warranty of the equipment provided herein is in existence. The parties understand that the Manufacturer warrants the software and equipment described on Exhibit 1 to be free of defects in design, manufacture, and materials for eighteen (18) months following the shipping date from the Manufacturer. (b) Exclusions to Warranties. There are no warranties which extend beyond the description of the face hereof. The express warranty granted above is effective only if Contractor installs the Software on Buyer’s computer; it shall be void if it is installed on any computer by anyone other than a person duly authorized by the Contractor to install same. THERE IS NO IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. (c) Voiding of Warranties. The warranties provided herein shall be void and of no effect if anyone on behalf of or under the control of Buyer, without consultation with Contractor and Contractor’s specific assent, disassembles or physically moves the Emergency Answering System, makes any modification to the equipment or software which comprise the Emergency Answering System, makes any modification of the configuration of the Software installed on the Hardware, installs additional software not sold hereunder on the Hardware or in any other way changes the Emergency Answering System as installed by Contractor. 10. Maintenance. The Contractor shall provide one (1) year of 24 X 7 X 365 Maintenance on the equipment and services installed as listed herein as well as Maintenance on equipment and services which were purchased originally (circa May of 2104), but not upgraded. Maintenance shall commence upon Beneficial Use Acceptance of the implementation of equipment and services at the Data Centers, and at each PSAP, respectively. Maintenance consists of five (5) support services; Monitor and Response (full time ongoing), Help Desk (immediate response), On-Site (two-hour response), Software Refresh, Patch Management and Virus Protection (as required), and Hardware repair and support. Details of Maintenance are listed in Exhibit 2 attached herein. Pricing of Maintenance is incorporated into the Pricing Pages of Exhibit 1. 11. Subcontractors. It is expressly agreed that Contractor has subcontracted portions of the contracted work and services with subcontractors, and Contractor is to supervise all work performed by the subcontractor. 6 12. 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 the either party, whether of the same or any other covenant, condition or obligation. 13. Governing Law. The validity of this Agreement, the construction and enforcement of their terms and the interpretation of the rights and duties of the parties shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 14. Compliance with Applicable Law. The parties shall comply with all federal, state and local law applicable to all aspects of the goods and services sold hereunder. A party who violates such law shall indemnify and hold harmless the other party from any and all damages and claims for damages, including attorneys' fees, arising out of any such violation. 15. Severability. If any provision, term, or condition of this Agreement is found to be or become unenforceable or invalid, it shall not effect 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. 16. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, its Exhibits, and references, 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. 17. Force Majeure. Neither party shall be liable to the other for any delay or failure to perform under this Agreement if the delay or failure to perform is without the fault or negligence of the party claiming excusable delay and is due to causes beyond the control of said party, including, but not limited to acts of God, war, acts of the government, fires, flood, epidemics, quarantine restrictions, strikes, labor disputes (including collective bargaining issues), work stoppages, and freight embargoes. 18. Insurance, Indemnification, Limitation of Liability Contractor agrees to provide and maintain at all times during the term of this Agreement such insurance coverages as are indicated herein. Such policy (ies) of insurance shall apply to the extent of, but not as a limitation upon or in satisfaction of, the Agreement indemnity provisions. The provisions of this section shall also apply to all subcontractors, sub-subcontractors, and independent contractors engaged by Contractor with respect to this Agreement, and Contractor shall be entirely responsible for securing the compliance of all such persons or parties with these provisions. (a) Insurance General Requirements: 7 • Contractor’s insurance shall be primary, and not excess, to any other coverage carried by the Buyers and the MESB. • Insurance companies must be acceptable to the Buyers and the MESB. • Coverage needs to be in force for the complete term of the contract. If insurance expires during the term of the contract, a new certificate must be received by the respective Buyers and the MESB at least ten (10) days prior to the expiration of this insurance. This new insurance must still meet the terms of the original contract. • Contractor is responsible for any deductible or self-insured retention contained within the insurance program. • Contractor shall immediately notify, by email or fax, the Buyers and the MESB if Contractor receives notice of cancellation or reduction of any of the required insurance coverages. Certificate of Insurance: • Contractor shall furnish an original Certificate of Insurance as evidence of required coverage to the Buyers and the MESB before work commences. • A person authorized by the insurer to bind coverage shall sign the Certificate. • The Certificate shall include a minimum 60-day written notice of intent to cancel, suspend, or reduce coverage. • The Certificate shall identify the Buyers and the MESB as an Additional Insured for relevant coverages, except workers’ compensation. • Insurance shall be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A:VII. Commercial General Liability Coverage: $3,000,000 Annual Aggregate $3,000,000 Products and Completed Operations Aggregate $1,500,000 Personal Injury and Advertising Injury $1,500,000 Each Occurrence $ 100,000 Fire Damage Limit $ 5,000 Medical Expenses The policy should be written on an occurrence basis, not a claims-made basis. Excess umbrella/liability coverage may be used to reach the total required limits. Auto Liability Coverage: A Combined Single Limit: $1,500,000 per occurrence Auto coverage should include: Any Auto, including Hired and Non-Owned. Excess umbrella/liability coverage may be used to reach the total required limits. Professional Liability Coverage: 8 $2,000,000 per claim $4,000,000 Annual Aggregate Umbrella Liability Coverage: An umbrella liability policy may be used in conjunction with primary coverage limits to meet the minimum limit requirement for each coverage. The Buyers and the MESB shall be listed as an Additional Insured. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Coverage: Workers’ Compensation limits are to be statutory per applicable state and federal laws. Employer’s Liability Coverage: Minimum Limits of: Bodily Injury by Accident: $500,000 each accident Bodily Injury by Disease: $500,000 each employee Bodily Injury by Disease: $500,000 policy limit (b) Indemnification The Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Buyers and the MESB, their officials, officers, agents, volunteers and employees from any liability, claims, causes of action, judgments, damages, losses, costs, or expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any act or omission of Contractor, a subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by them, and/or anyone for whose acts and/or omissions they may be liable in the performance of the services required by this Agreement, and against all loss by reason of the failure of Contractor to perform any obligation under this Agreement. (c) Limitation of Liability Under no circumstances shall the Buyers or the MESB be liable for consequential, incidental, indirect, or special damages, including but not limited to lost revenue or loss of profits, even if they have been advised of the likelihood of the occurrence of such damages and notwithstanding any failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. The Contractor understands and agrees that to the full extent permitted by law, actions by the Buyers and the MESB, which are “governmental units” under Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, are to be construed to be engaged in a "cooperative activity" and are to be deemed as a "single governmental unit" for purposes of liability, all as provided in said statute. 19. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed electronically in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to constitute one and the same agreement. 20. Independent Contractors. The parties are performing pursuant to this Agreement only as independent contractors. Each party has the sole obligation to supervise, manage, contract, direct, procure, perform, or a cause to be performed its obligations set forth in this 9 Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be constructed to create the relationship of partnership, agency, or joint venture between the parties. Each party shall be solely responsible for the withholding or payment of all applicable federal, state, local, income taxes, social security taxes, unemployment and other payroll taxes with respect to its own employees. 21. Contract Manager. Contractor agrees to communicate and fully cooperate with the Contract Manager to resolve disputes involving the Common Equipment. Contractor agrees to communicate and fully cooperate with the Contract Manager and the respective Buyer to resolve disputes involving individual PSAP Equipment. The Contract Manager and the Buyers, individually or jointly, shall have the right to initiate or participate in mediation, arbitration, or litigation to enforce the Buyers’ rights under this Agreement. Contractor acknowledges that the Contract Manager will have no financial or ownership interest under this Agreement, and Contractor agrees to not hold the Contract Manager responsible for any payments due Contractor under this Agreement. 22. Notices. All notices or other communications shall be deemed effectively delivered on the date of delivery if mailed certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, upon delivery using overnight courier, or personally delivered. All notices or other communications required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered or addressed as follows: If to IES: Independent Emergency Service, LLC Attention: Communications Consultant 235 Franklin Street SW Hutchinson, MN 55350 If to Buyer: Metropolitan Emergency Services Board Attn: 9-1-1 Manager 2099 University Ave. W. St. Paul, MN 55104 Each party represents to the other that it has full authority to enter into and secure performance of this Agreement and that the person signing this Agreement on behalf of the party has been properly authorized to enter into this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties, and each of them, hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized representatives. 10 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT INDEPENDENT EMERGENCY SERVICES a limited liability corporation By: ____________________________ Richard David Taylor II Manager 11 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT ALLINA HEALTH SYSTEM d/b/a Allina Health Emergency Medical Services By: ___________________________________ Angie Fox, Director 12 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA By: ____________________________________ Chair of its County Board Attest: __________________________________ Deputy/Clerk of its County Board Reviewed by County Attorney’s Office: _________________________________________ Assistant County Attorney 13 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT CITY OF EDINA By: ____________________________________ Todd Millburn, Chief of Police 14 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS Department Responsible for Administering and Monitoring Agreement By: ______________________________________________ Its Director of Department of Emergency Communications __________________________________ Finance Officer or Designee Approved as to form: ______________________________________ Assistant City Attorney 15 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, INC. d/b/a Hennepin County Medical Center By: ____________________________________ T. Ryan Mayfield, Asst. Chief – Director of EMS 16 SIGNATURE PAGE TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT METROPOLITAN EMERGENCY SERVICES BOARD By: ____________________________________ Joe Atkins, Board Chair Approved as to form: By: ____________________________________ Jay Arneson, Board Counsel EXHIBIT 1 to the PURCHASE AGREEMENT for a HARDWARE REFRESH / UPGRADE FOR THE FIVE-AGENCY CONSORTIUM SHARED / HOSTED VESTA 9-1-1 CALL HANDLING SYSTEM (Remainder of page intentionally blank) Quotation Quote Date:11/10/2021 Quote No.:IES3480053C-5 Site ID:103194 Customer Information Customer:Allina Medical IES Contact Information IES Consultant:John Olsen IES Consultant:Robert Madich Phone:(320) 234-5231; (800) 922-8148 Phone:(320) 234-5247; (800) 922-8148 Fax:(320) 234-5224 Fax:(320) 234-5224 E-Mail:john.olsen@ies911.com E-Mail:robert.madich@ies911.com Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 14 873090-11102 V911 LIC EIM MOD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 CDR Module Note: CDR not requested at this time. VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 14 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP $0.00 EA $0.00 2 873099-00702U V911 ACTIV VIEW SYS LIC UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations 14 PS-0SQ-VSML-M VS BSC MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 14 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 14 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $21,786.24 14 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $1,562.40 28 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $2,788.80 14 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $1,831.20 14 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $27,753.60 14 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $3,360.00 14 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $5,040.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Reuse reuse the following equipment Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 1 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Admin Line Gateways Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing ALI TS-4, Blackbox datashare and 8-port datacast hardware Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing SAM Sapeaker Kit Speakers Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Hadset and Jackbox Network Equipment 3 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $6,508.80 Miscellaneous 1 MISC Miscellaneous Cabling & Hardware $1,097.73 EA $1,097.73 VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $73,149.57 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-00301U V-ANLYT USER LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 14 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 Analytics MIS System Subtotal $1,420.80 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Managed Services Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (14) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations 16 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $3,744.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $3,744.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Installation 1 950104 Installation Services $17,840.80 EA $17,840.80 1 960575 Travel Expenses and Per Diem $1,654.40 EA $1,654.40 Extended Warranties Managed Services Analytics MIS System Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Implementation Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 2 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA $1,284.80 Note: URI and VESTA 9-1-1 configuration for remote PSAP's. 32 809800-51007-SMS SMS COORDINATION $82.50 EA $2,640.00 Note: Support PM services (remote) for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: TCC and Carrier Testing Support for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: Site Cut Support for remote PSAP's. Project Management 1 950510 Project Management Services $5,400.00 EA $5,400.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $28,820.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® SMS Note: Customer is responsible for Text Control Center (TCC) services and network charges. 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 2 809800-35120 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 1YR $827.50 EA $1,655.00 2 809800-35122 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 3YR $2,205.00 EA Optional 2 809800-35124 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 5YR $2,756.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations 14 SS-0SQ-VSSL-1Y SPT VS BSC 1YR $1,300.00 EA $18,200.00 14 SS-0SQ-VSSL-3Y SPT VS BSC 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 14 SS-0SQ-VSSL-5Y SPT VS BSC 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 14 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $3,290.00 14 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 14 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 3 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $2,250.00 3 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 3 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional Peripherals & Gateways 3 04000-00176 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 1YR $75.00 EA $225.00 3 04000-00178 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 3YR $225.00 EA Optional 3 04000-00180 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 5YR $375.00 EA Optional Support Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 3 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional 14 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $2,152.50 14 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 14 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (14) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations, 2 existing windows 10 positions 16 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $10,800.00 16 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 16 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (3) Gateways, (3) Cisco Switches 3 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $1,350.00 3 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 3 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional IES Turnkey Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR $12,765.00 EA $12,765.00 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 39,060.90 Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 65,739.75 Optional WAN Support 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 1 yr $386.19 EA $772.38 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 3 yr $393.91 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 5yr $401.79 EA Optional IES Network Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 1 yr $2,160.98 EA $2,160.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 3 yr 6,612.60 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 5 Yr 11,129.05 EA Optional Support Services Subtotal $55,975.86 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Cisco ISR-4321 Router Solution 2 ISR4321/K9 Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$941.42 EA $1,882.85 2 CON-SNT-ISR4321K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$1,372.10 EA $2,744.21 2 SL-4320-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4320 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4320-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4320 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 CAB-AC-C5 AC Power Cord, Type C5, US, Canada $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-FLSH-4G 4G Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4300 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-4320-4G 4G DRAM for Cisco ISR 4320 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 FL-4320-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4320 Series $794.77 EA $1,589.54 2 SISR4300UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4300 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 4 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $3,011.62 Network Config 2 Insight - cofig Insignt $1,200.00 EA $2,400.00 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Network Routers Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 4 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh PRODUCT TOTAL VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $73,149.57 Analytics MIS System Subtotal $1,420.80 Remote Monitoring Set Up Subtotal $0.00 Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Subtotal $0.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $3,744.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $28,820.00 Support Services Subtotal $55,975.86 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Freight and Shipping $1,097.73 TOTAL QUOTE including 1 year of support $175,836.18 Year 2 of support $57,655.14 Year 3 of support $59,384.79 Year 4 of support $61,166.33 Year 5 of support $63,001.32 Quote is valid for 120 days. Summary Additional Comments Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 5 of 5 Quotation Quote Date:6/13/2021 Quote No.:IES3480053C-4 Site ID:104199 Customer Information Customer:Edina Police IES Contact Information IES Consultant:John Olsen IES Consultant:Robert Madich Phone:(320) 234-5231; (800) 922-8148 Phone:(320) 234-5247; (800) 922-8148 Fax:(320) 234-5224 Fax:(320) 234-5224 E-Mail:john.olsen@ies911.com E-Mail:robert.madich@ies911.com Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 4 873090-11102 V911 LIC EIM MOD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 4 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873099-00702U V911 ACTIV VIEW SYS LIC UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 64000-00600 PC MOUNTING BRKT $66.00 EA $66.00 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations 4 PS-0SQ-VSML-M VS BSC MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 4 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 4 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $6,224.64 4 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $446.40 8 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $796.80 4 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $1,137.60 4 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $523.20 4 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $7,929.60 4 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $960.00 4 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $1,440.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Admin Printer Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer Network Equipment 2 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $4,339.20 VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 1 of 4 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Miscellaneous 1 MISC Miscellaneous Cabling & Hardware $426.14 EA $426.14 VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $25,994.78 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-00301U V-ANLYT USER LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 4 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Managed Services Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Recommended Spares Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (4) Workstations, (1) Admin Workstations 5 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $1,170.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $1,170.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Installation 1 950104 Installation Services $6,877.20 EA $6,877.20 1 960575 Travel Expenses and Per Diem Services to Support VESTA® SMS - Remote Sites 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA $1,284.80 Note: URI and VESTA 9-1-1 configuration for remote PSAP's. 32 809800-51007-SMS SMS COORDINATION $82.50 EA $2,640.00 Note: Support PM services (remote) for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: TCC and Carrier Testing Support for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: Site Cut Support for remote PSAP's. Project Management 1 950510 Project Management Services $3,600.00 EA $3,600.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $14,402.00 Extended Warranties Managed Services VESTA® Analytics Recommended Spares Implementation Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 2 of 4 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® SMS Note: Customer is responsible for Text Control Center (TCC) services and network charges. 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 1 809800-35120 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 1YR $827.50 EA $827.50 1 809800-35122 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 3YR $2,205.00 EA Optional 1 809800-35124 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 5YR $2,756.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations 4 SS-0SQ-VSSL-1Y SPT VS BSC 1YR $1,300.00 EA $5,200.00 4 SS-0SQ-VSSL-3Y SPT VS BSC 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 4 SS-0SQ-VSSL-5Y SPT VS BSC 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 4 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $940.00 4 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 4 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 2 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $1,500.00 2 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 2 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional 4 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $615.00 4 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 4 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (4) Workstations, (1) Admin Workstations 5 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $3,375.00 5 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 5 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (2) Gateways, (2) Cisco Switches 2 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $900.00 2 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 2 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional Support Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 3 of 4 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh IES Turnkey Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR $4,188.11 EA $4,188.11 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 12,815.63 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 21,568.79 EA Optional WAN Support 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 1 yr $386.19 EA $772.38 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 3 yr $393.91 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 5yr $401.79 EA Optional IES Network Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 1 yr $2,160.98 EA $2,160.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 3 yr 6,612.60 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 5 Yr 11,129.05 EA Optional Support Services Subtotal $20,833.98 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Cisco ISR-4321 Router Solution 2 ISR4321/K9 Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$941.42 EA $1,882.85 2 CON-SNT-ISR4321K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$1,372.10 EA $2,744.21 2 SL-4320-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4320 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4320-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4320 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 CAB-AC-C5 AC Power Cord, Type C5, US, Canada $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-FLSH-4G 4G Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4300 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-4320-4G 4G DRAM for Cisco ISR 4320 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 FL-4320-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4320 Series $794.77 EA $1,589.54 2 SISR4300UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4300 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 4 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $3,011.62 Network Config 2 Insight - cofig Insight $1,200.00 EA $2,400.00 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 PRODUCT TOTAL VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $25,994.78 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $0.00 Remote Monitoring Set Up Subtotal $0.00 Recommended Spares Subtotal $0.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $1,170.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $14,402.00 Support Services Subtotal $20,833.98 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Freight and Shipping $319.61 TOTAL QUOTE including 1 year of support $74,348.58 Year 2 of support $21,458.99 Year 3 of support $22,102.76 Year 4 of support $22,765.85 Year 5 of support $23,448.82 Quote is valid for 120 days. Summary Additional Comments Network Routers Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 4 of 4 Quotation Quote Date:11/29/2021 Quote No.:IES3480053C-8 Site ID:103701 Customer Information Customer:Hennepin EMS Contact: IES Contact Information IES Consultant:John Olsen IES Consultant:Robert Madich Phone:(320) 234-5231; (800) 922-8148 Phone:(320) 234-5247; (800) 922-8148 Fax:(320) 234-5224 Fax:(320) 234-5224 E-Mail:john.olsen@ies911.com E-Mail:robert.madich@ies911.com Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 6 873090-11102 V911 LIC EIM MOD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 6 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations 6 PS-0PR-VSML-M VPRIME MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 6 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 6 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $9,336.96 6 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $669.60 12 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $1,195.20 1 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $1,982.40 6 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $1,440.00 6 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $2,160.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Reuse reuse the following equipment Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Admin Line Gateways Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing ALI TS-4, Blackbox datashare and 8-port datacast hardware Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing SAM Sapeaker Kit Speakers Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Hadset and Jackbox Network Equipment 2 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $4,339.20 VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 1 of 4 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Miscellaneous 1 MISC Miscellaneous Cabling & Hardware $497.12 EA $497.12 VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $21,620.48 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-00301U V-ANLYT USER LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 6 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Managed Services Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Recommended Spares Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (6) Workstations 6 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $1,404.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $1,404.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Installation 1 950104 Installation Services $8,377.20 EA $8,377.20 1 960575 Travel Expenses and Per Diem $1,151.52 EA $1,151.52 Services to Support VESTA® SMS - Remote Sites 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA $1,284.80 Note: URI and VESTA 9-1-1 configuration for remote PSAP's. 32 809800-51007-SMS PROJECT MGMT - REMOTE SMS $82.50 EA $2,640.00 Note: Support PM services (remote) for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: TCC and Carrier Testing Support for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: Site Cut Support for remote PSAP's. Project Management 1 950510 Project Management Services $3,600.00 EA $3,600.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $17,053.52 Implementation Services Extended Warranties Managed Services VESTA® Analytics Recommended Spares Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 2 of 4 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® SMS Note: Customer is responsible for Text Control Center (TCC) services and network charges. 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations 6 SS-0PR-VSSL-1Y SPT VPRIME 1YR $1,300.00 EA $7,800.00 6 SS-0PR-VSSL-3Y SPT VPRIME 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 6 SS-0PR-VSSL-5Y SPT VPRIME 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 6 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $1,410.00 6 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 6 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 2 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $1,500.00 2 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 2 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional 6 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $922.50 6 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 6 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (6) Workstations 6 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $4,050.00 6 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 6 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (2) Gateways, (2) Cisco Switches 2 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $900.00 2 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 2 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional IES Turnkey Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR $4,188.11 EA $4,188.11 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 12,815.63 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 21,568.79 EA Optional WAN Support 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 1 yr $386.19 EA $772.38 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 3 yr $393.91 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 5yr $401.79 EA Optional Support Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 3 of 4 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh IES Network Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 1 yr $2,160.98 EA $2,160.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 3 yr 6,612.60 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 5 Yr 11,129.05 EA Optional Support Services Subtotal $24,058.98 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Cisco ISR-4321 Router Solution 2 ISR4321/K9 Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$941.42 EA $1,882.85 2 CON-SNT-ISR4321K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$1,372.10 EA $2,744.21 2 SL-4320-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4320 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4320-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4320 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 CAB-AC-C5 AC Power Cord, Type C5, US, Canada $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-FLSH-4G 4G Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4300 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-4320-4G 4G DRAM for Cisco ISR 4320 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 FL-4320-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4320 Series $794.77 EA $1,589.54 2 SISR4300UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4300 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 4 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $3,011.62 Network Config 2 Insight - cofig Insight $1,200.00 EA $2,400.00 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 PRODUCT TOTAL VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $21,620.48 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $0.00 Remote Monitoring Set Up Subtotal $0.00 Recommended Spares Subtotal $0.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $1,404.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $17,053.52 Support Services Subtotal $24,058.98 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Freight and Shipping $497.12 TOTAL QUOTE including 1 year of support $76,262.30 Year 2 of support $24,780.74 Year 3 of support $25,524.17 Year 4 of support $26,289.89 Year 5 of support $27,078.59 Quote is valid for 120 days. Summary Additional Comments Network Routers Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 4 of 4 Quotation Quote Date:11/12/2021 Quote No.:IES3480053C-7 Site ID:104245 Customer Information Customer:Hennepin County Sheriff Primary Contact: IES Contact Information IES Consultant:John Olsen IES Consultant:Robert Madich Phone:(320) 234-5231; (800) 922-8148 Phone:(320) 234-5247; (800) 922-8148 Fax:(320) 234-5224 Fax:(320) 234-5224 E-Mail:john.olsen@ies911.com E-Mail:robert.madich@ies911.com Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 32 873090-11102 V911 LIC EIM MOD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 CDR Module Note: CDR not requsted at this time. VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 32 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873099-00702U V911 ACTIV VIEW SYS LIC UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 64000-00600 PC MOUNTING BRKT $66.00 EA $66.00 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations 32 PS-0PR-VSML-M VPRIME MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Advanced Enhanced Operations Note Advanced Lic needed is RapidSOS is purchased 32 PA-0AD-VSSL VADV LIC ADD-ON $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 32 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 32 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $49,797.12 32 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $3,571.20 64 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $6,374.40 32 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $9,100.80 32 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $4,185.60 32 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $63,436.80 32 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $7,680.00 32 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $11,520.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 1 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Reuse reuse the following equipment Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Admin Line Gateways Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing ALI TS-4, Blackbox datashare and 8-port datacast hardware Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing SAM Sapeaker Kit Speakers Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Hadset and Jackbox Network Equipment 2 04000-29666-X SWITCH 2960-X +CBL 48-PORT $3,709.20 EA $7,418.40 1 MISC Miscellaneous Cabling & Hardware $1,625.25 EA $1,625.25 VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $166,480.77 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-00301U V-ANLYT USER LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 32 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 64000-00600 PC MOUNTING BRKT $66.00 EA $66.00 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $1,771.20 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Managed Services Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (32) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations 34 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $7,956.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $7,956.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Installation 1 950104 Installation Services $14,977.20 EA $14,977.20 1 960575 Travel Expenses and Per Diem $1,576.00 EA $1,576.00 Implementation Services Extended Warranties Managed Services VESTA® Analytics Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 2 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Services to Support VESTA® SMS - Remote Sites 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA $1,284.80 Note: URI and VESTA 9-1-1 configuration for remote PSAP's. 32 809800-51007-SMS PROJECT MGMT - REMOTE SMS $82.50 EA $2,640.00 Note: Support PM services (remote) for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: TCC and Carrier Testing Support for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: Site Cut Support for remote PSAP's. Project Management 1 950510 Project Management Services $4,160.00 EA $4,160.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $24,638.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® SMS 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 1 809800-35120 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 1YR $827.50 EA $827.50 1 809800-35122 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 3YR $2,205.00 EA Optional 1 809800-35124 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 5YR $2,756.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations 32 SS-0PR-VSSL-1Y SPT VPRIME 1YR $1,300.00 EA $41,600.00 32 SS-0PR-VSSL-3Y SPT VPRIME 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 32 SS-0PR-VSSL-5Y SPT VPRIME 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 32 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $7,520.00 32 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 32 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 2 04000-29681 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 1YR $785.00 EA $1,570.00 2 04000-29683 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 3YR $2,330.00 EA Optional 2 04000-29685 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 5YR $3,816.25 EA Optional Support Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 3 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional 32 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $4,920.00 32 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 32 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (32) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations 34 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $22,950.00 34 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 34 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (2) Gateways, (2) Cisco Switches 2 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $900.00 2 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 2 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional IES Turnkey Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR $23,141.13 EA $23,141.13 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 70,811.87 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 119,176.84 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 1 yr $386.19 EA $772.38 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 3 yr $393.91 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 5yr $401.79 EA Optional IES Network Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 1 yr $2,160.98 EA $2,160.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 3 yr 6,612.60 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 5 Yr 11,129.05 EA Optional Support Services Subtotal $106,716.99 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Cisco ISR-4321 Router Solution 2 ISR4321/K9 Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$941.42 EA $1,882.85 2 CON-SNT-ISR4321K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$1,372.10 EA $2,744.21 2 SL-4320-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4320 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4320-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4320 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 CAB-AC-C5 AC Power Cord, Type C5, US, Canada $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-FLSH-4G 4G Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4300 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-4320-4G 4G DRAM for Cisco ISR 4320 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 FL-4320-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4320 Series $794.77 EA $1,589.54 2 SISR4300UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4300 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 4 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $3,011.62 Network Config 2 Insight - cofig Insight $1,200.00 EA $2,400.00 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Network Routers Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 4 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh PRODUCT TOTAL VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $166,480.77 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $1,771.20 Remote Monitoring Set Up Subtotal $0.00 Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Subtotal $0.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $7,956.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $24,638.00 Support Services Subtotal $106,716.99 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Freight and Shipping $1,625.25 TOTAL QUOTE including 1 year of support $320,816.43 Year 2 of support $109,918.50 Year 3 of support $113,216.06 Year 4 of support $116,612.54 Year 5 of support $120,110.92 Quote is valid for 120 days. Summary Additional Comments Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 5 of 5 Quotation Quote Date:11/12/2021 Quote No.:IES3480053C-6 Site ID:104067 Customer Information Customer:Hennepin Sheriff's Office Backup IES Contact Information IES Consultant:John Olsen IES Consultant:Robert Madich Phone:(320) 234-5231; (800) 922-8148 Phone:(320) 234-5247; (800) 922-8148 Fax:(320) 234-5224 Fax:(320) 234-5224 E-Mail:john.olsen@ies911.com E-Mail:robert.madich@ies911.com Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 12 873090-11102 V911 LIC EIM MOD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 12 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP $0.00 EA $0.00 2 873099-00702U V911 ACTIV VIEW SYS LIC UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 64000-00600 PC MOUNTING BRKT $66.00 EA $66.00 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations Note Support ends 12/30/2020. No Support Renewal on file. Need to change a reinstatement fee. 12 PS-0PR-VSML-M VPRIME MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 12 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 12 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $18,673.92 12 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $1,339.20 24 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $2,390.40 12 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $3,412.80 12 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $1,569.60 12 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $23,788.80 12 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $2,880.00 12 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $4,320.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Reuse reuse the following equipment Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 1 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Admin Line Gateways Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing ALI TS-4, Blackbox datashare and 8-port datacast hardware Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing SAM Sapeaker Kit Speakers Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Hadset and Jackbox Network Equipment 3 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $6,508.80 Miscellaneous 1 MISC Miscellaneous Cabling & Hardware $1,220.16 EA $1,220.16 VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $67,874.88 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 2 873391-00301U V-ANLYT USER LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 12 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 64000-00600 PC MOUNTING BRKT $66.00 EA $66.00 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $1,771.20 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Managed Services Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Recommended Spares Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (12) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations 14 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $3,276.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $3,276.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Installation 1 950104 Installation Services $15,940.80 EA $15,940.80 1 960575 Travel Expenses and Per Diem $1,834.72 EA $1,834.72 Extended Warranties Managed Services VESTA® Analytics Recommended Spares Implementation Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 2 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Services to Support VESTA® SMS - Remote Sites 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA $1,284.80 Note: URI and VESTA 9-1-1 configuration for remote PSAP's. 32 809800-51007-SMS PROJECT MGMT - REMOTE SMS $82.50 EA $2,640.00 Note: Support PM services (remote) for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: TCC and Carrier Testing Support for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Project Management 1 950510 Project Management Services $4,160.00 EA $4,160.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $25,860.32 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® SMS Note: Customer is responsible for Text Control Center (TCC) services and network charges. 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 2 809800-35120 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 1YR $827.50 EA $1,655.00 2 809800-35122 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 3YR $2,205.00 EA Optional 2 809800-35124 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 5YR $2,756.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations 12 SS-0PR-VSSL-1Y SPT VPRIME 1YR $1,300.00 EA $15,600.00 12 SS-0PR-VSSL-3Y SPT VPRIME 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 12 SS-0PR-VSSL-5Y SPT VPRIME 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 12 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $2,820.00 12 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 12 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 3 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $2,250.00 3 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 3 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional 12 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $1,845.00 12 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 12 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Support Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 3 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (12) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations 14 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $9,450.00 14 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 14 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (2) Gateways, (3) Cisco Switches 3 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $1,350.00 3 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 3 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional IES Turnkey Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR $15,814.76 EA $15,814.76 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 48,393.18 Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 81,446.04 Optional WAN Support 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 1 yr $386.19 EA $772.38 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 3 yr $393.91 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 5yr $401.79 EA Optional IES Network Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 1 yr $2,160.98 EA $2,160.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 3 yr 6,612.60 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 5 Yr 11,129.05 EA Optional Support Services Subtotal $54,073.13 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Cisco ISR-4321 Router Solution 2 ISR4321/K9 Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$941.42 EA $1,882.85 2 CON-SNT-ISR4321K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$1,372.10 EA $2,744.21 2 SL-4320-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4320 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4320-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4320 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 CAB-AC-C5 AC Power Cord, Type C5, US, Canada $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-FLSH-4G 4G Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4300 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-4320-4G 4G DRAM for Cisco ISR 4320 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 FL-4320-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4320 Series $794.77 EA $1,589.54 2 SISR4300UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4300 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 4 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $3,011.62 Network Config 2 Insight - cofig Insight $1,200.00 EA $2,400.00 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Network Routers Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 4 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh PRODUCT TOTAL VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $67,874.88 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $1,771.20 Remote Monitoring Set Up Subtotal $0.00 Recommended Spares Subtotal $0.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $3,276.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $25,860.32 Support Services Subtotal $54,073.13 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Freight and Shipping $1,220.16 TOTAL QUOTE including 1 year of support $165,703.90 Year 2 of support $55,695.32 Year 3 of support $57,366.18 Year 4 of support $59,087.16 Year 5 of support $60,859.78 Quote is valid for 120 days. Summary Additional Comments Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 5 of 5 Quotation Quote Date:6/13/2021 Quote No.:IES3480053C-3 Site ID:102109 Customer Information Customer:City of Minneapolis (MECC) IES Contact Information IES Consultant:John Olsen IES Consultant:Robert Madich Phone:(320) 234-5231; (800) 922-8148 Phone:(320) 234-5247; (800) 922-8148 Fax:(320) 234-5224 Fax:(320) 234-5224 E-Mail:john.olsen@ies911.com E-Mail:robert.madich@ies911.com Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 31 873090-11102 V911 LIC EIM MOD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 31 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP $0.00 EA $0.00 2 873099-00702U V911 ACTIV VIEW SYS LIC UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 64000-00600 PC MOUNTING BRKT $66.00 EA $66.00 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations 31 PS-0PR-VSML-M VPRIME MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 31 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 31 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $48,240.96 31 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $3,459.60 62 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $6,175.20 31 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $8,816.40 31 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $4,054.80 31 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $61,454.40 31 853004-00401 SAM EXT SPKR KIT $201.60 EA Optional 31 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $7,440.00 31 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $11,160.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Reuse reuse the following equipment Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Admin Line Gateways VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 1 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing ALI TS-4, Blackbox datashare and 8-port datacast hardware Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing SAM Sapeaker Kit Speakers Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Hadset and Jackbox Network Equipment 2 04000-29666-X SWITCH 2960-X +CBL 48-PORT $3,709.20 EA $7,418.40 Miscellaneous 1 MISC Miscellaneous Cabling & Hardware $1,333.25 EA $1,333.25 VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $161,324.21 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-00301U V-ANLYT USER LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 31 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG $0.00 EA $0.00 Administrative Workstations 1 61000-409612 DKTP ELITE MINI 705 G5 W/O OS $1,009.20 EA $1,009.20 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 64000-00600 PC MOUNTING BRKT $66.00 EA $66.00 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $1,771.20 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Managed Services Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Subtotal $0.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (31) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations 33 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $7,722.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $7,722.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Installation 1 950104 Installation Services $16,477.20 EA $16,477.20 1 960575 Travel Expenses and Per Diem $3,356.80 EA $3,356.80 Services to Support VESTA® SMS - Remote Sites 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA $1,284.80 Note: URI and VESTA 9-1-1 configuration for remote PSAP's. Implementation Services Extended Warranties Managed Services VESTA® Analytics Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 2 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh 32 809800-51007-SMS SMS COORDINATION $82.50 EA $2,640.00 Note: Support PM services (remote) for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: TCC and Carrier Testing Support for remote PSAP's. 16 809800-17006-SMS FIELD ENG-EXPRESS SMS $80.30 EA Optional Note: Site Cut Support for remote PSAP's. Project Management 1 950510 Project Management Services $3,600.00 EA $3,600.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $27,358.80 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total VESTA® SMS Note: Customer is responsible for Text Control Center (TCC) services and network charges. 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 2 809800-35120 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 1YR $827.50 EA $1,655.00 2 809800-35122 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 3YR $2,205.00 EA Optional 2 809800-35124 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 5YR $2,756.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Prime Operations 31 SS-0PR-VSSL-1Y SPT VPRIME 1YR $1,300.00 EA $40,300.00 31 SS-0PR-VSSL-3Y SPT VPRIME 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 31 SS-0PR-VSSL-5Y SPT VPRIME 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 31 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $7,285.00 31 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 31 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 2 04000-29681 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 1YR $785.00 EA $1,570.00 2 04000-29683 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 3YR $2,330.00 EA Optional 2 04000-29685 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 5YR $3,816.25 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional 31 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $4,766.25 31 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 31 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (31) Workstations, (2) Admin Workstations 33 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $22,275.00 Support Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 3 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh 33 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 33 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (6) Gateways, (2) Cisco Switches 2 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $900.00 2 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 2 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional IES Turnkey Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 28,010.56 EA $28,010.56 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 85,712.31 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 5 YR 144,254.38 EA Optional WAN Support 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 1 yr $386.19 EA $772.38 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 3 yr $393.91 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4321 MESB 4321 WAN ROUTER SPT 5yr $401.79 EA Optional IES Network Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 1 yr $2,160.98 EA $2,160.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 3 yr 6,612.60 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 5 Yr 11,129.05 EA Optional Support Services Subtotal $110,050.17 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Cisco ISR-4321 Router Solution 2 ISR4321/K9 Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$941.42 EA $1,882.85 2 CON-SNT-ISR4321K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4321 (2GE,2NIM,4G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$1,372.10 EA $2,744.21 2 SL-4320-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4320 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4320-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4320 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 CAB-AC-C5 AC Power Cord, Type C5, US, Canada $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-FLSH-4G 4G Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4300 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-4320-4G 4G DRAM for Cisco ISR 4320 (Soldered on motherboard)$0.00 EA $0.00 2 FL-4320-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4320 Series $794.77 EA $1,589.54 2 SISR4300UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4300 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 4 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $3,011.62 Network Config 2 Insight - cofig Insight $1,200.00 EA $2,400.00 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Network Routers Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 4 of 5 Quotation VESTA® 9-1-1 Hardware Refresh PRODUCT TOTAL VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $161,324.21 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $1,771.20 Remote Monitoring Set Up Subtotal $0.00 Recommended Spares (included on the Host quote) Subtotal $0.00 Extended Warranties Subtotal $7,722.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $27,358.80 Support Services Subtotal $110,050.17 Network Routers Subtotal $11,628.22 Freight and Shipping $1,999.88 TOTAL QUOTE including 1 year of support $321,854.47 Year 2 of support $113,351.68 Year 3 of support $116,752.23 Year 4 of support $120,254.79 Year 5 of support $123,862.44 Quote is valid for 120 days. Summary Additional Comments Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 5 of 5 Quotation Quote Date:11/29/2021 Quote No.:IES3480053C Site ID:108321, 108325 Customer Information Customer:CHS-1 Host A and B IES Contact Information IES Consultant:John Olsen IES Consultant:Robert Madich Phone:(320) 234-5231; (800) 922-8148 Phone:(320) 234-5247; (800) 922-8148 Fax:(320) 234-5224 Fax:(320) 234-5224 E-Mail:john.olsen@ies911.com E-Mail:robert.madich@ies911.com Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Host "A" VESTA® 9-1-1 1 870899-0104R7.5U V911 R7.5 DOC/MED UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873099-03002U V911 CAD INTF LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Servers VM Very Large Server Bundle Note: The Very Large Server Bundle is for PSAP's up to 160 positions with an annual call volume of 2,000,000 or less. 1 853031-DLVLS-GD2 V-DL SVR VLS BNDL GEO $22,858.80 EA $22,858.80 1 06500-00201 2-POST RELAY RACK MNT KIT $205.20 EA $205.20 1 BA-V00-VS00-1 V-CTR APPLIANCE ADD-ON $6,169.20 EA $6,169.20 VESTA® SMS 1 870891-66301 VESTA 9-1-1 SMS LIC $0.00 EA $0.00 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 2 03800-03060 FIREWALL 60E $684.00 EA $1,368.00 2 809800-00200 CFG NTWK DEVICE $159.60 EA $319.20 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 1 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP 1 873099-00702 V911 ACTIV VIEW SYS LIC $4,200.00 EA $4,200.00 1 809800-35246 V911 ACT VIEW RNSTMNT $1,543.20 EA $1,543.20 Geo Diverse Add On License 1 BA-MGD-VSSL GEO-DIV LIC SYS $2,250.00 EA $2,250.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations 1 PS-0SQ-VSML-M VS BSC MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 1 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 1 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 1 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $1,556.16 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 2 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $199.20 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $130.80 1 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $1,982.40 1 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $240.00 1 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $360.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Reuse reuse the following equipment Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Admin Line Gateways Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing ALI TS-4, Blackbox datashare and 8-port datacast hardware Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing SAM Sapeaker Kit Speakers Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Hadset and Jackbox Network Equipment 2 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $4,339.20 Host "B" VESTA® 9-1-1 1 870899-0104R7.5U V911 R7.5 DOC/MED UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873099-03002U V911 CAD INTF LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Servers VM Very Large Server Bundle Note: The Very Large Server Bundle is for PSAP's up to 160 positions with an annual call volume of 2,000,000 or less. 1 853031-DLVLS-GD2 V-DL SVR VLS BNDL GEO $22,858.80 EA $22,858.80 1 06500-00201 2-POST RELAY RACK MNT KIT $205.20 EA $205.20 VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 1 873090-11102 V911 LIC EIM MOD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® SMS Note: Customer is responsible for Text Control Center (TCC) services and network charges. 1 870891-66301 VESTA 9-1-1 SMS LIC $0.00 EA $0.00 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 1 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 2 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 3 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 4 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 2 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh 1 809810-00102 V911 ADV DATA LVL 1 ANNUAL SUB $0.00 EA $0.00 Note: Annual Subscription - Year 5 Note: Firewall supports Call and Text Handling for ESInet Interface Module (EIM), Text to 9-1-1 and Direct PSAP Interconnect (DPI). 2 03800-03060 FIREWALL 60E $684.00 EA $1,368.00 2 809800-00200 CFG NTWK DEVICE $159.60 EA $319.20 VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View Reuse Existing 1 873099-00802U V911 ACT VIEW LIC PER ST UP $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873099-00702U V911 ACTIV VIEW SYS LIC UPG $0.00 EA $0.00 Geo Diverse Add On License 1 BA-MGD-VSSL GEO-DIV LIC SYS $2,250.00 EA $2,250.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations Note Support ends 12/30/2020. No Support Renewal on file. Need to change a reinstatement fee. 1 PS-0SQ-VSML-M VS BSC MLTP SEAT LIC NFEE $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module Note: Customer to Reuse HASP Keys 1 873099-00502U V911 IRR LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA Interface Unit VESTA® Workstation Equipment 1 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $1,556.16 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 2 65000-00261 NIC PCIE SNGL ADPTR CARD $99.60 EA $199.20 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $130.80 1 853030-00302 V911 SAM HDWR KIT $1,982.40 EA $1,982.40 1 809800-35109 V911 IWS CFG $240.00 EA $240.00 1 809800-35108 V911 IWS STG FEE $360.00 EA $360.00 1 870890-07501 CPR/SYSPREP MEDIA IMAGE $0.00 EA $0.00 Network Equipment 2 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $4,339.20 VESTA® 9-1-1 Reuse reuse the following equipment Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Printer Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Admin Line Gateways Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing ALI TS-4, Blackbox datashare and 8-port datacast hardware Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing SAM Sapeaker Kit Speakers Note: Cutomer to Reuse Existing Hadset and Jackbox Miscellaneous 1 MISC Miscellaneous Cabling & Hardware $1,850.18 EA $1,850.18 VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $86,172.50 Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 3 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Host "A" VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 873399-00103.4U V-ANLYT 3.4 DOC/MED UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-01002U V-ANLYT HOST LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 873391-00301U V-ANLYT USER LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG VESTA® Analytics Modules 1 873391-00901 V-ANLYT ADV RPT PKG LIC $4,200.00 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Server Equipment Note: Server is configured for up to 2,000,000 calls per year. 1 62040-G819204 SVR 2U RACK ENH DL380/G10 2.2 $5,971.20 EA $5,971.20 1 06500-00201 2-POST RELAY RACK MNT KIT $205.20 EA $205.20 4 64000-20066 HARD DRIVE 600GB SAS 10K $764.40 EA $3,057.60 4 64000-20064 HARD DRIVE 300GB 12G SAS 10K $526.80 EA $2,107.20 4 6400C-40044 8GB RAM G10 $374.40 EA $1,497.60 1 62033-2GB4T04 SVR NAS 8TB $1,983.60 EA $1,983.60 1 04000-00444 SVR WIN2019 STD DWNGRD 2012 $1,527.60 EA $1,527.60 1 04000-00319 SQL 2014 CAL RUN EMB LIC $132.00 EA $132.00 1 04000-00346 SQL 2014 SVR RUN EMB LIC $4,288.80 EA $4,288.80 1 04000-00436 PRESENTENSE TIME CLIENT 5.1 $66.00 EA $66.00 1 809800-01416 MIS SVR CFG $600.00 EA $600.00 Host "B" 1 873391-02001U V-ANLYT SITE LIC UPGD $0.00 EA $0.00 1 PA-MSG-ASSL-M V-ANLYT STD SEAT LIC MIG $0.00 EA $0.00 VESTA® Analytics Modules 1 873391-00901 V-ANLYT ADV RPT PKG LIC $4,200.00 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $21,436.80 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Host "A" Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Servers Note: Includes (1) DDS Servers,, (1) VESTA Analytics Server Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (1) Workstations, (1) Management Console Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (1) Virtual Host/Machines, (1) MDS Servers, (1) ASN Servers, (1) VM Hosts, (2) Gateways, (3) Firewalls for EIM/SMS/M&R, (1) 8TB NAS Device, (2) Cisco Switches. Will use 10 purchased Licenses 1 04000-00400 M&R NETWORK/IP AGENT LIC $94.80 EA $94.80 Managed Services VESTA® Analytics Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 4 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh Host "B" Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Servers Note: Includes (1) DDS Servers, Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations Note: Includes (1) Workstations, (1) Management Console Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices Note: Includes (1) Virtual Host/Machines, (1) MDS Servers, (1) ASN Servers, (1) VM Hosts, (2) Gateways, (3) Firewalls for EIM/SMS/M&R, (2) Cisco Switches 1 04000-00400 M&R NETWORK/IP AGENT LIC $94.80 EA $94.80 Managed Services Subtotal $189.60 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Host "A" Cables and Switches 1 65000-00124 CBL PATCH 15FT $16.80 EA $16.80 1 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $2,169.60 Workstation Equipment 1 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $1,556.16 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 65000-00179 NIC PCIE GIGABIT $51.60 EA $51.60 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 Spare Workstation Equipment 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $130.80 1 850830-03201 BASIC SAM HDWR KIT $1,388.40 EA $1,388.40 Host "B" Gateways and Equipment Cables and Switches 1 65000-00124 CBL PATCH 15FT $16.80 EA $16.80 1 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $2,169.60 Workstation Equipment 1 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $1,556.16 1 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $111.60 1 65000-00179 NIC PCIE GIGABIT $51.60 EA $51.60 1 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $300.00 Spare Workstation Equipment 1 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $284.40 1 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $130.80 1 850830-03201 BASIC SAM HDWR KIT $1,388.40 EA $1,388.40 Recommended Spares Hosts Subtotal $12,018.72 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Network Equipment 2 04000-29666-X SWITCH 2960-X +CBL 48-PORT $3,709.20 EA $7,418.40 Network Equipment 2 04000-29638-X SWITCH 2960-X+CBL 24-PORT $2,169.60 EA $4,339.20 Recommended Spares Hosts Recommended Remote Spares Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 5 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh Workstation Equipment 2 61000-409614SFF WKST HP Z2 G4 SFF W/O OS SSD $1,556.16 EA $3,112.32 2 04000-00441 WINDOWS 10 LTSC LIC $111.60 EA $223.20 2 65000-00179 NIC PCIE GIGABIT $51.60 EA $103.20 2 809800-00102 GENERIC WKST CFG FEE $300.00 EA $600.00 Spare Workstation Equipment 2 63000-221693 MNTR FP WIDE SCRN LED 22IN $284.40 EA $568.80 2 64007-50021 KEYPAD 24 KEY USB CBL 12FT $130.80 EA $261.60 2 850830-03201 BASIC SAM HDWR KIT $1,388.40 EA $2,776.80 Recommended Remote Spares Subtotal $19,403.52 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Host "A" Server Extended Warranty Note: Includes (1) VESTA 9-1-1 Servers, (1) VESTA Analytics Server 2 04000-01620 WARR 24X7 DL380G10 5YR $6,693.60 EA $13,387.20 Note: Upgrade & uplift from 3 yr warranty 9x5 NBD to 3 yrs, 24x7, 4 hour response time. 2 04000-01621 WARR NBD DL380G10 5YR $3,525.60 EA Optional Note: Upgrade & uplift from 3 yr warranty 9x5 NBD to 5 yrs, 9x5 NBD response time. Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (1) Workstations, (1) Management Console. 2 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $468.00 Note: Warranty upgrade from 3 yrs warranty 9x5 NBD to 5 yrs 9x5 NBD. Host "B" Server Extended Warranty Note: Includes (1) VESTA 9-1-1 Servers 1 04000-01620 WARR 24X7 DL380G10 5YR $6,693.60 EA $6,693.60 Note: Upgrade & uplift from 3 yr warranty 9x5 NBD to 3 yrs, 24x7, 4 hour response time. 1 04000-01621 WARR NBD DL380G10 5YR $3,525.60 EA Optional Note: Upgrade & uplift from 3 yr warranty 9x5 NBD to 5 yrs, 9x5 NBD response time. Workstation Extended Warranty Note: Includes (1) Workstations, (1) Management Console. 2 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $468.00 Note: Warranty upgrade from 3 yrs warranty 9x5 NBD to 5 yrs 9x5 NBD. Extended Warranties Subtotal $21,016.80 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Installation 1 950104 Installation Services $27,980.00 EA $27,980.00 1 960575 Travel Expenses and Per Diem $1,508.80 EA $1,508.80 Data Migration 64 809800-17007 FIELD ENG-STANDARD $110.00 EA $7,040.00 Implementation Services Extended Warranties Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 6 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh VESTA® 9-1-1 Features ESInet Interface Module (EIM) 80 809800-17006 FIELD ENG-EXPRESS $80.30 EA $6,424.00 Note: Initial configuration 64 809800-17006 FIELD ENG-EXPRESS $80.30 EA $5,139.20 Note: Remote FE to support Carrier Failover Testing 64 809800-17006 FIELD ENG-EXPRESS $80.30 EA $5,139.20 Note: Operational Readiness Testing per agency Project Management 1 950510 Project Management Services $37,160.00 EA $37,160.00 Implementation Services Subtotal $90,391.20 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Host "A" VM Very Large Server Bundle 2 04000-68015 V-SVR STD SPT 1YR $496.25 EA $992.50 2 04000-68017 V-SVR STD SPT 3YR $1,238.75 EA Optional 2 04000-68019 V-SVR STD SPT 5YR $2,056.25 EA Optional 1 04000-68037 V-SVR MGMT CTR SPT 1YR $2,241.25 EA $2,241.25 1 04000-68039 V-SVR MGMT CTR SPT 3YR $6,486.25 EA Optional 1 04000-68041 V-SVR MGMT CTR SPT 5YR $10,732.50 EA Optional VESTA® SMS 2 03800-03061 WARR FIREWALL 60E 1YR $227.50 EA $455.00 2 03800-03063 WARR FIREWALL 60E 3YR $596.25 EA Optional 2 03800-03065 WARR FIREWALL 60E 5YR $1,050.00 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 1 809800-35120 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 1YR $827.50 EA $827.50 1 809800-35122 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 3YR $2,205.00 EA Optional 1 809800-35124 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 5YR $2,756.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations 1 SS-0SQ-VSSL-1Y SPT VS BSC 1YR $1,300.00 EA $1,300.00 1 SS-0SQ-VSSL-3Y SPT VS BSC 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 1 SS-0SQ-VSSL-5Y SPT VS BSC 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 1 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $235.00 1 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 1 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 2 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $1,500.00 2 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 2 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional Peripherals & Gateways 2 04000-00176 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 1YR $75.00 EA $150.00 2 04000-00178 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 3YR $225.00 EA Optional 2 04000-00180 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 5YR $375.00 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional Support Services Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 7 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh 1 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $153.75 1 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 1 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Servers 2 809800-16361 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 1YR $1,673.75 EA $3,347.50 2 809800-16363 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 3YR $4,627.50 EA Optional 2 809800-16365 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 5YR $7,310.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations 2 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $1,350.00 2 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 2 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices 9 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $4,050.00 9 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 9 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional Host "B" VESTA® 9-1-1 Servers VM Very Large Server Bundle 2 04000-68015 V-SVR STD SPT 1YR $496.25 EA $992.50 2 04000-68017 V-SVR STD SPT 3YR $1,238.75 EA Optional 2 04000-68019 V-SVR STD SPT 5YR $2,056.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Activity View 1 809800-35120 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 1YR $827.50 EA $827.50 1 809800-35122 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 3YR $2,205.00 EA Optional 1 809800-35124 V911 ACT VIEW SW SPT 5YR $2,756.25 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 Basic Operations 1 SS-0SQ-VSSL-1Y SPT VS BSC 1YR $1,300.00 EA $1,300.00 1 SS-0SQ-VSSL-3Y SPT VS BSC 3YR $3,465.00 EA Optional 1 SS-0SQ-VSSL-5Y SPT VS BSC 5YR $5,053.75 EA Optional VESTA® 9-1-1 IRR Module 1 809800-35110 V911 IRR SW SPT 1YR $235.00 EA $235.00 1 809800-35112 V911 IRR SW SPT 3YR $627.50 EA Optional 1 809800-35114 V911 IRR SW SPT 5YR $783.75 EA Optional Network Equipment 1 03800-03061 WARR FIREWALL 60E 1YR $227.50 EA $227.50 1 03800-03063 WARR FIREWALL 60E 3YR $596.25 EA Optional 1 03800-03065 WARR FIREWALL 60E 5YR $1,050.00 EA Optional 2 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $1,500.00 2 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 2 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional Peripherals & Gateways 2 04000-00176 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 1YR $75.00 EA $150.00 2 04000-00178 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 3YR $225.00 EA Optional 2 04000-00180 SW SPT ANALOG GATEWAY 5YR $375.00 EA Optional VESTA® Analytics Hosted 1 809800-03361 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 1YR $355.00 EA $355.00 1 809800-03363 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 3YR $945.00 EA Optional 1 809800-03365 SPT V-ANLYT ENT/HOST 5YR $1,181.25 EA Optional 1 SA-MSG-ALSL-1Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 1YR $153.75 EA $153.75 1 SA-MSG-ALSL-3Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 3YR $410.00 EA Optional 1 SA-MSG-ALSL-5Y SPT V-ANLYT STD 5YR $597.50 EA Optional Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 8 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Servers 1 809800-16361 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 1YR $1,673.75 EA $1,673.75 1 809800-16363 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 3YR $4,627.50 EA Optional 1 809800-16365 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 5YR $7,310.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations 2 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $1,350.00 2 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 2 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices 8 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $3,600.00 8 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 8 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Servers 1 809800-16361 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 1YR $1,673.75 EA $1,673.75 1 809800-16363 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 3YR $4,627.50 EA Optional 1 809800-16365 M&R PM AV SVR SRVC 5YR $7,310.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: Workstations 2 809800-16377 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 1YR $675.00 EA $1,350.00 2 809800-16379 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 3YR $1,881.25 EA Optional 2 809800-16381 M&R PM AV WKST SRVC 5YR $3,015.00 EA Optional Monitoring, PM & AV Service: IP Devices 11 809800-16343 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 1YR $450.00 EA $4,950.00 11 809800-16345 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 3YR $1,237.50 EA Optional 11 809800-16347 M&R IP DEVICE SRVC 5YR $1,935.00 EA Optional IES Labor Support Side A 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR $7,547.94 EA $7,547.94 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 23,096.71 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 38,871.91 EA Optional IES Labor Support Side B 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR $9,562.98 EA $9,562.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 3 YR 29,262.73 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 MAINT 1 YR 49,249.37 EA Optional Cisco Router support 2 CIS-CON SNT-4431 MESB 4431 WAN ROUTER SPT 1 Yr $2,247.50 EA $4,495.00 2 CIS-CON SNT-4431 MESB 4431 WAN ROUTER SPT 3 Yr $2,292.45 EA Optional 2 CIS-CON SNT-4431 MESB 4431 WAN ROUTER SPT 5Yr $2,338.30 EA Optional IES Network Labor Support 1 IESMAINT01 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 1 Yr $2,160.98 EA $2,160.98 1 IESMAINT03 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 3 Yr 6,612.60 EA Optional 1 IESMAINT05 IES 24X7X365 LABOR SUPPORT 5 Yr 11,129.05 EA Optional Support Services Subtotal $54,407.18 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Host "A" Cables and Switches 1 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $750.00 1 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 1 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional Workstation Equipment 1 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $234.00 Support Services Host Spares Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 9 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh Host "B" Cables and Switches 1 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $750.00 1 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 1 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $2,111.25 EA Optional Workstation Equipment 1 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $234.00 Support Services Host Spares Subtotal $1,968.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Network Equipment 2 04000-29681 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 1YR $785.00 EA $1,570.00 2 04000-29683 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 3YR $2,330.00 EA Optional 2 04000-29685 WARR 2960-X 48P 24X7 5YR $3,816.25 EA Optional Network Equipment 2 04000-29717 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 1YR $750.00 EA $1,500.00 2 04000-29719 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 3YR $2,111.25 EA Optional 2 04000-29716 WARR 2960-X 24P 24X7 5YR $3,437.50 EA Optional Workstation Equipment 2 04000-01605 WARR NBD Z240/Z2 WKST 5YR $234.00 EA $468.00 Support Services Remote Spares Subtotal $3,538.00 Qty.Part No.Description Unit Price U/M Total Cisco ISR 4431 2 ISR4431/K9 Cisco ISR 4431 (4GE,3NIM,8G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$4,898.33 EA $9,796.66 2 CON-SNT-ISR4431K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4431 (4GE,$5,276.89 EA $10,553.78 2 SL-44-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4400 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4430-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4430 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 PWR-4430-AC/2 AC Power Supply (Secondary PS) for Cisco ISR 4430 $317.90 EA $635.81 6 CAB-AC AC Power Cord (North America), C13, NEMA 5- 15P, 2.1m $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-44-4G 4G DRAM (1 x 4G) for Cisco ISR 4400 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-FLSH-8G 8G eUSB Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4430 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 MEM-4400-DP-2G 2G DRAM (1 DIMM) for Cisco ISR 4400 Data Plane $0.00 EA $0.00 2 NIM-BLANK Blank faceplate for NIM slot on Cisco ISR 4400 $0.00 EA $0.00 2 FL-4430-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4430 Series $2,086.28 EA $4,172.57 2 SISR4400UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4400 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 4 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $3,011.62 Cisco Pluggables 4 GLC-SX-MMD=1000BASE-SX SFP transceiver module, MMF, 850nm, DOM $137.22 EA $548.88 12 GLC-LH-SMD=1000BASE-LX/LH SFP transceiver module, MMF/SMF, 1310nm, DOM $271.79 EA $3,261.46 2 CWDM-SFP-1530=CWDM 1530 NM SFP Gigabit Ethernet and 1G/2G FC $1,323.30 EA $2,646.60 2 CWDM-SFP-1490=CWDM 1490 NM SFP Gigabit Ethernet and 1G/2G FC $1,323.30 EA $2,646.60 Network Routers Support Services Remote Spares Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 10 of 11 Quotation Vesta Hardware Refresh Host A and B Hardware Refresh Spare Cisco ISR 4431 1 ISR4431/K9 Cisco ISR 4431 (4GE,3NIM,8G FLASH,4G DRAM,IPB)$4,898.33 EA $4,898.33 1 CON-SNT-ISR4431K SNTC-8X5XNBD Cisco ISR 4431 (4GE,$5,276.89 EA $5,276.89 1 SL-44-IPB-K9 IP Base License for Cisco ISR 4400 Series $0.00 EA $0.00 1 PWR-4430-AC AC Power Supply for Cisco ISR 4430 $0.00 EA $0.00 1 PWR-4430-AC/2 AC Power Supply (Secondary PS) for Cisco ISR 4430 $317.90 EA $317.90 2 CAB-AC AC Power Cord (North America), C13, NEMA 5- 15P, 2.1m $0.00 EA $0.00 1 MEM-44-4G 4G DRAM (1 x 4G) for Cisco ISR 4400 $0.00 EA $0.00 1 MEM-FLSH-8G 8G eUSB Flash Memory for Cisco ISR 4430 $0.00 EA $0.00 1 MEM-4400-DP-2G 2G DRAM (1 DIMM) for Cisco ISR 4400 Data Plane $0.00 EA $0.00 1 NIM-BLANK Blank faceplate for NIM slot on Cisco ISR 4400 $0.00 EA $0.00 1 FL-4430-BOOST-K9 Booster Performance License for 4430 Series $2,086.28 EA $2,086.28 1 SISR4400UK9-172 Cisco ISR 4400 Series IOS XE Universal $0.00 EA $0.00 2 NIM-2GE-CU-SFP 2-port GE WAN NIM, dual-mode RJ45 & SFP $752.90 EA $1,505.81 Network Config 2 Insight - cofig Insight $1,200.00 EA $2,400.00 Network Routers Subtotal $53,759.18 PRODUCT TOTAL VESTA® 9-1-1 Subtotal $86,172.50 VESTA® Analytics Subtotal $21,436.80 Remote Monitoring Set Up Subtotal $189.60 Recommended Spares Hosts Subtotal $12,018.72 Recommended Remote Spares Subtotal $19,403.52 Extended Warranties Subtotal $21,016.80 Implementation Services Subtotal $90,391.20 Support Services Subtotal $54,407.18 Support Services Host Spares Subtotal $1,968.00 Support Services Remote Spares Subtotal $3,538.00 Network Routers Subtotal $53,759.18 Freight and Shipping $1,387.64 TOTAL QUOTE including 1 year of support $365,689.14 Year 2 of support $61,710.57 Year 3 of support $63,561.89 Year 4 of support $65,468.75 Year 5 of support $67,432.81 Quote is valid for 120 days. Summary Additional Comments Independent Emergency Services, LLC 235 Franklin St. SW, Hutchinson MN 55350 (800) 922-8148 Page 11 of 11 Exhibit 2 To the PURCHASE AGREEMENT for a HARDWARE REFRESH / UPGRADE FOR THE FIVE-AGENCY CONSORTIUM SHARED / HOSTED VESTA 9-1-1 CALL HANDLING SYSTEM Maintenance Maintenance consists of five (5) support services; Monitor and Response (full time ongoing), Help Desk (immediate response), On-Site (two-hour response), Software Refresh, Patch Management and Virus Protection (as required), and Hardware repair and support. Monitor and Response shall include: • 24 x 7 x 365 monitoring of all servers, workstations, VESTA equipment and any other SNMP/IP compliant device on the network. • Alarm notification via e-mail to first level support should an alarm threshold be exceeded. • Remote troubleshooting tools to diagnose hardware and software problems. • Performance monitoring of network and computer components. • Maintenance check-in every 24 hours to verify monitoring is working properly. • Critical and major alarms are sent to Motorola Network Operations Center within seconds of the event. Motorola NOC notifies IES of alarms – IES notifies customer of alarms. Help Desk shall include: • 24 X 7 365 telephone access to Help Desk. • Immediate technical support shall be provided by Help Desk On- Site shall include: • Technician shall be on site within 2 hours of reported a Priority 1 issue. • Technician will contact customer via phone and / or email with hourly updates until issue is resolved. • Contractor will provide email with detailed description of the issue and its resolution. Exhibit 2 To the PURCHASE AGREEMENT for a HARDWARE REFRESH / UPGRADE FOR THE FIVE-AGENCY CONSORTIUM SHARED / HOSTED VESTA 9-1-1 CALL HANDLING SYSTEM Software Refresh, Patch Management and Virus Protection shall include: • Software upgrades and refreshes as distributed by Operating System providers (i.e. Microsoft) • Patch Management as recommended by Operating System providers. Time-sensitive path management shall be installed immediately after notification of its availability and successful testing in the VESTA system environment. • Virus Protection shall be installed and continually upgraded to maintain all current available software protection. Continual upgrades means up to daily or even multiple times per day as the provider suggests. Trouble Reporting and Escalation Trouble Reporting o IES Staff ▪ 1-320‐234‐3911 or 1-800-922-8148, week days 8:00am – 5:00pm o IES After Hours answering Service ▪ 1-800‐909‐8148 after hours and Holidays. • New Year’s Day • Martin Luther King Day • Memorial Day • Independence Day Labor Day • Thanksgiving Day • Christmas Day Call Process week days 8:00 am to 5:00 pm • The ticket will initially be taken by an IES staff member who will then enter applicable data into the ticketing system. o Customer primary contact will be notified by email on ticket entry • Ticket will then be assigned to IES Technician. o Customer primary contact will be notified by email on assignment of Technician • At that point, troubleshooting will begin. o Any update to the trouble ticket, customer will be notified. o Customer will be contacted by Phone for additional information or troubleshooting Exhibit 2 To the PURCHASE AGREEMENT for a HARDWARE REFRESH / UPGRADE FOR THE FIVE-AGENCY CONSORTIUM SHARED / HOSTED VESTA 9-1-1 CALL HANDLING SYSTEM Call Process holidays and after hours 5:01 pm to 7:59 am • Initial call will be taken by after hours’ service • After hours’ service will notify IES on call technician • IES Technician will open trouble ticket and call to get additional Details o Customer primary contact will be notified by email on ticket entry • At that point, troubleshooting will begin. o Any update to the trouble ticket, customer will be notified. o Customer will be contacted by Phone for additional information or troubleshooting Call Priorities • Calls will be escalated based on the urgency of the issue reported. Email or Telephone response time guidelines are as follows: • Priority 1: 1 hour o Email updates will go to primary contact on creation of ticket, hourly status report, any change in status, resolution, or update. o Phone contact will be as needed for troubleshooting • Priority 2: 2-8 hours o Email updates will go to primary contact on creation of ticket, daily status report, any change in status, resolution, or update. o Phone contact will be as needed for troubleshooting • Priority 3: 1-5 business days o Email updates will go to primary contact on creation of ticket, status report after three days, any change in status, resolution, or update. o Phone contact will be as needed for troubleshooting Examples A Priority 1 call is an Urgent or High Priority call, Priority 2 is a Medium Priority call, and Priority 3 is deemed to be a Low Priority issue. The criteria used to establish guidelines for these calls include, but are not limited to, as follows: Priority 1 – High • System Down • Inability to process incoming calls • Critical Program errors without workarounds • Aborted transactions or error messages preventing data integration and update • Performance issues of severe nature impacting critical processes Priority 2 – Medium • Errors impacting a minority of records • Reports calculation issues • Printer related issues (related to interfaces with the software and not the printer itself) Exhibit 2 To the PURCHASE AGREEMENT for a HARDWARE REFRESH / UPGRADE FOR THE FIVE-AGENCY CONSORTIUM SHARED / HOSTED VESTA 9-1-1 CALL HANDLING SYSTEM • Security issues • Workstation connectivity issues (Workstation specific) Priority 3 – Low • System errors that have workarounds • Usability issues • Performance issues not impacting critical processes • Report formatting issues • Training questions, how to, or implementing new processes • Issues with workarounds for large majority of calls • Recommendations for enhancements on system changes • Questions on documentation Escalation Process • If the customer does not believe the issue is being properly addressed, the escalation process is defined below: o Priority 1, escalate if no response after 1 hour o Priority 2 escalate if no response after 8 hours o Priority 3 escalate if no response after 5 days • Escalation Level 1 o IES Networking Engineer – Paul Mraz 320-234-5241 • Escalation Level 2 o IES Project Management / Sales Engineering – Robert Madich 320-234-5247 o Rick Buchholz 320-234-5231 • Escalation Level 3 o IES Manager – Dave Taylor 320-234-5284 Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.I. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Jeff Brown, Community Health Administrator Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-124: Authorizing 2022 Local Public Health Services Agreement Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-124 authorizing 2022 Local Public Health Services Agreement. INTRODUCTION: This resolution authorizes the signing of the City's annual contract with the City of Bloomington for the provision of Public Health Services. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution No. 2021-124: Authorizing 2022 Local Public Health Services Agreement Public Health Services Agreement City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 RESOLUTION NO 2021-124 AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF EDINA TO ENTER INTO A LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON WHEREAS, the CITY, acting as a Community Health Board, and pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 145A.04, is empowered to enter into a contractual agreement for the provision of statutorily prescribed public health services, and WHEREAS, the Public Health Division within the City of Bloomington is a duly certified public health agency operating in accordance with all applicable federal and state requirements, and WHEREAS, the CITY has for forty-four years contracted with the Public Health Division of the City of Bloomington for the provision of community and public health services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Edina City Council that the Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute a Public Health Services Agreement with the City of Bloomington to complete administrative and programmatic duties as a Community Health Board. Passed and adopted this 21st day of December, 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 December 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 Agreement ID: 2021-765 SECOND AMENDMENT TO LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA CITIES OF BLOOMINGTON AND EDINA THIS SECOND AMENDMENT is made on _______________________ by and between the CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA, a Minnesota municipal corporation, acting through its Public Health Division, located at 1800 West Old Shakopee Road, Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 (“Bloomington”), and the CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, a Minnesota municipal corporation, located at 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424 (“Edina”), each a “Party” and collectively the “Parties.” WHEREAS, Bloomington and Edina are parties to an Agreement dated January 1, 2020 (Agreement ID 2019-649), as amended by a First Amendment dated December 31, 2020 (Agreement ID 2020-517), pursuant to which Bloomington is responsible for providing Public Health Services to the residents of Edina (“Agreement”); and WHEREAS, the term of the Agreement ends December 31, 2021. The Parties desire to amend the Agreement to extend the term until December 31, 2022; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to amend the Agreement to include additional services for the 2022 contract year as set forth in Exhibit E, and updated pricing for the 2022 contract year as set forth in Exhibit F; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to amend the Agreement to increase the total amount of work authorized, including reimbursable expenses, by $353,000 for a total contract not-to-exceed amount of $981,000; and NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions expressed in this Second Amendment, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Paragraph 1 of the Agreement shall be amended to read: “Services to be Provided: Bloomington agrees to provide the residents of Edina with Public Health Services as set forth in Bloomington’s Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibits A, C, and E and any supplemental letter agreements entered into between the Parties (“Services”). The Services referenced in the attached Exhibits A, C, and E or any supplemental letter agreements shall be incorporated into this Agreement by reference. All Services shall be provided in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by contractors currently providing similar services.” 2. Paragraph 2 of the Agreement shall be amended to read: “Time for Completion. This Agreement shall remain in force and effect commencing from Effective Date and continuing until December 31, 2022, unless terminated by either party or amended pursuant to the Agreement.” 3. Paragraph 3 of the Agreement shall be amended to read: “Consideration: The consideration, which Edina shall pay to Bloomington, shall not exceed $981,000.00, pursuant to the terms of payment set forth in Exhibits B, D, and F and incorporated into this Agreement.” 4. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement not modified by this Second Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to the Agreement have caused this Second Amendment to be executed the day and year first above written. CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA DATED:___________________________ BY:________________________________ Its: Mayor DATED:___________________________ BY:________________________________ Its: City Manager Reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. __________________________________ Melissa J. Manderschied CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA DATED:___________________________ BY:________________________________ Its: Mayor DATED:___________________________ BY:________________________________ Its: City Manager Reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. __________________________________ 3 EXHIBIT E TO LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA CITIES OF BLOOMINGTON AND EDINA SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. Bloomington agrees to provide residents of Edina with Public Health Services, which include activities designed to protect and promote the health of the general population within a community health service area by emphasizing the prevention of disease, injury, disability, and preventable death through the promotion of effective coordination and use of community resources, and by extending Public Health Services into the community. 2. Bloomington agrees to provide Public Health Services to the residents of Edina in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised, and utilizing the same quality and kind of personnel, equipment and facilities, as Public Health Services are provided and rendered to residents of Bloomington. 3. Bloomington shall provide the Public Health Services pursuant hereto on a confidential basis, using capable, trained professionals. 4. Bloomington shall require medical malpractice insurance coverage by its physicians and other licensed professionals with whom Bloomington has a contract for professional services. 5. All Public Health Services to be rendered hereunder by Bloomington shall be rendered pursuant to and subject to public health policies, rules, and procedures now or hereafter, from time to time, adopted by the Bloomington City Council, and in full compliance with all applicable state and federal laws. 6. It shall be Bloomington's sole responsibility to determine the .qualifications, functions, training, and performance standards for all personnel rendering Public Health Services under this Agreement. 7. Bloomington will communicate with Edina relative to Public Health Services to be performed hereunder, in the form of reports, conferences, or consultations, as Edina shall request. All reports relating to the provision of Public Health Services that are given by Bloomington to the Bloomington City Council or to the Bloomington City Manager during the term of this Agreement shall also be given to Edina. 8. Bloomington also agrees to send to Edina an annual report describing the Public Health Services performed pursuant to this Agreement. Said report shall be in such detail and form as Edina may reasonably request. Also, at Edina's request, made not more than five (5) times during the term of this Agreement, responsible administrative officers of Bloomington's Division of Public Health shall attend meetings of the Edina City Council, or appropriate board or commission, to answer questions and give further information relative to the activities performed and Public Health Services rendered under this Agreement. 9. Bloomington will also provide services to Edina for Title V Maternal Child Health (MCH) and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) to qualifying women, infants, children and adolescents. Edina agrees to assign its rights to Minnesota Department of 4 Health (MDH) funding provided for the MCH and TANF programs for fiscal year 2022 to Bloomington. Bloomington will complete all required services, reports and documentation for these programs and will directly invoice MDH for the MCH and TANF services that Bloomington provides to Edina residents. 5 EXHIBIT F TO LOCAL PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA CITIES OF BLOOMINGTON AND EDINA TERMS OF PAYMENT 1. The parties agree to allocate the costs of the Services in accordance with each city’s share of the total services provided by Bloomington to all three cities (Bloomington, Edina, and Richfield) as identified below. 2. Edina shall pay Bloomington the total not-to-exceed amount of $981,000 for Services during the term of this Agreement. The amount is based on the 2021 contracted amount adjusted for the 2020 service levels as noted below. Allocation method Description of Service Share of total cost Bloomington Edina Richfield Agreed-upon percentage of cost (fixed) Administration and Planning & Health Promotion infrastructure 65% 17.5% 17.5% Internal service charges 80% 10% 10% Accreditation 33% 33% 33% SHIP 44% 30% 26% By population (as estimated by the American Community Survey) DP&C Senior Health Outbreak response 50% 29% 21% By number of clients in each city (changes annually) Maternal Health Clinical Services Share of total cost will change each year based on # of clients per city, according to the following formula: (Clients served in Edina) ------------------------------------------ = share of total cost (Clients served in all three cities) Direct expense All others cost of service provided 6 3. Bloomington will invoice Edina for the Services according to the following terms: Invoice Date Amount April 15, 2022 $88,250 July 15, 2022 $88,250 October 15, 2022 $88,250 January 15, 2023 $88,250 4. Edina shall make payment to Bloomington within fifteen (15) days of receipt after Bloomington’s invoice. Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.J. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Pete Fisher, Operations Chief Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Three 2022 Ford Explorer Hybrid Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve request for purchase for three 2022 Ford Explorer Hybrid vehicles for emergency response and fire inspection/investigation for $148,400. INTRODUCTION: These vehicles replace a 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe and two 2011 Chevrolet Tahoes. The replacement vehicles allow Fire Inspection staff to conduct fire inspections, investigations, and emergency response throughout the City. We are not increasing our allotted fleet. Fire inspections vehicles, replaced with Hybrid models, will assist in the reduction of the carbon footprint in line with the City's Green Fleet Policy. Each vehicle is $49,466.72. ATTACHMENTS: Description Request for Purchase: Three 2022 Ford Explorer Hybrid Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12200012 Department:Fire Buyer:Pete Fisher Date: 12/13/2021 Requisition Description: Fire Inspections vehicle replacement Vendor: Multiple Vendors Cost: $148,400.16 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:STATE K - STATE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION: Vehicles for Fire inspections and emergency response. Vendor Breakdown/Cost: Northwoods Ford- $113,485.20 EATI (Sirens/Lights)- $29,514.96 Knox Key Secure - $4500.00 Advanced Graphics- $900.00 BUDGET IMPACT: Equipment Replacement Levy, unknown disposal cost, no budget change Environmental Impact - item specific: 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT:Provides for continued Fire/Life Safety Inspections within the City ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:Improved Mileage, Less CO2 Vehicle - Make/Model/Year requested vehicle:2022 Ford Utility Vehicle - Make/Model/Year current vehicle (if replacement): 2008 Chevy Tahoe Vehicle - Does purchase meet Green Fleet Recommendations? YES - YES Vehicle - If does not meet Green Fleet Recommendations, justification: - MPG:+ 9 mpg Carbon Emissions:- 194 Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.K. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Ross Bintner P.E., Engineering Services Manager Item Activity: Subject:Request for Purchase: Change Order: Design Services for Replacement of Lift Station No. 6 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Change Order No. 1 to Design Services for Replacement of Lift Station No. 6 with Barr Engineering for $69,500. INTRODUCTION: Change Order No. 1 increased the contract by $69,500 from $225,000 to $294,500 due to changing scope from a prefabricated building type to build on-site type that requires architectural services. ATTACHMENTS: Description Revised Scope of Service for Design Request for Purchase: Change Order Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com December 9, 2021 Mr. Ross Bintner City of Edina 7450 Metro Blvd. Edina, MN 55439 Re: LS-6 Expanded Scope – Request for Engineering Fee Increase Dear Ross: We appreciate the continued opportunity to provide engineering services related to the update of lift station 6 (LS-6). During preliminary discussions with the City, it was determined that the City would like to install a building over LS-6 wet well and valve vault. This building was not included in the original scope for the project and Barr is respectfully requesting an increase in engineering fees to perform this design. Below is a summary of our request: Scope Item Requested Fee Structural, mechanical, and electrical engineering design for new building $39,500 Architectural design for new building (CBS Squared; subconsultant to Barr Engineering) $30,000 Total Requested Fee Increase $69,500 Original Contract Amount $225,000 Total Contract Amount $294,500 The building will be designed to the requirements of Edina’s Sustainable Buildings Policy and will have similar building materials and aesthetic to Edina’s Well #3. This additional scope also includes: Building Code Review Architectural design including: o Building materials review o Roof and floor plans and exterior elevations o Interior and exterior details and hardware schedules for doors and windows o Interior and exterior finish schedule Structural design for the following building elements: o Building envelope force computations o Header design o Roof design o Wall design Building mechanical (HVAC) and electrical design Mr. Ross Bintner December 9, 2021 Page 2 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271898 City of Edina Lift Station 6\ProjRiskMgmt\Scope Change Letter.docx Please let me know if you would like additional information regarding this request. Sincerely yours, BARR ENGINEERING CO. Julia Macejkovic Its Vice President Accepted this ____________ day of ___________________, 20____ City of Edina By Request for Purchase Requisition Number 1 CITY OF EDINA 4801 W 50th St., Edina, MN 55424 www.EdinaMN.gov | 952-927-8861 12100191 Department: Engineering Buyer: Chad Millner Date: 09/01/2021 Requisition Description: Sanitary Lift Station No 6 Design Bid CIP No19338 Vendor: BARR ENGINEERING CO Cost: $225,000.00 REVISED COST: $294,500 REPLACEMENT or NEW:REPLACEM - REPLACEMENT PURCHASE SOURCE:SERVIC K - SERVICE CONTRACT DESCRIPTION: Capital Improvement Plan Project No 19338 proposes the replacement of lift station 6 LS6 with a new station. LS6 is a major component of the sanitary conveyance system. The professional services will design and bid the replacement of this station scheduled for Spring of 2022. BUDGET IMPACT: This project will be funded from the sanitary sewer utility fund. Dec 21, 2021: Contract Change Order #1 increased the Contract by $69,500 from $225,000 to $294,500 due to changing scope from a prefabricated building type to build on-site type that requires architectual services. 2 COMMUNITY IMPACT: This lift station provides sanitary sewer service to approximately 2/3rds of the city. It is a vital piece of infrastructure to support the sanitary sewer service. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Sustainability will be considered during the design process. Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.L. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Request For Purchase From:Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications Director Item Activity: Subject:Approve Contract for Strategic Communications Plan for 2022 Referendum Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve contract with Rapp Strategies for communications, marketing and design services for elements and materials explaining a possible local option sales tax and questions on the November 2022 election ballot. INTRODUCTION: In November, the Communications Department solicited Requests for P roposals from firms interested in providing professional communications, marketing and design services for elements and materials explaining a possible local option sales tax and questions on the November 2022 election ballot. Under State law, the City’s role in the referendum is to provide factual information. The City seeks to educate voters on the vision for the future of Braemar and Fred Richards parks, plans for redevelopment, the need for funding, benefits of a local option sales tax, cost and tax impact, consequences of inaction, when and were to vote and how to find more information. The City received five proposals. A team of staff from the Administration, Communications and Parks & Recreation departments reviewed the proposals and interviewed staff from three of the firms that submitted proposals. The team recommends hiring Rapp Strategies for this project. Rapp Strategies has a considerable amount of experience with this sort of work, having led the strategy and executed communications for 72 local referenda. Rapp Strategies’ work would be completed in two phases. In the first phase, Jan. 3-March 14, 2022, Rapp Strategies will develop a comprehensive communications plan, supporting materials and research. In the second, March 15-Nov. 8, Rapp Strategies would manage the communications plan for the referendum and assist the City’s Communications Department with various referendum-related communications pieces. The Communications Department has negotiated the costs to $30,000 for the first phase. Rapp Strategies would be paid an hourly rate (with a total not to exceed $20,000) for the second phase. ATTACHMENTS: Description Rapp Strategies Contract Rapp Strategies Proposal Rapp Strategies Presentation Rapp Strategies, Inc. 333 South Seventh Street, Suite 2120 | Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.843.4500 | www.rappstrategies.com December 15, 2021 Jennifer Bennerotte Communications Director, City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Ms. Bennerotte: This letter, together with any Attachments, is the agreement (“Agreement”) between Rapp Strategies, Inc. (“Rapp Strategies”), a Minnesota company located at 333 South 7th Street, Suite 2120, Minneapolis, MN 55402, and the City of Edina (“Client” or “City”), located at 4801 W 50th Street, MN 55424, wherein Rapp Strategies will provide the services to the Client described substantially in Section Number 1., below. This Agreement shall be effective from December 21, 2021 until November 30, 2022. Client is pursuing a plan to make infrastructure improvements at Braemar Park and spur further development of the Fred Richards Park (“Projects”). Client received legislative approval for a half-cent local sales tax option to present to voters at a Nov. 8, 2022 referendum (“Referendum”). If the Referendum is approved, the sales tax will provide the funding necessary to complete the Projects. 1. Rapp Strategies is being retained by the Client to provide strategic counsel and communications services to support Client’s public information and community engagement program related to its Referendum pursuant to the following scope of services and any Attachments: a. Phase 1: Public Information Communications Plan Development. Between Jan. 3 and March 15, 2022, Rapp Strategies will work with City staff to develop strategies, tactical communications plan and communications materials as follows: i. Core messaging and talking points about the Projects and Referendum; ii. A month-by-month communications plan for the period between February 2022 and November 2022; iii. Design survey questions to be used by a third-party telephone polling vendor chosen by the Client for a community survey of 400 adult residents of the City of Edina, and present analysis of survey results to Client in Power Point format; iv. Written content for publication on Client’s Referendum website; v. Logos and icons for the Referendum questions, including a style guide; and vi. Draft content and design for a pamphlet describing the Projects and Referendum. Client agrees to pay Rapp Strategies a fixed fee of $30,000.00 for the services described in Section Number 1(a). Rapp Strategies will invoice the Client in two equal installments at the end of January and March 2022. Page 2 of 7 For the work described in Section Number 1(a), Todd Rapp, CEO of Rapp Strategies will provide oversight and strategic counsel and Todd Stone, Senior Director at Rapp Strategies will lead the work and be the day-to-day contact for the Client. Other Rapp Strategies staff may provide services as necessary to the completion of the work. b. Phase 2: Ongoing communications services. From March 15 through November 8, 2022, Rapp Strategies will provide the following services to support Client’s Referendum information and public engagement program: i. Ongoing management of the Referendum communications plan described in Section 1(a)(ii); ii. One two-hour training session for up to six City of Edina personnel to prepare for media interviews related to the Referendum; iii. Review and editing of Referendum-related communications material developed by Client; iv. Guidance on how to maximize the effectiveness of the Client’s Referendum website; v. A slide deck presentation about the Referendum for the use of City leaders; and vi. Bi-monthly meetings between Rapp Strategies and City staff to assess the impact of communications and manage unforeseen issues Client agrees to pay Rapp Strategies’ professional fees at current hourly rates, not to exceed $20,000.00, for the services described in Section Number 1(b). Rapp Strategies will invoice the client monthly for services provided on an hourly basis. For the work described in Section Number 1(b), Todd Stone will oversee the implementation of the work and serve as the day-to-day contact, and Todd Rapp will provide strategic counsel on specific community issues, as needed. c. Additional services. If Client seeks a significantly broader scope of services than described in Section Numbers 1 (a) or (b), Rapp Strategies will invoice the Client at the current hourly rates set forth in Section Number 2, below. 2. Rapp Strategies invoices are detailed to show the services performed by individual Rapp Strategies account staff members. For reference, Rapp Strategies current hourly rates are: • Partners, $325/hour • Senior Counselors or Vice President, $275-325/hour • Directors, $225-275/hour • Account Managers/Supervisors, $180-230/hour • Senior Account Executives, $145-180/hour • Account Executives, $110-145/hour • Assistant Account Executives, $80-110/hour • Support Staff, $55/hour Rapp Strategies will provide at least thirty (30) days written notice prior to changes in these hourly rates. 3. Rapp Strategies will invoice the Client for work on a monthly basis. Client shall submit payment to Rapp Strategies within thirty-five (35) days of the invoice date. Overdue invoices incur a Page 3 of 7 service charge of 1.5% per month (18% annually). The Client agrees to reimburse Rapp Strategies for all expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred in the collection of any overdue and unpaid balance. This section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 4. The costs associated with third-party vendor services are not included in the fees agreed to for services described in Section Number 1. Examples of such third-party vendor services include, but are not limited to, printing of materials, mailing, website hosting and URLs, video production and survey field work. Client will be responsible for contracting with all third-party vendors and making all payments for such third-party services. If mutually agreed to by Rapp Strategies and Client, Rapp Strategies may provide the Client with access to third-party vendors by contracting directly with such vendors on the behalf of the Client. In doing so, Rapp Strategies provides the Client with access to Rapp Strategies’ relationships with such vendors, allowing the Client access to potentially significant cost savings such as avoiding set-up expenses and other account initiation fees. On behalf of the Client, Rapp Strategies will manage the vendor’s services, handle billing arrangements and provide for timely payment to the vendor. In consideration for the Client’s access to such cost savings and to offset the expense of managing vendor invoices and pre-payment, Rapp Strategies will add a mark-up of fifteen percent (15%) to the vendor’s invoice when Rapp Strategies bills the Client for such vendor’s services. Rapp Strategies is not reselling the vendor’s services and the vendor’s invoice will include sales tax as appropriate. 5. In the event the Client discovers any potential errors in or has questions about an invoice, the Client agrees to submit, in writing prior to the due date provided on the invoice, (i) the dollar amount of the suspected error or transaction needing documentation, and (ii) a description of the suspected billing error and/or an explanation of why additional documentation is requested. The Client agrees that if it does not notify Rapp Strategies of any suspected error within thirty (30) days of the date of the invoice, then it foregoes any rights to dispute such error. 6. Rapp Strategies will maintain accurate records of all work performed for the Client and out-of- pocket expenses incurred on the Client's behalf and will make these records available for inspection for up to one (1) year following the date of any work performed. The Client agrees that it will not be entitled to access to confidential Rapp Strategies information, including salary or overhead information. 7. The data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by Rapp Strategies, any subcontractor of Rapp Strategies or Client in performing the work contemplated under this Agreement and this Agreement itself (“Agreement Data”) are subject to the requirements of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. Chapter 13 (“Act”). Agreement Data is considered public information under the Act, unless it can be demonstrated that any given Agreement Data should not be treated as public information, including but not limited to that such Agreement Data is a “trade secret” pursuant to Minn. Stat. §13.37, subd. 1 or “nonpublic business data” pursuant to Minn. Stat. §13.591. In the event that Rapp Strategies receives a request for Agreement Data under Minn. Stat. Chapter 13, Rapp Strategies will notify Client promptly and direct such requests to provide Agreement Data to Client so that Client may respond to the request. Client acknowledges that Rapp Strategies does not have a duty to provide access to public data to the public if the public data are available from the Client. Page 4 of 7 8. To the extent Rapp Strategies is asked by Client’s legal counsel to perform public relations strategy and functions in support of legal actions involving the Client, Rapp Strategies will make all reasonable efforts to protect this work from disclosure to third parties using the attorney work product doctrine. 9. Rapp Strategies will make all reasonable efforts to preserve confidential information provided by the Client or developed by Rapp Strategies on behalf of the Client in a manner complying with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. “Confidential Information” for purposes of this agreement means all non-public information, including, but not limited to, product information, customer information, financial information, business and marketing plans, production plans and methods, customer lists, business contacts, fee schedules, personnel information, on-site and off-site computer data, computer usernames and passwords, business systems and techniques, and any documents labeled or stamped “trade secrets,” “proprietary,” or “confidential.” Rapp Strategies acknowledges and agrees that in connection with the provision of the services to the Client, Rapp Strategies shall not, during the term or thereafter, use, publish, otherwise disclose, or utilize in any way, any of the Client’s Confidential Information, at any time during or after the term of this Agreement, and continuing for so long as the Client continues to reasonably maintain the non-public nature of such Confidential Information, except as necessary to provide the services hereunder. Upon termination of this Agreement and at the request of the Client, Rapp Strategies shall return to the Client any of the Client’s Confidential Information in its possession. 10. Rapp Strategies will not and shall not be expected to undertake activities to verify the accuracy of any information supplied to it by the Client and is entitled to rely on such submission in the discharge of its services. 11. Rapp Strategies specifically acknowledges that Client is subject to Minn. Stat. §297A.99, subd. 1(d) and Rapp Strategies agrees that all work contemplated by this Agreement will be subject to Client’s review and final approval prior to publication so that Client may ensure compliance with that statute and other law. 12. The Client agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Rapp Strategies, together with its shareholders, officers, employees, agents, successors and assigns, from and against any loss, claim, suit, judgment, proceeding, investigation, liability, cost and expense (including the immediate assumption and payment of any Rapp Strategies legal expenses and attorney’s fees and out-of-pocket costs and expenses), penalty, damage, settlement or obligation of any kind or nature that arises from or is incurred as a result of (i) any act or omission of the Client, its agents or affiliates, (ii) any information provided by the Client to Rapp Strategies or approved and/or adopted by the Client, or (iii) representations made by the Client to Rapp Strategies or to any third party. This indemnification shall include payment for time spent by Rapp Strategies personnel in connection with any such matter (including time spent in responding to subpoenas and preparing for and providing testimony in depositions and at trial) at the hourly rates specified for such personnel in this Agreement. This section shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 13. Rapp Strategies agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Client from and against any loss, claim, suit, judgment, proceeding, investigation, liability, cost and expense, penalty, damage, settlement or obligation of any kind that arises from or is incurred as a result of negligent conduct by Rapp Strategies, or as a result of communications made by Rapp Strategies to any third party, unless such communications were made at the direct request of, Page 5 of 7 provided by or approved by Client. Rapp Strategies agrees this indemnity obligation shall survive the completion or termination of this Agreement. 14. Rapp Strategies, at its expense, shall procure and maintain in force for the duration of this Agreement the following minimum insurance coverages: A. General Liability. Rapp Strategies agrees to maintain commercial general liability insurance in a minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, products completed operations, personal injury, advertising injury, and contractually assumed liability. The City shall be endorsed as additional insured. B. Automobile Liability. If Rapp Strategies operates a motor vehicle in performing the Services under this Agreement, Rapp Strategies shall maintain commercial automobile liability insurance, including owned, hired, and non-owned automobiles, with a minimum liability limit of $1,000,000 combined single limit. C. Workers’ Compensation. Rapp Strategies agrees to provide workers’ compensation insurance for all its employees in accordance with the statutory requirements of the State of Minnesota. Rapp Strategies shall also carry employers liability coverage with minimum limits are as follows: • $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease per employee • $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Disease aggregate • $500,000 – Bodily Injury by Accident D. Professional (Errors and Omissions) Liability Insurance. Rapp Strategies will maintain professional liability insurance for all claims Rapp Strategies may become legally obligated to pay resulting from any actual or alleged negligent act, error, or omission related to Rapp Strategies’ professional services required under this Agreement. Rapp Strategies is required to carry the following minimum limits: $1,000,000 per occurrence; $2,000,000 annual aggregate. The retroactive or prior acts date of such coverage shall not be after the effective date of this Agreement, and Rapp Strategies shall maintain such insurance for a period of at least three (3) years following completion of the Services. If such insurance is discontinued, extended reporting period coverage must be obtained by Rapp Strategies to fulfill this requirement. Rapp Strategies shall, prior to commencing the Services, deliver to the City a Certificate of Insurance as evidence that the above coverages are in full force and effect. The insurance requirements may be met through any combination of primary and umbrella/excess insurance. Rapp Strategies’ policies shall be the primary insurance to any other valid and collectible insurance available to the City with respect to any claim arising out of Rapp Strategies’ performance under this Agreement. Rapp Strategies’ policies and Certificate of Insurance shall contain a provision that coverage afforded under the policies shall not be cancelled without at least thirty (30) days advanced written notice to the City. Page 6 of 7 15. It is expressly understood that Rapp Strategies is an “independent contractor” and not an employee of the City. Rapp Strategies shall have control over the manner in which the Services are performed under this Agreement. Rapp Strategies shall supply, at its own expense, all materials, supplies, equipment, and tools required to accomplish the Services contemplated by this Agreement. Rapp Strategies shall not be entitled to any benefits from the City, including without limitation, insurance benefits, sick and vacation leave, workers’ compensation benefits, unemployment compensation, disability, severance pay, or retirement benefits. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute a partnership, joint venture or agency relationship. 16. In the hiring of employees to perform work under this Agreement, Rapp Strategies shall not discriminate against any person by reason of any characteristic or classification protected by state or federal law. 17. All reports, plans, specifications, data, maps, and other documents produced by Rapp Strategies in the performance of services under this Agreement shall be the property of the City. 18. The waiver by either party of any breach or failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement by the other Party shall not be construed as or constitute a continuing waiver of such provision or a waiver of any other breach of or failure to comply with any other provision of this Agreement. 19. The Contractor may not assign this Agreement to any other person unless written consent is obtained from the City. 20. This Agreement may be terminated at any time following the receipt of written notice to the address of Rapp Strategies (in the case of termination by the Client) or the Client (in the case of termination by Rapp Strategies) provided above; however, any amounts otherwise due to Rapp Strategies, irrespective of whether such amounts have been invoiced to the Client as of the date of any termination, shall remain due and payable upon the terms described herein. 21. This Agreement constitutes the whole agreement between the Client and Rapp Strategies with respect to the subject matter and supersedes any and all prior oral or written understandings, arrangements, negotiations, communications and/or representations between them. No amendment of this Agreement will be effective unless mutually agreed to in writing by Client and Rapp Strategies. 22. This Agreement is made and entered into in the State of Minnesota and the parties hereto agree the laws thereof shall govern it. Any action to enforce this Agreement shall take place in the courts of the state of Minnesota located in Hennepin County, Minnesota, or in the U.S. District Court located in Minneapolis, Minnesota. SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS: Page 7 of 7 Sincerely, Rapp Strategies, Inc. By: Todd Rapp, CEO Date: December 15, 2021 Accepted as of the ___ day of ___________, 20___ by the “Client”, described above. Signed: By: Its: 1 Rapp Strategies, Inc. Proposal to Provide Referendum Communications Services for the City of Edina NOVEMBER 12, 2021 CONTACT: Todd Stone, Senior Director & Chief of Staff | 832.710.5885 | toddstone@rappstrategies.com 333 South Seventh Street, Suite 2120 | Minneapolis, MN 55402 www.rappstrategies.com Photo: City of Edina (Local Government) Facebook 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introductory Letter 3 Firm Overview 4 Staff Profiles 5 Referendum Experience 6 References 8 Scope, Costs and Calendar 9 Work Samples 10 3 Jennifer Bennerotte, Communications Director, City of Edina 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Jennifer: Rapp Strategies, Inc. is honored to submit a proposal to the City of Edina for professional communications services to help the city inform its residents about the local option sales tax questions that will appear on the November 2022 election ballot. Rapp Strategies is a full-service public affairs agency with a strong record of success serving clients with strategy, public communications, media relations, material development, and opinion research and analysis. During the past 20 years, we have assisted clients with a wide range of public affairs challenges and opportunities across the state of Minnesota, including the approval and/or construction of landmark projects with public participation, such as Rochester’s Destination Medical Center, the new Vikings stadium and the rebuild of the I-35W bridge. We are confident stating that no Minnesota firm has a broader background in recent local government referendum work than Rapp Strategies. In fact, Rapp Strategies has led the strategy and executed communications for 72 local referenda. We are pleased that our clients succeeded in 53 of those initiatives, including seven school district referendums in November 2021. As you know, local governments have a responsibility to inform their residents about significant investments of public resources. Your residents will be looking to you, other city leaders and your council members to provide accurate information about your plans to make important improvements at Braemar Park and spur further development of the Fred Richards Park. When we work with local governments on referenda, we have found that every community and proposal bring different challenges, so we work closely with leadership and staff to develop the appropriate communications strategy and work plan for each referendum election. Because we contract directly with the responsible local government, we focus on community outreach and public engagement for your residents, consistent with the limitations of Minnesota Statutes 297A.99. Per your Request for Proposals, we can assist the city in developing the plan and materials that will help you successfully launch a public information effort. Further, if you have the need, we can provide ongoing communications support throughout 2022 that supplement your staff’s strengths and remain on call when challenging issues arise. If the City of Edina chooses Rapp Strategies to provide communications services for its referendum, Todd Rapp, President and CEO, would lead development of the strategic communications plan and community survey. Todd Stone, Senior Director and Chief of Staff, would serve as the project manager. Account Executive Anna Shay would deliver tactical implementation assisted by members of Rapp Strategies’ account staff. Todd Stone and Anna Shay would serve as the primary contacts. We appreciate this opportunity to engage you and your team. Please feel free to reach out to Todd Stone if you have any questions about our proposal. Regards, Todd Rapp, President and CEO Todd Stone, Senior Director 4 FIRM OVERVIEW Rapp Strategies is a privately held C corporation with a single owner, six employees and two open positions. The firm was launched under its current brand in 2017, but that was hardly the start of the company. Himle and Associates began in 1982 as a full-service public affairs firm. In 1989, Tom Horner joined the firm as a partner, creating Himle Horner. By late 2001, Todd Rapp joined the firm as Managing Director, becoming President in 2008, co-owner of the rebranded Himle Rapp in 2010, and sole owner of Rapp Strategies in 2017. For simplicity, this proposal uses the firm name “Rapp Strategies” to describe past engagements of the firm, even those that occurred under previous business names. However, all engagements referenced herein occurred during Todd Rapp’s tenure with the firm (December 31, 2001 – present) and involved his leadership. Rapp Strategies has built its reputation on successfully managing complex challenges. Our accomplishments include difficult projects such as: • Passage of the 2006 constitutional amendment on transportation funding • Landmark tobacco control policies • More than $9 billion in public construction projects Our team is comprised of staff with background in government, communications, the media and law – this allows us to bring sophisticated insights to complex public affairs challenges. We understand how government affairs and public policy work, and how to help change things when they are not working. We help clients empower their vision for the future by: Shaping understanding Managing risk Strengthening reputation Advancing good ideas Rapp Strategies’ reputation for providing outstanding service to clients is based on the qualities that set us apart from other agencies. Every account is managed by a senior level staff person who is responsible for the development of strategy and the implementation of all activities. By starting engagements with identifying the right strategies, the remainder of the communications plan supports our client’s chosen outcomes. This results in a more efficient, and usually more successful, plan. 5 STAFF PROFILES TODD RAPP, PRESIDENT & CEO With three decades in public service and the private sector, Todd has been part of strategies that have addressed some of our region's most complex and important issues. For the past 19 years, Todd has served as Managing Director, President and now President and CEO of Rapp Strategies and its predecessor firms. Prior to joining the firm in 2001, Todd was Director of Minnesota Public Affairs for Northern States Power and served in leadership positions in state government and politics, including as Executive Director to former House Speaker Phil Carruthers. TODD STONE, SENIOR DIRECTOR Todd is an MBA-trained news leader with 20 years of service in management positions within news organizations throughout the country, including The Denver Post, Star Tribune and Houston Chronicle. He offers strong experience in writing and editing, project management, media relations, research, social media and digital news reporting. Todd helped lead the public communications efforts for Elk River’s sales tax referendum and provided communications support for more than 15 school district referendums. ANNA SHAY, ACCOUNT EXECUTIVE Prior to joining Rapp Strategies in 2016, Anna worked as an editor for bestselling author Julie Klassen. As Account Executive, Anna has led project work for public and nonprofit organizations. Anna offers expertise in writing, research, media relations, digital advocacy and social media. She has managed social media channels, developed original content, promoted media coverage, and produced letters to the editor, advocacy emails and press releases. Over the past two years, Anna has been the day-to-day lead over several successful school communications efforts for school district referendums. 6 REFERENDUM EXPERIENCE Many local governments turn to outside counsel in an effort to meet the public’s expectations for accurate and timely information leading up to a referendum election. At Rapp Strategies, we have extensive experience developing strategic communications plans and preparing public information materials for local governments to use for community outreach during a referendum. Over the past decade, Rapp Strategies has helped lead and execute communications on 72 local referenda in Minnesota and Wisconsin, with our clients succeeding in 53 of those initiatives, including seven successful school referendums in November 2021. We are currently working with Hermantown, Itasca County and Maple Grove on sales tax proposals for 2022. Rapp Strategies has extensive experience developing a wide range of materials for local governments to use in communicating about a referendum. We have produced a diverse portfolio of websites, brochures, direct mail pieces, annual reports, newsletters and other publications. Further, Rapp Strategies can provide the direction and oversight of independent public research that can inform communications initiatives and messaging, including qualitative research, scientific polling and other forms of survey work. Rapp Strategies currently provides strategic counsel on complicated public issues for several Twin Cities municipalities. We have also led strategic planning and issue management for other area local governments, including New Brighton, Lakeville and Dakota County. As part of our services, we have produced community outreach and public engagement plans, preparing external messaging guides, addressed potential crises and trained staff and leaders to manage media interviews. Rapp Strategies also played a leadership role in developing strategy and implementing communications plans for the legislative approval and funding of the Northstar Commuter Rail on behalf of the Northstar Corridor Development Authority. OUR APPROACH TO REFERENDA Local governments have a responsibility to inform their residents about significant investments of public resources, and your residents will be looking for accurate information about the park projects and sales tax to support them. In Rapp Strategies’ experience, insufficient communication is the most common reason a local government referendum fails. That is why we work closely with local government leaders to develop and implement a community outreach and public engagement plan that informs residents about the value and scope of a project, explains how the referendum will finance it, and provides answers to questions that residents have. 7 Every public referendum is unique, based on the community and the nature of each project. However, we have found that local governments are most successful when the core of their community outreach and public engagement plan includes the following elements: • Vision behind the investment • Need for the project • Process to develop a plan • Plan itself • Expected benefits of the plan • Cost, tax impact and other impacts inherent to the project • Consequences of not moving forward • Where to find more information • How and where residents can vote It’s important to use a variety of media to ensure that your message reaches potential voters on the communications platforms that they prefer. Typically, the core of your public information should include most or all of the following types of outreach: • Project website • Brochure/fact sheet • FAQ • Social media • Personal meetings with local leaders • Newsletter articles • Informational videos • Local media stories and letters • Feedback mechanism • Community presentation Every local government has different communications skills and capacity. Rapp Strategies is flexible in structuring a scope of services plan and budget that meets the needs of our clients. We look forward to the opportunity to work with the city to understand its needs and how best to meet them. 8 REFERENCES CALVIN PORTNER City Administrator, Elk River cportner@ElkRiverMN.gov 763-635-1001 ANDREW WITTENBORG Communications & Marketing Manager, City of Minnetonka awittenborg@minnetonkamn.gov 952-939-8207 JAY BELCASTRO Superintendent, Lake Superior School District jbelcastro@isd381.org 218-834-8201 (ext. 8213) 9 SCOPE, COSTS AND CALENDAR We consciously work to provide high quality services that meet or exceed client expectations, delivered on time and within budget. If selected, Rapp Strategies will work with city staff to develop a comprehensive communications plan, supporting materials and research. As outlined by the city’s RFP, these elements include the following: • A month-by-month communications work plan • Community survey field work and analysis, working with Morris Leatherman Company (Rapp Strategies’ preferred research vendor) using a 400-sample of adult residents • Core messaging to inform voters • Logos and icons for the referendum questions, including a style guide • Pamphlet to be mailed to residents • Written content for a microsite Presuming contract approval on Dec. 21, work would begin on Jan. 3, 2022, with an expected completion date of March 14, 2022. The cost would be a fixed fee of $45,000, which includes $15,000 for the vendor cost of the survey field work. Additional Services: Beyond the core services described above, Rapp Strategies is offering an additional package of services for consideration to support the city’s ongoing communications efforts beyond March 15, which include the following: 1. Ongoing management of communications plan regarding the referendum 2. Building and managing updates of the website 3. Producing articles, press releases, op-eds or graphic material for social media each month to support earned media efforts or for use in city publications 4. Creating 12 to 15 social media posts each month for Edina’s social media accounts 5. Conducting one two-hour training session for up to six City of Edina personnel to prepare for media interviews related to the project and referendum 6. Developing a slide deck presentation about the referendum and projects for the use of city leaders 7. Regular meetings between Rapp Strategies and City of Edina staff to assess the impact of communications and manage unforeseen issues This work would begin March 15 and continue through Nov. 8, 2022. Rapp Strategies would charge professional fees at current hourly rates for a total budget not to exceed $35,000. Rapp Strategies will invoice the city monthly for pre-approved services provided on an hourly basis. 10 Additional services: If the city requests additional services beyond the agreed upon scope of services, those services will be billed based on a pre-approved budget at Rapp Strategies’ current hourly fees as follows: • Principals, $325/hour • Senior Counselors, $275-325/hour • Directors, $225-275/hour • Account Managers/Supervisors, $180-225/hour • Senior Account Executives, $145-180/hour • Account Executives, $110-145/hour • Assistant Account Executives, $80-110/hour • Support Staff, $55/hour WORK SAMPLES For your consideration, we have provided a variety of examples of our work producing referendum materials, including fact sheets, brands/logos and microsites. ELK RIVER SALES TAX REFERENDUM IN 2018 LOGO SOCIAL MEDIA 11 BLUE EARTH AREA SCHOOLS OPERATING LEVY IN 2020 LOGO MICROSITE FACT SHEET 12 AITKIN PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL PROJECTS LEVY IN 2021 LOGO SOCIAL MEDIA MICROSITE 13 BRAINERD PUBLIC SCHOOLS BOND REFERENDUM 2018 PROJECT INFORMATION BOOKLET (28 PAGES) Todd Rapp and Todd StoneRapp Strategies, Inc.C R E AT I N G A S U C C E S S F U L R E F E R E N D U M P L A N :Public Outreach and Community Engagement Public Outreach and Community Engagement Public Outreach and Community Engagement Public Outreach and Community Engagement Strategies for the City of EdinaStrategies for the City of EdinaStrategies for the City of EdinaStrategies for the City of EdinaD E C E M B E R 2021 2STRATEGY Rapp Strategies: Rapp Strategies: Rapp Strategies: Rapp Strategies: AAAAn Experienced and Trusted Partnern Experienced and Trusted Partnern Experienced and Trusted Partnern Experienced and Trusted Partner272 local referenda 72 local referenda 72 local referenda 72 local referenda with 53 client with 53 client with 53 client with 53 client successessuccessessuccessessuccessesUnderstand and Understand and Understand and Understand and manage political manage political manage political manage political environmentsenvironmentsenvironmentsenvironmentsOffer both strategy Offer both strategy Offer both strategy Offer both strategy and communications and communications and communications and communications supportsupportsupportsupportPlans designed Plans designed Plans designed Plans designed to meet your to meet your to meet your to meet your community’s needscommunity’s needscommunity’s needscommunity’s needs 31)1)1)1) High turnout, low attentionHigh turnout, low attentionHigh turnout, low attentionHigh turnout, low attention2)2)2)2) Local issues defined on Local issues defined on Local issues defined on Local issues defined on state/national partisan termsstate/national partisan termsstate/national partisan termsstate/national partisan terms3)3)3)3) Speed of distribution Speed of distribution Speed of distribution Speed of distribution of informationof informationof informationof information4)4)4)4) COVID exhaustionCOVID exhaustionCOVID exhaustionCOVID exhaustionSTRATEGYConsiderations Considerations Considerations Considerations for a Nov 2022 for a Nov 2022 for a Nov 2022 for a Nov 2022 ReferendumReferendumReferendumReferendum3 4I want to improve I want to improve I want to improve I want to improve my communitymy communitymy communitymy communityI am worried about I am worried about I am worried about I am worried about my own financesmy own financesmy own financesmy own financesPrice Price Price Price PointPointPointPointResidents won’t reach Residents won’t reach Residents won’t reach Residents won’t reach a consensus on this a consensus on this a consensus on this a consensus on this amountamountamountamountSTRATEGYHow Residents Think About a ReferendumHow Residents Think About a ReferendumHow Residents Think About a ReferendumHow Residents Think About a ReferendumThe vote won’t be unanimous, and The vote won’t be unanimous, and The vote won’t be unanimous, and The vote won’t be unanimous, and your strategy should reflect that realityyour strategy should reflect that realityyour strategy should reflect that realityyour strategy should reflect that reality....4 5Perceptions of City LeadershipPerceptions of City LeadershipPerceptions of City LeadershipPerceptions of City LeadershipMake decisions in the best interests of residents?Use tax dollars wisely?Engage citizens in decision-making?Belief this plan provides high Belief this plan provides high Belief this plan provides high Belief this plan provides high value for tax dollarsvalue for tax dollarsvalue for tax dollarsvalue for tax dollarsEasy access to project Easy access to project Easy access to project Easy access to project information and answers information and answers information and answers information and answers to questionsto questionsto questionsto questionsWhat do my friends What do my friends What do my friends What do my friends and neighbors think?and neighbors think?and neighbors think?and neighbors think?STRATEGYDeterminants of Residents’ SupportDeterminants of Residents’ SupportDeterminants of Residents’ SupportDeterminants of Residents’ Support5 6EXECUTIONCommunication Starts Communication Starts Communication Starts Communication Starts NowNowNowNowand and and and AcceleratesAcceleratesAcceleratesAccelerates During the YearDuring the YearDuring the YearDuring the Year6WINTERWINTERWINTERWINTERSPRINGSPRINGSPRINGSPRING END OF END OF END OF END OF SCHOOL YEARSCHOOL YEARSCHOOL YEARSCHOOL YEARAUG 9AUG 9AUG 9AUG 9(PRIMARY(PRIMARY(PRIMARY(PRIMARY))))LABOR DAYLABOR DAYLABOR DAYLABOR DAYSEPT 23 SEPT 23 SEPT 23 SEPT 23 (EARLY VOTING (EARLY VOTING (EARLY VOTING (EARLY VOTING STARTS)STARTS)STARTS)STARTS)NOV 8NOV 8NOV 8NOV 8(ELECTION DAY)(ELECTION DAY)(ELECTION DAY)(ELECTION DAY)CITIZENCITIZENCITIZENCITIZENENGAGEMENTENGAGEMENTENGAGEMENTENGAGEMENTLEVELLEVELLEVELLEVELEngagement Engagement Engagement Engagement likely to be likely to be likely to be likely to be slowerslowerslowerslowerEngagement Engagement Engagement Engagement likely to be likely to be likely to be likely to be slowerslowerslowerslowerVoters start to Voters start to Voters start to Voters start to awaken; City must reawaken; City must reawaken; City must reawaken; City must re----energize outreachenergize outreachenergize outreachenergize outreachVoters start to Voters start to Voters start to Voters start to awaken; City must reawaken; City must reawaken; City must reawaken; City must re----energize outreachenergize outreachenergize outreachenergize outreachAs voters begin to As voters begin to As voters begin to As voters begin to make decisions, make decisions, make decisions, make decisions, remind them whereremind them whereremind them whereremind them whereto find questions to find questions to find questions to find questions on balloton balloton balloton ballotAs voters begin to As voters begin to As voters begin to As voters begin to make decisions, make decisions, make decisions, make decisions, remind them whereremind them whereremind them whereremind them whereto find questions to find questions to find questions to find questions on balloton balloton balloton ballotLaying the Laying the Laying the Laying the groundwork of groundwork of groundwork of groundwork of Need, Process, and Need, Process, and Need, Process, and Need, Process, and Plan BenefitsPlan BenefitsPlan BenefitsPlan BenefitsLaying the Laying the Laying the Laying the groundwork of groundwork of groundwork of groundwork of Need, Process, and Need, Process, and Need, Process, and Need, Process, and Plan BenefitsPlan BenefitsPlan BenefitsPlan Benefits 7EXECUTIONNine Most Important Items for the Nine Most Important Items for the Nine Most Important Items for the Nine Most Important Items for the City to Communicate to ResidentsCity to Communicate to ResidentsCity to Communicate to ResidentsCity to Communicate to Residents6)6)6)6) Cost and Tax ImpactCost and Tax ImpactCost and Tax ImpactCost and Tax Impact7)7)7)7)Consequences of InactionConsequences of InactionConsequences of InactionConsequences of Inaction8)8)8)8)How to Find More InformationHow to Find More InformationHow to Find More InformationHow to Find More Information9)9)9)9)When and Where to VoteWhen and Where to VoteWhen and Where to VoteWhen and Where to Vote1)1)1)1)Vision for the FutureVision for the FutureVision for the FutureVision for the Future2)2)2)2)The NeedThe NeedThe NeedThe Need3)3)3)3)The ProcessThe ProcessThe ProcessThe Process4)4)4)4)The PlanThe PlanThe PlanThe Plan5)5)5)5)The BenefitsThe BenefitsThe BenefitsThe BenefitsCity's role is factual information as governed by M.S. 297A.997 8QUESTIONS? Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.M. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:MJ Lamon, Community Engagement Manager Item Activity: Subject:Approve 2022 Board & Commission Reappointments Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve 2022 Board and Commission reappointments. INTRODUCTION: Annually, staff conducts a member assessment of all Boards and Commissions. Members with a term limit approaching in the upcoming year are notified, and if eligible, are asked if they would like to request reappointment from City Council. The staff report provides a recommendation for all 2022 reappointments. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: 2022 Board and Commission Reappointments December 21, 2021 Mayor & City Council MJ Lamon, Community Engagement Manager Approve 2022 Board and Commission Reappointments Information / Background: Term expiration notices were sent to all individuals with terms expiring March 1, 2022. The following individuals expressed a willingness to be reappointed to their respective board or commission. Appointments will all be for a three-year term expiring 3/1/2025. All regular members are eligible for reappointment with respect to term limits and attendance requirements. Arts and Culture Commission Susan Chandler Russ Rubin Community Health Commission Andrew Hawkins Phillip King-Lowe Board of Appeal & Equalization None Construction Board of Appeals None Energy & Environment Commission Ukasha Dakane Hilda Martinez Human Rights and Relations Commission Leticia Guadarrama Jasmine Stringer-Moore Heritage Preservation Commission Garrett Knudsen Jane Lonnquist Parks & Recreation Commission None Planning Commission David Alkire James Bennett Transportation Commission Janet Kitui Bruce McCarthy Jill Plumb-Smith It is evident, the pandemic is still impacting individuals, and this affected meeting attendance for some. Staff recommends City Council reappoint the following individuals who did not meet the 75% attendance threshold back into their current seats: Teri HovAnec (EEC), Rob Loesch (CHC), Sarah Nymo (HPC), JoAnn Olsen (PC). STAFF REPORT Page 2 After making reappointments, the following vacancies will exist: Arts & Culture Commission (1), Community Health Commission (1), Construction Board of Appeals (1), Energy & Environment Commission (1), Heritage Preservation Commission (1), Human Rights & Relations Commission (2), Parks & Recreation Commission (4), Planning Commission (3), Transportation Commission (0), and Board of Appeals & Equalizations (1). Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.N. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Other From:Scott H. Neal, City Manager Item Activity: Subject:Approve Amended 2022 Calendar of Meetings and Religious Observance Dates Action, Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve the amended 2022 Calendar of Meetings and Religious Observance dates. INTRODUCTION: In order to alleviate a schedule conflict for Council Members between the City Council meeting scheduled for March 15, 2022 and the National League of Cities’ 2022 Congressional Cities Conference, the City Council will amend the 2022 Calendar of Meeting and Religious Observance Dates to reschedule the March 15, 2022 meeting to March 22, 2022. The Juneteenth holiday has also been officially added to the calendar. ATTACHMENTS: Description Amended 2022 Calendar JANUARY Jan. 1 New Year’s Day Jan. 4 City Council Jan. 6 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Jan. 10 Community Health Commission Jan. 11 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission Jan. 12 Planning Commission Jan. 13 Energy & Environment Commission Jan. 17 Martin Luther King Jr. Day Jan. 19 City Council Jan. 20 Transportation Commission Jan. 25 Human Rights & Relations Commission Jan. 26 Planning Commission Jan. 27 Arts & Culture Commission FEBRUARY Feb. 1 City Council Feb. 8 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission Feb. 9 Planning Commission Feb. 10 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Energy & Environment Commission Feb. 14 Community Health Commission Feb. 15 City Council Feb. 17 Transportation Commission Feb. 21 Presidents Day Feb. 22 Human Rights & Relations Commission Feb. 23 Planning Commission Feb. 24 Arts & Culture Commission MARCH March 1 City Council March 3 Housing & Redevelopment Authority March 8 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission March 9 Planning Commission March 10 Energy & Environment Commission March 14 Community Health Commission March 22 City Council Human Rights & Relations Commission March 23 Planning Commission March 24 Arts & Culture Commission Transportation Commission APRIL April 5 City Council April 7 Housing & Redevelopment Authority April 11 Community Health Commission April 12 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission April 13 Planning Commission April 14 Energy & Environment Commission April 15 Good Friday (Christian) April 15-17 Passover (Jewish) April 19 City Council April 21 Transportation Commission April 26 Human Rights & Relations Commission April 27 Planning Commission April 28 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Arts & Culture Commission MAY May 3 Eid al Fitr (Muslim) May 4 City Council May 9 Community Health Commission May 10 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission May 11 Planning Commission May 12 Energy & Environment Commission May 17 City Council May 19 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Transportation Commission May 24 Human Rights & Relations Commission May 25 Planning Commission May 26 Arts & Culture Commission May 30 Memorial Day JUNE June 7 City Council June 9 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Energy & Environment Commission June 13 Community Health Commission June 14 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission June 15 Planning Commission June 16 Transportation Commission June 19 Juneteenth June 20 Juneteenth observed June 21 City Council June 23 Arts & Culture Commission June 28 Human Rights & Relations Commission June 29 Planning Commission June 30 Housing & Redevelopment Authority 2022 Meeting Calendar Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Religious Observance*Holiday City Council or Housing & Redevelopment Authority Meeting Board or Commission Meeting(s) Election Day** Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 30 30 31 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 * No public meetings held. **No public meetings after 6 p.m. 28 19 9 10 JULY July 4 Independence Day July 10 Eid al-Adha (Muslim) July 11 Community Health Commission July 12 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission July 13 Planning Commission July 14 Energy & Environment Commission July 19 City Council July 21 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Transportation Commission July 26 Human Rights & Relations Commission July 27 Planning Commission July 28 Arts & Culture Commission AUGUST Aug. 2 Night to Unite Aug. 3 City Council Aug. 8 Community Health Commission Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission Aug. 9 Election Day Aug. 10 Planning Commission Aug. 11 Energy & Environment Commission Aug. 16 City Council Aug. 18 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Transportation Commission Aug. 23 Human Rights & Relations Commission Aug. 24 Planning Commission Aug. 25 Arts & Culture Commission SEPTEMBER Sept. 5 Labor Day Sept. 7 City Council Sept. 8 Energy & Environment Commission Sept. 12 Community Health Commission Sept. 13 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission Sept. 14 Planning Commission Sept. 15 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Transportation Commission Sept. 20 City Council Human Rights & Relations Commission Sept. 22 Arts & Culture Commission Sept. 25-27 Rosh Hashanah (Jewish) Sept. 28 Planning Commission OCTOBER Oct. 4-5 Yom Kippur (Jewish) Oct. 6 City Council Oct. 10 Community Health Commission Oct. 11 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission Oct. 12 Planning Commission Oct. 13 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Energy & Environment Commission Oct. 18 City Council Oct. 25 Human Rights & Relations Commission Planning Commission Oct. 26 Diwali (Hindu) Oct. 27 Arts & Culture Commission Transportation Commission NOVEMBER Nov. 1 City Council Parks & Recreation Commission Nov. 7 Heritage Preservation Commission Nov. 8 Election Day Nov. 10 Energy & Environment Commission Nov. 11 Veterans Day Nov. 14 Community Health Commission Nov. 15 City Council Human Rights & Relations Commission Nov. 16 Planning Commission Nov. 17 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Arts & Culture Commission Transportation Commission Nov. 24 Thanksgiving Nov. 25 Day after Thanksgiving DECEMBER Dec. 6 City Council Human Rights & Relations Commission Dec. 8 Housing & Redevelopment Authority Energy & Environment Commission Dec. 12 City Council Community Health Commission Dec. 13 Heritage Preservation Commission Parks & Recreation Commission Dec. 14 Planning Commission Dec. 15 Arts & Culture Commission Transportation Commission Dec. 20 City Council Dec. 24 Christmas Eve (Christian) Dec. 25 Christmas (Christian) Dec. 26 Christmas observed 2022 Meeting Calendar Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 1 2 3 4 5 7 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Religious Observance*Holiday City Council or Housing & Redevelopment Authority Meeting Board or Commission Meeting(s) Election Day** 21 18 15 13 15 6 820 1 17 12 * No public meetings held. **No public meetings after 6 p.m. Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VI.O. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Sharon Allison, City Clerk Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-125: Accepting Donations Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-125 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. 2021-110: Accepting Donations RESOLUTION NO. 2021-125 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 Friends of the Edina Library $1,000 October Book Sale at Senior Center Grandview Square Condo Residents $ 900 One Crabapple Tree at Sherwood Park o Ann Yoko House $ 50 o Bruce & Mary Bean $ 100 o David & Janet Zens $ 200 o Bill & Sally Hauger $ 100 o Grace Dow $ 150 o Dick Young $ 200 o Dale Thornsjo & Mary Kohl $ 100 Andy Warczak $2,800 Two Ironwoods, one Oak and Maple trees at Chowen Park EHR Construction $ 700 Tree at Pamela Park Fire Department J. Patrick & Linda M. Smith $ 500 General Fire Department Usage Dated: December 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 December 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: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: VII.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Item Activity: Subject:Transportation Commission Report on Organized Trash Collection Discussion, Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None; information and discussion only. INTRODUCTION: As part of their 2021 work plan, the Transportation Commission investigated the impacts of organized trash collection, specifically related to traffic, the environment and damage to roadways. As stated in their final report, “the Transportation Commission believes that there is sufficient evidence to support moving forward with establishing organized trash collection in Edina and recommends that City Council direct staff to create a plan to establish organized trash collection, including determining staffing/administrative costs, timeline and a communication plan to educate the community and solicit public input.” At this time, staff does not support the Transportation Commission’s recommendation to move forward with organized trash collection in Edina. See attached staff report and Commission report. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: Organized Trash Collection Transportation Commission Report: Organized Trash Collection Staff Presentation December 21. 2021 Mayor and City Council Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Transportation Commission Report on Organized Trash Collection Background Organized collection is defined as a system for collecting waste in which one hauler or a consortium of haulers are authorized by a local government agency to collect from a defined geographic service area. In the City of Edina, recycling has been organized since 1989 and organics recycling has been organized since 2020. Solid waste collection is not organized; residents and businesses privately contract with one of six licensed haulers. Among the six neighboring cities, only Minnetonka and Eden Prairie also do not participate in organized trash collection. Transportation Commission Recommendation As part of their 2021 work plan, the Transportation Commission investigated the impacts of organized trash collection, specifically related to traffic, the environment and damage to roadways. The Commission reviewed existing City goals and objectives, analyzed the results of the City’s 2021 Quality of Life Survey, met with city staff from Richfield and Bloomington, and reviewed relevant resources prepared by various government and environmental agencies. As stated in their final report, “the Transportation Commission believes that there is sufficient evidence to support moving forward with establishing organized trash collection in Edina and recommends that City Council direct staff to create a plan to establish organized trash collection, including determining staffing/administrative costs, timeline and a communication plan to educate the community and solicit public input.” The Energy and Environment Commission reviewed and commented on a draft version of the report at their September 9 regular meeting and voted in support of it. Strategic Objectives Although organized trash collection is not specifically identified in the Comprehensive Plan, it relates to several objectives across multiple City departments; Travel Demand Management/Traffic Safety – The Commission contends that organizing trash collection would support the City’s travel demand management objectives by reducing traffic on local roadways. The Commission’s report references an intersection study at West Shore Drive and Dunberry Lane, where 50 garbage trucks were observed within a single day. This number included recycling and organics recycling REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 trucks in addition to garbage trucks, and is not truly representative of the percentage of traffic generated by garbage trucks. The same study found that a higher percentage of traffic was comprised of contractor/delivery/other large vehicles (95 vehicles or 8% of total traffic), and the vast majority (1,055 or 87% of total traffic) was comprised of regular passenger vehicles. While organized trash collection can reduce the number of garbage trucks on the roadways, it would be more effective to reduce the number of regular passenger vehicles (many of which have a single occupant). At this time, the City does not have sufficient evidence to suggest that accident rates are higher among garbage trucks than other vehicles. Sustainability/Climate Action – The Commission report also notes that organized trash collection supports the City’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals and objectives in the draft Climate Action Plan (CAP). In the Waste Management chapter, one goal involves decreasing total per capita municipal solid waste handled 5% by 2030. As the Commission notes, Hennepin County currently requires haulers collecting from cities with organized collection to deliver solid waste to the Hennepin Energy Resource Center (HERC) rather than a landfill. This would not only reduce harmful emissions, but would provide the ability to better track tonnage and emissions. It is also worth noting that while the Commission recommends creating a plan to establish organized trash collection, the CAP recommends “exploring options for waste hauling improvements…including modifications to City’s existing licensure process and requirements as well as organized waste hauling strategies”. Economic Development – Locally-operated waste hauling services frequently express opposition to organized trash collection. Among their concerns is a fear of losing business to larger waste hauling businesses. The experiences of other cities provide some basis for this concern, and it is an important factor to consider given the Comprehensive Plan objectives to support locally-owned small businesses. Equity – In the City of Richfield, it was discovered that some residents were paying different rates for the same level of service. This disproportionally impacted residents that were elderly, on a fixed or low income, and those who’s native language was not English. While it is not known if this same problem is occurring in Edina, organizing trash collection may increase equity within the community through price transparency. Resident Support Since 2011, the City has included in its biennial Quality of Life Survey (QLS) questions about garbage collection. Between 2015 and 2021, an average of 87% of respondents gave good or excellent ratings to the quality of current garbage collection in Edina. Additionally, Question 31 asked respondents “to what extent do you support the City changing from the current system in which residents may choose from several different haulers to a system where the City chooses one hauler for the whole community?” Respondents have consistently been evenly divided on this question. In 2021, 53% of respondents (excluding Don’t Know responses) expressed support for a single-hauler system, a slight increase from previous years. REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 3 Figure 1 shows the distribution of responses to the same question including the Don’t Know responses. In total, 41% of respondents somewhat or strongly supported a single-hauler system, 36% somewhat or strongly opposed it, and 23% were uncertain of where they stood. This suggests that a significant portion of the community is unclear on what organized collection is or how it could impact them. The City may benefit from engaging in a broader community conversation on the subject, if only to obtain a clearer understanding of the specific questions and concerns residents may have. Procedural Requirements The Commission also noted in their report that the premise of Question 31 is not reflective of the legal process for organizing trash collection. First, the City would have to give notice to the public and all licensed haulers that it is considering adopting organized collection. From there, the City would enter into a negotiation period with the licensed haulers for at least 60 days. The goal of these negotiations is to create a proposal where each hauler is assigned a specific area of the City to collect from while maintaining their respective market share of business. Haulers may opt out from the proposal; the City would then reallocate their customers proportionately to the remaining participating haulers. If an agreement is reached as a result of negotiation, the City must again provide public notice and conduct a public hearing before officially deciding to implement organized collection. In this scenario, the initial agreement must be in effect for seven years. If the City were not to reach an agreement with the licensed haulers, it may form a solid waste collection options committee to study additional methods of solid waste collection. Members of the committee would Strongly Support 20% Somewhat Support21% Somewhat Oppose 15% Strongly Oppose 21% Don't Know 23% Figure 1. Question 31 Responses from 2021 Quality of Life Survey REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 4 be appointed by City Council and their meetings would be subject to open meeting law. The committee would have four primarily duties; 1. Determine which methods of solid waste collection to examine, which must include the existing system, a single-collector system and a multiple-collector system. 2. Establish a list of criteria on which the collection methods selected for examination will be evaluated. 3. Collect information regarding the operation and efficacy of existing methods of organized collection in other cities and towns. 4. Seek input from (at a minimum) City Council, the city official responsible for solid waste issues, licensed haulers and residents. The committee must then issue a report with its findings and recommendations to City Council. Again, the City must provide public notice and conduct at last one public hearing before deciding to implement organized collection. Cities can begin organized collection no sooner than six months after making the official decision. Cities have been met with varying levels of community opposition when attempting to regulate trash collection, including lawsuits in the Cities of St. Paul and Bloomington. Both of these lawsuits related to resident’s ability to petition for a ballot question in a home-rule charter city. Unlike St. Paul and Bloomington, Edina is a statutory city. Staff Recommendation At this time, staff does not support the Transportation Commission’s recommendation to move forward with organized trash collection in Edina. Without consensus from the public, the City’s efforts are better spent on other actions recommended in the Comprehensive Plan and Climate Action Plan related to traffic congestion, sustainability, economic development and equity. However, if Council wishes to move forward, it could consider; • Directing the City Manager to study the possible revision of Question 31 in future Quality of Life Surveys to accurately reflect the legal process for organizing trash collection. • Directing the City Manager to review staffing levels and administrative costs required if organized trash collection were to be implemented. • Hosting a community forum on organized trash collection, including licensed haulers, city staff and subject-matter experts from other cities. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Transportation Commission Date: October 28, 2021 Amended: December 16, 2021 To: Mayor and City Council Cc: Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner From: Transportation Commission Subject: Organized Trash Collection Initiative Investigate the impacts of organized trash collection while considering the travel demand management objectives, environmental goals, and reducing wear-and-tear on City streets. Recommendation The Transportation Commission believes that there is sufficient evidence to support moving forward with establishing organized trash collection in Edina and recommends that City Council direct staff to create a plan to establish organized trash collection, including determining staffing/administrative costs, timeline and a communication plan to educate the community and solicit public input. Background In organized trash collection (OTC), waste hauling services are organized by local government to achieve benefits for residents. This does not mean a city has just one hauler. Typically, OTC includes a consortium of garbage haulers who may contract with a city; wherein each hauler is assigned a geographic area equal to their market share. In Minnesota, all haulers are legally allowed to negotiate and contract with a city under MN Statute 115A.94. This statute would require Edina to engage in contract negotiation with all current haulers leaving no option for one city-wide hauler. Benefits 1. OTC significantly reduces miles traveled by each hauler contributing to both environmental, quality of life, traffic safety, and economic benefits (meaning lower costs for the residents and the city). 2. For Edina specifically, OTC aligns with the broader sustainability goals within the Transportation Chapter of the Edina Comprehensive Plan (mainly goals 3, 9 and 14) along with the Climate Action Plan and Living Streets Plan. Current State The City of Edina has an open trash collection system in which residents choose from 6 city-licensed haulers for garbage collection. The summarized problem and opportunity are: Page 2 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 1. Problem: Open collection systems result in high truck traffic where Edina residents may experience a range of 6-9 garbage trucks traveling their street on a single day. 2. Opportunity: Reducing this type of traffic to just one garbage truck on a single day (once per week) would significantly lower greenhouse gas emissions, street maintenance costs, and improve neighborhood safety and livability. Rationale for Recommendation: Data for this report was largely cited from the 2021 Quality of Life Survey Report, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA) 2009 report, Analysis of Waste Collection Service Arrangements, and 2012 report, The Benefits of Organized Collection. Additional research support came from Minnetonka High School’s advanced professional studies program VANTAGE - an academic program led by students to help solve real-world business problems via hands-on learning and project-based assignments. Lastly, City Staff from Richfield and Bloomington provided input on their OTC transition process. Resident Support In the 2021 Quality of Life Survey Report, residents were asked to rate the overall quality of garbage collection in Edina as well as the subsets of recycling, and organic recycling. (Question 14): 87% of residents gave excellent or good ratings in the overall quality of garbage collection 83% of residents gave excellent or good ratings for recycling 78% of residents gave excellent or good ratings for organics recycling (City of Edina, 2021, p. 28) From this data, it is evident that Edina residents are comfortable with organized collection systems as both recycling and organics recycling services are organized collection systems run by the City of Edina. Each service has one city-contracted vendor. Both are exempt from Statute 115A.94 (Minnesota Legislature, 2021). When looking at the organics recycling ratings by year, it suggests that Edina residents prefer an organized system: In 2021, 78% of residents gave excellent or good ratings for organics recycling In 2019, 52% of residents gave excellent or good ratings for organics recycling (City of Edina, 2021, p. 53) In early 2020, Edina converted to a city-wide, organized organics collection system. (Wig, 2019) Residents were also asked, ‘to what extent do you support the City changing from the current system in which residents may choose from several different haulers to a system where The City chooses one hauler for the whole community?’ (Question 31): Please Note: This question states one hauler for the whole community and does not include the option for multiple vendors with a designated geography according to market share. The City choosing one hauler is not an option under MN Statute 115A.94. Page 3 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 53% of residents were strongly or somewhat supportive of changing to OTC, a slight increase from previous years. (City of Edina, 2021, p. 30) When responses were analyzed by length of residency and age (City of Edina, 2021, p. 165): Length of Residency Age ≤ 5years 63% 18‐34 58% 6‐20 years 59% 35‐54 62% ≥ 20 years 41% 55+ 45% Key interpretive factor: The results from Question 31 are without any public education on OTC prior to the survey distribution. The Transportation Commission suggests if Edina residents had been educated on the environmental and economic benefits of OTC, or if they knew their rates could be lower and have guaranteed fewer garbage trucks on their street, the results of this survey question would be significantly more in favor of OTC. Greater Community Support ETC and EEC commissioners connected with City Staff in both Richfield and Bloomington to get a better understanding of the transition and implementation process. Richfield’s OTC starts October 2021, and Bloomington’s started October 2016. Their experiences were dissimilar in that Bloomington was in a four- year court battle to bring OTC to the ballot. In November 2020, OTC went up for vote where 70% of residents voted to continue the organized collection system (Hanks, 2020). Richfield had some resistance with residents not wanting to switch providers but experienced nothing like Bloomington. Both projected that as OTC continues to grow in the metro, the process will become easier as haulers are used to it. This could be true for Edina as 4 of 6 haulers already participate in OTC in other cities. Suburban Waste Service is the only hauler that participates in Haulers for People’s Choice, an organization that opposes OTC. Other take-aways from these meetings include: Bloomington gets fewer complaints with OTC. o The City does the billing through Utilities and fewer mistakes are made. o Missed pick-ups are less frequent as haulers must stop at every house in their zone. o There’s an accountability process and centralization for complaints not found in open systems. o Haulers are bound by service standards in their city-contract. Suggestions from Bloomington and Richfield City Staff: o Keep the public informed with mailers, newsletters, create an e-subscribe system just for garbage and recycling. o Know what haulers are charging in the open system before contract negotiations. Full notes from these meetings can be found in Appendix A and Appendix B. Page 4 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Economic Benefits Savings for Residents: With OTC, customers pay a flat rate based on garbage volume - a pricing system that has widely shown to reduce costs for customers. In the table below, the MPCA report shows that Open MSW (Municipal Solid Waste) has significantly higher rates than Organized MSW (MPCA, 2012, p. 1). With open systems, haulers may have a range of rates for identical, base service plans. Richfield found hauler billing rates fluctuated between $200- $1000/year. They also discovered that many residents with the largest can size (95 gallons) were being charged less than residents with smaller can sizes; hence, why some residents saw their rate increase with OTC. On average, residents are now saving around 15% (see Appendix A). The table below shows the OTC pricing schedule for Richfield. Open rates in Bloomington averaged $26.72/month before OTC (see Appendix B). The table below shows the OTC pricing schedule for Bloomington. Savings for the City: Edina is responsible for maintaining 27 million square feet of pavement with maintenance costs estimated to be $5 to $9 per square foot over a 60-year life span (City of Edina, 2021, p. 2). Based on axel load data, MnDOT formulates that the impact from a single garbage truck equates to the impact of 1,000 cars. 86% of road wear in alleys and 8% of road wear in high traffic areas comes garbage trucks (MPCA, 2012, p. 1). As city streets last 5-10 years longer with an organized trash system (MPCA, 2009, p. 40), optimizing garbage routes would significantly reduce both the miles traveled and the quantity and frequency of trucks Page 5 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 on residential streets and alleys ultimately reducing the need for maintenance and maintenance costs. Within the rankings of Quality of City Services in the 2021 Survey, Street Repair was found to be of ‘lower quality’ compared to other city services with 57% believing the service was excellent or good (City of Edina, 2021, p. 27). Environmental Benefits Edina’s Climate Action Plan goals include reducing citywide greenhouse gas emissions 30% by 2025, and 80% by 2050 (City of Edina, 2021). Garbage trucks average 3-5 miles per gallon and reducing the miles traveled reduces greenhouse gases. Open cities studied in the MPCA 2009 report and compiled in the MPCA 2012 report (pg. 2) show the percentage of additional fuel used per year than if these cities were in an organized system. Eagan 216% Duluth 294% Rochester 250% Woodbury 355% St. Paul 437% Converting fuel usage to carbon emissions, the City of St. Paul, alone, could have saved an estimated total annual 2,470,664 pounds of CO2 if they were in an OTC system (MPCA, 2009, p. 144). In relatable terms, this amounts to: 2,816,476 miles traveled by an average passenger vehicle, or 45,813 propane cylinders used for home barbeques (Environmental Protection Agency, 2021). St. Paul officially started OTC in October 2018, but the decision to do so without a vote was brought to court where it was ruled that OTC should be brought to ballot. In November 2019, 63% of residents voted to keep OTC. (Walsh, 2019). Key fact: Both St. Paul and Bloomington had an established OTC before it went to ballot. After residents in these cities experienced the benefits of OTC, the majority voted to keep it. Additionally, Hennepin County requires garbage trucks to deliver trash to the Hennepin Energy Recovery Center (HERC) for cities with OTC. This means that garbage refuse will go to a waste to energy facility where garbage metrics can be easily tracked. In an open system, the hauler can choose any landfill. According to Hennepin County: “Every ton of trash burned at HERC produces fewer tons of greenhouse gas emissions than if it were disposed of in a landfill because decomposing garbage in landfills produces methane. Methane is over 20 times more potent of a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide over 100 years” (Hennepin County, 2021). Page 6 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Traffic Safety In May of 2021, the City installed a camera at the intersection of West Shore Dr and Dunberry Ln to collect traffic data on garbage pick-up day. This is the corner of two minor residential streets, which do not have pass-through traffic, i.e., garbage trucks at this corner are serving the residences in the neighborhood. Staff calculated the percentage of vehicles observed: garbage trucks, school buses, other large vehicles, and regular passenger vehicles. 50 garbage trucks were recorded at this intersection on one pick-up day: Depending on the structure of the organized collection system, the number of trash trucks could be reduced to 3; 94% of the garbage truck traffic is potentially unnecessary. Other Considerations: Due to the size and frequent stops of garbage trucks, reducing the quantity of trucks on any given street fosters safer travel for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorized vehicles alike. When one hauler services every house on a street, truck speeds are reduced, and stops are more predictable. Page 7 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 References Bloomington. (2021, October 4). Garbage and recycling. Retrieved from Bloomington MN: https://www.bloomingtonmn.gov/ub/garbage-and- recycling City of Edina. (2021, October 4). 2021 Quality of Life Survey. Retrieved from City of Edina: https://www.edinamn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/11232/2021-Quality-of-Life-Survey-PDF City of Edina. (2021, October 4). Climate Action Plan. Retrieved from Better Together Edina: https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/climate-action-plan City of Edina. (2021, October 4). 5. Transportation. Retrieved from Edina Comprehensive Plan: https://www.edinamn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8111/05-Transportation-Chapter-PDF City of Edina. (2021, October 4). Living Streets Plan 2015. Retrieved from City of Edina: https://www.edinamn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1199/Living-Streets-Plan-PDF?bidId= Dunbar, E. (2019, June 5). When Minnesota cities take over trash collection, they take heat. But sometimes it pays off. Retrieved from MPR News: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/06/05/minnesota-cities- organized-trash-pickup-see-lower-costs-controversy Environmental Protection Agency. (2021, October 4). Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. Retrieved from United States Environmental Protection Agency: https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas- equivalencies-calculator Hanks, M. (2020, November 18). Bloomington's ballot questions feature wild outcomes. Retrieved from Sun Current: https://www.hometownsource.com/sun_current/free/bloomingtons-ballot-questions- feature-wild-outcomes/article_b05e6342-1e4f-11eb-bd2f-37b673ab28ed.html Hennepin County. (2021, October 4). Hennepin Energy Recovery Center. Retrieved from Hennepin County Minnesota: https://www.hennepin.us/your-government/facilities/hennepin-energy-recovery-center Minnesota Legislature. (2021, October 4). Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Retrieved from Minnesota Legislature: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/115A.94 MPCA. (2009). Analysis of Waste System Collection Service Arrangements. Retrieved from Pollution Control Agency: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/w-sw1-06.pdf MPCA. (2012). The Benefits of Organized Collection. Retrieved from Pollution Control Agency: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/leg-12sy1-06.pdf Richfield. (2021, October 4). Organized Collection. Retrieved from Richfield: https://www.richfieldmn.gov/residents/sustainability_recycling/organized_collection.php Walsh, J. (2019, November 6). St. Paul voters say yes to city's trash collection system. Retrieved from Star Tribune: https://www.startribune.com/st-paul-trash-vote-in-hands-of-voters/564537512/ Page 8 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Wig, A. (2019, April 4). Organics Recycling Coming to Edina Next Year. Retrieved from Sun Current: https://www.hometownsource.com/sun_current/community/organics- recycling-coming-to-edina-next-year/article_ec2307b2-5573-11e9-b2e6- 2f28030f5c37.html Page 9 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 APPENDIX A: Meeting with City of Richfield, 8/27/21 Rachel Lindholm, Richfield Sustainability Coordinator Commissioners present: Jill Plumb-Smith, ETC; John Haugen, EEC Current Haulers: Aspen, Republic, Waste Management Primary motivations to switch to OTC - Equity, Sustainability, Quality of Service o Equity: Residents were paying different rates for the same service. Through an invoice request via Richfield’s Facebook page, it was found that yearly rates differed from $200- $1000 for the same service. ~100 invoices were received. In many cases, residents with 95-gallon containers were paying less than residents with smaller containers. o Sustainability: Richfield launched an organics drop-off program that became so popular residents requested curbside pick-up. Also, residents were dumping bags of household trash and household items around town. The problem needed to be systemically addressed. o Quality of Service: The City was receiving complaints regarding missed pick-ups, incorrect billing, and poor customer service. With an open system, the complaint is filed to the license where it may or may not be addressed by the hauler. In an OTC system, there is a better accountability for complaints. Hauler and Resident Feedback o Most of the hauler feedback was positive or neutral. They were used to it. Republic, Aspen and Waste Management had done it for other cities. There was some push-back during price negotiations, however. o A contingency of Hands-Off Our Cans and Haulers for Choice expressed that government regulation wasn’t necessary and infringed on residents right to choose. Both groups were much less vocal than they were with Bloomington’s OTC conversion. o Resident feedback was largely positive. Some were reluctant to the change as they had the same hauler for years and didn’t want to switch. There was also a perception that the pricing would go up and level of service would go down. Establishing OTC o Followed the requirements of State Statute 115A.94 where city must work with all haulers who want to participate o Get market share data from haulers – 6 months prior data o Negotiated terms of 7-year contracts o Took about 6 months to negotiate contracts Outcomes o OTC begins October 4th, 2021 o Prices lowered for all trash container sizes: 95 gal, 65 gal, 35 gal o 70-80% of residents will be paying less Page 10 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 APPENDIX B: Meeting with City of Bloomington, 9/15/21 Laura Horner, Bloomington Project Coordinator Andrew Scipioni, Edina Transportation Planner Commissioners present: Jill Plumb-Smith, ETC; Kirk Johnson, ETC Current Haulers: Aspen, Republic, Vierkant, Waste Management, Netti, Randy’s (since acquired by Republic) Motivation for moving to OTC o A group of Master Recyclers wrote a Citizens Request Letter to the City and laid out the benefits of OTC. Based on the letter, the City took formal action. o Hired Foth Consulting to create a more sustainable solid waste management plan. Recommendation was to move to OTC. Resident Feedback History o On October 2014, the process to move to OTC had begun. o A loud and vocal minority created a group call Hands Off Our Cans. The group started a petition and gathered the required number of signatures for OTC to go to ballot. o City Attorney believed a vote was not the right avenue to take and rejected the petition o The group filed a lawsuit against The City where it remained in the courts for 4 years. The State Supreme Court made the final ruling and determined that OTC should go to ballot. o A sustainability commission put together a public education website to talk about the advantages of OTC, in addition to going door to door and posting signs to educate residents. o In the November 2020 election, 70% voted to keep OTC. The program had been successfully running for 4 years. Establishing OTC o The City sent a survey requesting residents to mail in invoices with current rates. ~300 invoices were received. The overall average biweekly rate was $26.72. Under OTC and a contracted rate its $18.50. o Following Statute 115A.94, all haulers were allowed to bid and follow the negotiation process. Each hauler retained their same market share. o Negotiations required significant City Attorney time. Many committees were formed on a city level: A Solid Waste Working Group comprised of council members, the city manager and public works director plus public program coordinators. Others included a communication committee, a cart roll-out, committee, a legal and contract committee and an outreach community. o Bloomington does all the billing so Utility Billing software needed to be upgraded. This was considered a benefit for the haulers as The City handles the billing process. It’s more accurate and they get fewer complaints. o Total time estimated to establish an OTC system – 2 years o Organized organics collection starts in March of 2022 Comments from Bloomington about Richfield’s conversion o Haulers were not as concerned about the process of moving to OTC. They had done it before. o Bloomington was a bigger system and had established a more-clear path for Richfield. Key suggestions for other cities moving forward with OTC o Go into it with eyes wide-open and message that to the residents. Page 11 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 o Keep the public informed with info mailers, newsletters, create an e- subscribe system just for garbage and recycling o Know what haulers are charging in the open system o Ask haulers where they are currently dumping o Hennepin County ordinance requires haulers in OTC systems to use HERC facilities. This means that all refuse goes from waste to energy where garbage metrics can be easily tracked. In an open system, the haulers can choose any dump or landfill which makes tracking waste metrics much harder. Page 12 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 APPENDIX C: Energy and Environment Commission meeting minutes regarding first draft of OTC report, 9/9/21 Commissioner Haugen introduced the draft organized trash collection report from the Transportation Commission for comment. EEC comments include: o The state statute regarding requirement to keep number of haulers should be researched to figure out parameters, and make sure there is a proper system in place for bids if hauler shares are to be kept? We want to reduce emissions, but also keep cost down for residents. o The final report should clarify and define meaning of organized trash collection. o What does transition period look like for customers in Edina who must change their hauler? o If they’re not getting choice for vendors, customer service cannot drop and residents need to save money. o Could city elect to have fewer licensed haulers than six? o How does price reduction work for residents? Costs should be kept down for residents. o Why can’t we have one vendor for trash like recycling and organics? o What can City do to ensure quality of service doesn’t diminish if residents are unhappy with new vendor? o Quality of Life survey respondents show majority support for this, higher level than before. EEC moved to support this report. All members in attendance voted in favor, with the Commission’s comments considered for the final report. Transportation Commission Report on Organized Trash CollectionDecember 21, 2021 Background•2021 work plan initiative;•“Investigate the impacts of organized trash collection while considering travel demand management objectives, environmental goals and reducing wear-and-tear on City streets.”•Reviewed City goals/objectives•Analyzed Quality of Life Survey results•Met with Bloomington and Richfield staff•Reviewed relevant literatureEdinaMN.gov1 Commission Recommendation•ETC believes sufficient evidence to support moving forward with OTC•Recommends that City Council direct staff to create a plan to establish OTC;•Determine staffing/administrative costs•Timeline•Communication plan•EEC also voted in support of the report, provided commentsEdinaMN.gov2 Strategic Objectives•OTC not specifically mentioned in Comp Plan, Living Streets Plan- Briefly mentioned in Climate Action Plan•TDM/Traffic Safety –Reducing garbage trucks not as effective as reducing passenger vehicles•Sustainability/Climate Action –Diverting solid waste to HERC would allow better tracking of tonnage and emissions•Economic Development –May not support small, locally-owned hauling businesses•Equity –Can increase price transparency within communityEdinaMN.gov3 Resident Support26%27%20%27%Excluding Don’t Know ResponsesEdinaMN.gov420%21%15%21%23%Including Don’t Know Responses“To what extent do you support the City changing from the current system in which residents may choose from several different haulers to a system where the City chooses one hauler for the whole community?” Staff Recommendation•Staff does not support Commission recommendation to move forward with OTC at this time•- No specific direction in Comprehensive Plan•- No public consensus•If Council wishes to move forward, it could consider;•- Directing City Manager to study possible revision of Question 31•- Directing City Manager to review staffing levels, administrative costs•- Hosting a community forum on OTCEdinaMN.gov5 Date: December 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: Ordinance 2021-03, Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Impervious Surface, Basement, 1-foot Rule and Setback Definitions Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Close the public hearing at noon on Monday, December 27 and continue action to the January 4, 2022 City Council meeting. INTRODUCTION: As part of the 2021 Planning Commission Work Plan, the Commission has been working on Zoning Ordinance Amendments to establish an impervious surface requirement in the R-1 Zoning District, eliminate the requirement for basements in newly constructed homes, amend the one-foot rule for tear down rebuilds when a low water table is present and amend/clarify setback definitions. Attached is the final draft to be considered as recommended by the Planning Commission. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: Ordinance 2021-03, Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Impervious Surface, Basement, 1-foot Rule and Setback Definitions Ordinance No 2021-03 Better Together Public Hearing Comment Report Engineering Studies, Survey of Cities and Country Club Examples December 21, 2021 Mayor and City Council Cary Teague, Community Development Director PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance 2021-03, Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Impervious Surface, Basement, 1-foot Rule and Setback Definitions Information / Background: As part of the 2021 Planning Commission Work Plan, the Commission has been working on the above Ordinance Amendments. To work on the Impervious Surface portion of this ordinance, the Commission created a small working group made up of Commissioners Lou Miranda, Jimmy Bennett, and Gerry Strauss, as well as planning and engineering staff. To assist in the development of the Ordinance, planning and engineering staff put together some background information for the work group and Planning Commission to consider and discuss. That information is attached and summarized below. The most significant take away from the engineering study is that impervious surface increases in the city is not the main contributing factor causing flooding/drainage concerns, rather it is climate changes. The information included in the packet is as follows: 2019 Morningside Impervious Surface analysis (post and slide deck) • This is a historic review that was done to create a poster presentation for the Minnesota Water Resources Conference. Appendix A of the 2018 CWRMP • This is an analysis of imperviousness rates citywide to set the stormwater model parameter for various land uses. • In past models, we used 40% total impervious and 20% directly connected impervious for single family areas (LDR). • Section 4 has a good discussion of the variability in neighborhoods for LDR. • Section 5 and 6 have good discussion of why this trend matters for stormwater. • As a result of this we changed LDR impervious modeled value to 40% total, 25% directly connected. STAFF REPORT Page 2 Appendix D of the 2019 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy - conducted a “Private Infrastructure Analysis” • This analysis considered a possible policy alternative where individual properties to reduce volumes and rates of stormwater to reduce flooding community wide. • The analysis showed that Site by site does not have a strong business case, it is expensive and possibly unreasonable to implement for its limited benefit. Survey of Cities • How other cities regulate impervious surface Impervious surface examples of existing lots with the Country Club District. Attached is the final draft that is recommended unanimously by the Planning Commission for approval. The following provides a summary of each Section within the proposed Amendment. Section 1. Definitions. Impervious Surface is defined. The definition of “setback” is revised to include the new measurement method for setbacks from buildings to curbs in the Greater Southdale Area. This form of measurement was adopted into the Zoning Ordinance last summer. Section 2 & 5 – Building Coverage is clarified, and an Impervious Surface Lot coverage regulation is created for the R-1 Zoning District. Building coverage is clarified to eliminate patios and recreations facilities like tennis courts. Patios, tennis courts or similar uses would now be regulated under the impervious surface regulations, and not building coverage. The proposed impervious surface requirement is 50% as recommended by the work group of the planning commission (Commissioners Strauss, Miranda and Bennett) and staff. Section 3 & 4 – Basements and First Floor Elevation. The requirement to install a basement with any new single-family home is eliminated. This could reduce the cost of housing in Edina, should someone choose to not construct a basement. Additionally, it could provide assistance with development or re-development of lots with a very high-water table that prevent a basement from being constructed. Additionally, the “One-Foot Rule” is revised to allow an increase to the one-foot rule only if there is a flood plain or high-water elevation issue. The current City Ordinance requires the first-floor elevation of a new home not exceed the first-floor elevation of the previous home by more than one-foot. The Planning Commission has experienced over the past several years that the current ordinance conflicts with the City’s requirement for the low floor elevation of new homes to be 2 feet above a flood elevation. Since the adoption of this ordinance in late 2014, the City has processed and approved 23 variances to the one-foot rule when there is a high-water table issue. STAFF REPORT Page 3 This amendment would not impact the overall height of new homes as they would still be required to meet the overall height requirement, which is measured from existing grade. The amendment also would not impact site’s that do not have a flood plain or high-water table issue. Section 6 – Setbacks. The section simply clarifies the Zoning Ordinance regarding how setbacks in the Greater Southdale District are measured. STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Adopt the proposed Ordinance Amendment. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX ORDINANCE NO. 2021-__ AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REGARDING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LOT COVERAGE, SETBACKS, BASEMENTS AND THE 1-FOOT RULE THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA ORDAINS: Section 1. Sec. 36-10 Definitions is amended as follows: Building coverage means the percentage of the lot area occupied by principal and accessory buildings and structures. including, without limitation, patios. Impervious surface: A constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at an increased rate of flow than prior to placement. Examples include, but are not limited to, buildings, decks, rooftops, sidewalks, patios, permeable pavers, and concrete, asphalt, or gravel driveways. Setback, front street, means the shortest horizontal distance from the forward most point of a building or structure to the nearest point on the front lot line. Within the Greater Southdale District, front street setbacks shall be measured from the forward most point of a building or structure to the face of curb per Section 36-1276. Setback, interior side yard, means the shortest horizontal distance from any part of a building or structure to the nearest point on an interior side lot line. Setback, rear yard, means the shortest horizontal distance from any part of a building or structure to the nearest point on a rear lot line. Setback, side street, means the shortest horizontal distance from any part of a building or structure to the nearest point on a side lot line that adjoins a street. Within the Greater Southdale District, side street setbacks shall be measured from the forward most point of a building or structure to face of curb per Section 36-1276. Section 2. Subsection 36-438 of the Edina City Code. Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height Special Requirements are amended to add the following: Sec. 36-438. - Requirements for building coverage, impervious surface lot coverage, setbacks and height. The minimum requirements for building coverage, impervious surface lot coverage, setbacks, and height in the Single Dwelling Unit District (R-1) are as follows: (1) Building Coverage. a. Lots 9,000 square feet or greater in area. Building coverage shall be not more than 25 percent for all buildings and structures. On lots with an existing conditional use, if the combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 2 and structures, excluding attached garages, is 1,000 square feet or greater, a conditional use permit is required. b. Lots less than 9,000 square feet in area. Building coverage shall be not more than 30 percent for all buildings and structures; provided, however, that the area occupied by all buildings and structures shall not exceed 2,250 square feet. c. Combined total area. The combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings and structures, excluding attached garages, shall not exceed 1,000 square feet for lots used for single dwelling unit buildings. d. Building coverage shall include all principal or accessory buildings, including, but not limited to: 1. Decks and patios. The first 150 square feet of an unenclosed deck or patio shall not be included when computing building coverage. 2. Gazebos. 3. Balconies. 4. Breezeways. 5. Porches. 6. Accessory recreational facilities constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis courts. e. The following improvements shall be excluded when computing building coverage: 1. Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios, subject to subsection (1)d.1 of this section. 2. Parking lots and parking ramps. 3. Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not covered by a roof, including outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts and shuffleboard courts. 4. Unenclosed steps and stoops less than 50 square feet. 5. Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars. (2) Impervious Surface Lot coverage. Impervious surface lot coverage shall be limited to a maximum of Fifty percent (50%). (2) (3) Setbacks. (3) (4) Height. Section 3. Sec. 36-439. (3) (7) AND (8). Special Requirements is amended as follows: (3) Basements. All single dwelling unit buildings shall be constructed with a basement having a gross floor area equal to at least 50 percent of the gross floor area of the story next above. The floor area of accessory uses shall not be included for purposes of this subsection. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 3 (7) Additions to, or replacement of, single dwelling unit buildings and buildings containing two dwelling units. For additions, alterations and changes to, or rebuilds of, existing single dwelling unit buildings and buildings containing two dwellings, the first-floor elevation may not be more than one foot above the existing first floor elevation, unless one of the conditions in (8) below exists on the site. If a split-level dwelling is torn down and a new home is built, the first- floor elevation of the dwelling unit being torn down is deemed to be the lowest elevation of an entrance to the dwelling, excluding entrance to the garage and entrances that do not face a street. (8) Additions to, or replacement of, single dwelling unit buildings with a first-floor elevation of more than one foot above the existing first floor elevation of the existing dwelling unit building require a variance per [article II], division 3. Such additions to, or replacements of, single dwelling unit buildings must meet one or more of conditions a-c and always meet condition d.: If one of the conditions below exist on site, the one-foot requirement in (7) above could be increased to the minimum extent possible, as long as the low floor elevation is no higher than 2.5 feet above the low water elevation and the basement ceiling height is no taller than 9 feet. a. The first floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to elevate the lowest level of the dwelling to an elevation of two feet above the There is a 100-year flood elevation, as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), or the city's comprehensive water resource management plan; or b. The first-floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to reasonably protect the dwelling from groundwater intrusion. Existing and potential groundwater elevations shall be determined in accordance with accepted hydrologic and hydraulic engineering practices. Determinations shall be undertaken by a professional civil engineer licensed under Minn. Stats. ch. 326, or a hydrologist certified by the American Institute of Hydrology. Studies, analyses and computations shall be submitted in sufficient detail to allow thorough review and approval; or c. The first-floor elevation may be increased to the extent necessary to allow the new building to meet the state building code, this Code or other statutory requirements. d. An increase in first floor elevation will only be permitted if the new structure or addition fits the character of the neighborhood in height, mass and scale. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 4 Section 4. Sec. 36-467. (b) (3) - Special requirements is amended as follows: (3) Basements. All double dwelling unit buildings shall be constructed with a basement having a gross floor area equal to at least 50 percent of the gross floor area of the story next above. The floor area of accessory uses shall not be included for the purposes of this subsection. Section 5. Sec. 36-1259. – Building Coverage Computation; exclusion and inclusions are amended as follows: (a) The following structures and improvements shall be excluded when computing building coverage: (1) Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios. (2) Parking lots and parking ramps. (3) Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not covered by a roof, including outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts and shuffleboard courts; but facilities which are constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis courts, shall be included when computing building coverage. (4) Unenclosed and uncovered steps and stoops less than 50 square feet. (5) Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars. (b) Building coverage computations, however, shall include all other principal or accessory buildings, including, but not limited to: (1) Decks and patios, subject to allowances provided by this chapter. (2) Gazebos. (3) Balconies. (4) Breezeways. (5) Porches. (6) Accessory recreational facilities constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis courts. Section 6. Sec. 36-1276. – Setbacks in the Greater Southdale District is amended as follows: (a) Front Street Setbacks on France Avenue between Highway 62 and Minnesota Drive and the on York Avenue between 66th Street and 78th Street: A 50-foot setback is required from the face of the curb to the face of building. Above a building height of 60-feet the additional height must step back 10 feet from the face of the building. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 5 (b) Front Street Setbacks on streets other than France Avenue and York Avenue: A 30-foot setback is required from the face of curb to the face of building. with a building podium height of 60 feet. Above the 60-foot height limit, additional height should step back 30 feet from the face of the building, to a maximum height of 105 feet. Any height about 105 feet should step back and additional 10 feet from the face of the building. Existing text – XXXX Stricken text – XXXX Added text – XXXX 6 Section 7. This ordinance is effective immediately upon its passage. First Reading: Second Reading: Published: Attest Sharon Allison, City Clerk James B. Hovland, Mayor Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 15 December 2021 Public Hearing Comments-Ch 36 Ordinance Amendments Better Together Edina Project: Public Hearing: Zoning Ordinance Amendments – Impervious Surface, Basement, 1-foot rule, and Setback definitions. VISITORS 3 CONTRIBUTORS 2 RESPONSES 2 0 Registered 0 Unverified 2 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 2 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Nov 16, 2021 13:43:13 pm Last Seen:Nov 16, 2021 13:43:13 pm IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Scott Busyn Q2.Address 4633 Arden Avenue Q3.Comment I read the draft of the zoning changes. I would like to recommend that covered front porches(not covered by windows or screens) up to 100 square feet are excluded from building coverage calculations or up to 100 square feet of covered front porches (not covered by windows or screens) are allowed to be included in Impervious Surface calculations. I am concerned not including allowing front porches to be excluded from Building Coverage or to be included in Impervious Surface calculations will discourage Edina residents from building covered front entries. The front porch is an American icon and represents the ideal of community. It connects families to the outside and brings them out to enjoy their block with their neighbors. It is an area that shares the sanctity of home with the community outside. In a world changed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the front porch is seeing a renaissance. With people spending more time home, it is more evident that front yards in Edina have become the connection points between neighbors. Front porches make a home more welcoming and connected with the neighborhood. I feel strongly that front porches are in important part of Edina’s neighborhood culture since they represent family, community, and being outside. With the recent uptake in violent crime, it is important that we continue to promote front porches. Front porches build in neighborhood security by encouraging people to be outside and having more eyes on the neighborhood. Front porches also reduce the appearance of mass on a home and make for a better streetscape. Home facades are easier on the eye when they open up slowly from a front porch vs. a plain two story facade. Zoning guidelines in our neighboring cities are also promoting the importance of front porches. Minneapolis excludes front porches from FAR calculations and gives design points for homes with at least 70 square feet of front porch. St. Louis Park updated zoning to reduce the setback of front yard patios a few years ago. I attached photos of homes nearby that shows how Edina residents have increasingly embraced their front porches over the past several years. Since we don’t revise the R-1 zoning very often, I feel this is a great time to consider updating the zoning to allow front porches. Thank you! Scott Busyn 4633 Arden Avenue 952-807-8765 IMG_3065.jpg IMG_3066.jpg IMG_3067.jpg IMG_3069.jpg IMG_3070.jpg IMG_3071.jpg IMG_3072.jpg IMG_3073.jpg IMG_3076.jpg IMG_3081.jpg IMG_3083.jpg IMG_3087.jpg IMG_3088.jpg IMG_3090.jpg IMG_3093.jpg IMG_3095.jpg Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Email:n/a Responded At:Nov 17, 2021 08:29:48 am Last Seen:Nov 17, 2021 08:29:48 am IP Address:n/a Q1.First and Last Name Chad Holder Q2.Address 5712 Woodland lane Q3.Comment I feel the "one foot rule" should be removed from the city code. On my property the previous home's basement was far below the flood elevation. The plan for the new home needed to be 2 feet above the flood elevation, pushing the 1st floor higher. This required my family to seek a variance, which was approved by the planning commission. However, the neighbors appealed, their appeal was supported by the City Council and I was not able to get a permit. It was simple math. Our proposed home overall height was below what was allowed, and still we were denied. The "one foot rule" does not make sense when the lowest elevation is determined by FEMA. MorningsideNeighborhood Boundary 2015 ImperviousSurfaces Morningside Impervious Surfaces 0.00 500,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,500,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,500,000.00 1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015square feetTotal Impervious Surface Area within Parcels 26.46 28.62 29.98 31.08 31.66 35.30 24.30 26.47 27.62 28.78 29.39 32.95 0 10 20 30 40 1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015percent AveragePercentageCovered perParcelPercent ofResidentialParcelsCovered Impervious surface area includes primary and accessory structures, driveways, private paths, decks, patios, and pool decks. Average percent covered per parcel (2015): 35.30%Average impervious area per parcel (2015): 3,419.03 sq ftMinimum percent covered: 0.34%Maximum percent covered: 65.74% Percent Impervious Surface0-1010-2020-3030-4040-5050-6060-70 2015 1960 1950 52% 30% 3% 9% 3% 3% 0% 0% Impervious Surfaces 2015 Primary structure Driveway Private paths Accessory structure Deck Patio Other Pool deck 0.00 2,000.00 4,000.00 6,000.00 8,000.00 10,000.00 12,000.00 1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015square feet Average Size ofOccupiedParcel AverageImperviousSurface Areaper Parcel 0.00 500,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,500,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,500,000.00 1950 1960 1975 1985 2000 2015square feet Pool deck Other Patio Deck AccessorystructurePrivate paths Driveway Primarystructure 2 51 184 201 142 63 14 0 50 100 150 200 250 0-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60-70Count of Parcels Percent of Parcel Covered Parcels Histogram 2015 Average impervious surface area per parcel increased 39% from 1950 to 2015. Average size of occupied parcels increased by 3%. Average impervious surface area per parcel increased 12% from 2000 to 2015. Average size of occupied parcels increased by <1%. 1950 2000 2015 65.74% 64.46% 1950 2000 2015 63.44% 62.17% 1950 2000 2015 61.1% 60.79% Sec. 36-438. - Requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height. The minimum requirements for building coverage, setbacks and height in the Single Dwelling Unit District (R-1) are as follows: (1) Building coverage. a. Lots 9,000 square feet or greater in area. Building coverage shall be not more than 25 percent for all buildings and structures. On lots with an existing conditional use, if the combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings and structures, excluding attached garages, is 1,000 square feet or greater, a conditional use permit is required. b. Lots less than 9,000 square feet in area. Building coverage shall be not more than 30 percent for all buildings and structures; provided, however, that the area occupied by all buildings and structures shall not exceed 2,250 square feet. c. Combined total area. The combined total area occupied by all accessory buildings and structures, excluding attached garages, shall not exceed 1,000 square feet for lots used for single dwelling unit buildings. d. Building coverage shall include all principal or accessory buildings, including, but not limited to: 1. Decks and patios. The first 150 square feet of an unenclosed deck or patio shall not be included when computing building coverage. 2. Gazebos 3. Balconies. 4. Breezeways. 5. Porches. 6. Accessory recreational facilities constructed above grade, such as paddle tennis courts. e. The following improvements shall be excluded when computing building coverage: 1. Driveways and sidewalks, but not patios, subject to subsection (1)d.1 of this section. 2. Parking lots and parking ramps. 3. Accessory recreational facilities not enclosed by solid walls and not covered by a roof, including outdoor swimming pools, tennis courts and shuffleboard courts. 4. Unenclosed steps and stoops less than 50 square feet. 5. Overhanging eaves and roof projections not supported by posts or pillars. 95 14% 237 36% 327 50% Non-CodeCompliant Maybe CodeCompliant Code Compliant Parcels with red boundaries are non-code compliant based on building structure area (greater than 2,250 sq ft) despite being within 5% of their coverage limit (30%). *2,250 sq ft limit only applies to parcels under 9,000 sq ft. Appendix A City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Technical Memorandum To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Project: 23/27-0354.00 BCO 160 1.0 Introduction Redevelopment throughout the City of Edina (City), particularly the rebuilding of older homes with newer, larger homes, has raised questions about the imperviousness assumptions used for stormwater modeling. Therefore, as directed by the City, Barr evaluated the most recent imperviousness data throughout different neighborhoods of the city to help determine if the assumptions that were previously used for stormwater modeling are representative of current conditions. This memo documents the findings of this imperviousness assessment, referred to herein as the “2016 analysis”. There are two forms of imperviousness: (1) “Total Impervious” which represents the total area of impervious surfaces such as pavement, roof tops, etc., and (2) “Directly Connected Impervious” which represents the area of impervious surface from which water flows directly into storm sewer or water bodies. The Directly Connected Impervious area is the area that is most important for hydrologic modeling. The majority of this memo discusses the Total Impervious, and Section 5.0 discusses methods for converting from Total Impervious area to Directly Connected Impervious area. Table 1 provides a summary of the imperviousness assumptions used for modeling associated with both the 2003 and 2011 CWRMPs (2003/2011 CWRMPs). Table 1 Imperviousness assumptions from the 2003/2011 CWRMPs Land Use Type Total Impervious % Directly Connected Impervious % Ratio of Directly Connected to Total Commercial 90% 80% 0.889 Developed Park Not previously used Not previously used N/A Golf Course 5% 2% 0.400 High Density Residential 70% 40% 0.571 Highway 50% 50% 1.000 Industrial/Office 90% 80% 0.889 Institutional 40% 20% 0.500 Institutional - High Imperviousness 70% 50% 0.714 Low Density Residential 40% 20% 0.500 Medium Density Residential 55% 30% 0.545 Natural/Park/Open 2% 0% 0.000 Open Water 100% 100% 1.000 To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 2 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Land Use Type Total Impervious % Directly Connected Impervious % Ratio of Directly Connected to Total Other Not previously used Not previously used N/A Very Low Density Residential 12% 8% 0.667 Wetland 100% 100% 1.000 2.0 Data Sources The main data source for this 2016 analysis is the 2011 Twin Cities impervious surface area dataset developed by the University of Minnesota (reference [1]). This geographic information system (GIS) dataset is a 30-meter resolution raster (grid) of impervious surface classification for the seven-county Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The values in this GIS layer represents total imperviousness, not directly connected imperviousness. The impervious surface classification was created using a combination of multi-temporal Landsat (satellite) data and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data. This raster data set is shown in Figure 1. Barr analyzed the imperviousness data by land use type and neighborhood. This approach allowed us to review the range of results by neighborhood for imperviousness of each land use type. A neighborhood analysis was performed (as opposed to a parcel analysis) due to the larger grid size of the imperviousness raster dataset (i.e., the U of M’s imperviousness data is too coarse for a parcel-level analysis). The City provided the neighborhood GIS layer containing 45 neighborhoods throughout the city (Figure 2 (reference [2]). The land use data utilized for this analysis was the same land use data provided by the City for the 2003/2011 CWRMPs (reference [3]). Using the same land use data allowed us to analyze results with the understanding that changes were strictly based on the changing imperviousness within the city. The land use data is shown in Figure 3. 3.0 Analysis Methods The neighborhood and land use type polygon GIS layers were intersected to define smaller polygons of land use type within each neighborhood. Zonal statistics were then used to calculate the average raster cell value for each land use type within each neighborhood (Table 2). Additionally, the area of each land use type within each neighborhood was calculated to understand which land use types are more prevalent in each neighborhood (Table 3). The data from Table 2 and Table 3 were then used to create a histogram of imperviousness and a cumulative area function to understand the range of imperviousness for each land use type. Figure 4 also shows the average and range of the resulting imperviousness values of all neighborhoods by land use type. These results are presented and discussed in Section 4.0. CahillBraemar Hills Countryside Parkwood Knolls Concord Southdale Bredesen Park Lake Cornelia Indian Hills Highlands Dewey Hill Creek Valley Todd Park Birchcrest Grandview Presidents The Heights Prospect Knolls Parklawn South Cornelia Melody Lake Arden Park Normandale Park Pentagon Park Morningside Pamela Park Lake Edina Fox Meadow Golf Terrace Heights Country ClubInterlachen Park Chowen Park Indian Trails Hilldale Promenade Rolling Green Brookview Heights Edinborough Minnehaha Woods Strachauer Park White Oaks Centennial Lakes Sunny Slope Creek Knoll 50th and France Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community PERCENT IMPERVIOUSNESS2011 U OF M DATASETImperviousness AnalysisCity of Edina FIGURE 1 Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4, 2016-09-16 16:52 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\CRWMP_Update_2017\Maps\Meetings\Percent Imperviousness.mxd User: cda1 0 1 Miles !;N Percent ImperviousnessHigh : 100 Low : 0 Edina Neighborhoods Note: Raster grid cells with0% imperviousness aretransparent and the backgroundimagery is visible. §¨¦494§¨¦494 £¤212 £¤169 £¤169 100 62 7 10062 7 456728 456717 456753 456734 456731 45673 4567158 456720 456732 456761 CahillBraemar Hills Countryside Parkwood Knolls Concord Southdale Bredesen Park Lake Cornelia Indian Hills Highlands Dewey Hill Creek Valley Todd Park Birchcrest Grandview Presidents The Heights Prospect Knolls Parklawn South Cornelia Melody Lake Arden Park Pentagon Park Morningside Pamela Park Lake Edina Fox Meadow Golf Terrace Heights Country ClubInterlachen Park Chowen Park Normandale Park Indian Trails Hilldale Promenade Rolling Green Brookview Heights Edinborough Minnehaha Woods Strachauer Park White Oaks Centennial Lakes Sunny Slope Creek Knoll 50th and France Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community EDINA NEIGHBORHOODSImperviousness AnalysisCity of Edina FIGURE 2 Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4, 2016-09-16 16:24 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\CRWMP_Update_2017\Maps\Meetings\Edina Neighborhoods.mxd User: cda1 0 1 Miles !;N Edina Neighborhoods Streets and Highways Interstate Highway US Highway State Trunk Highway County State-Aid Highway Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX,Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, and the GIS User Community LAND USE TYPEImperviousness AnalysisCity of Edina FIGURE 3 Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.4, 2016-09-16 16:44 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\CRWMP_Update_2017\Maps\Meetings\Land Use Map.mxd User: cda1 0 1 Miles !;N Edina Neighborhoods Land Use Natural/Park/Open Developed Parkland Golf Course Very Low Density Residential Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential Institutional Institutional - High Imperviousness Highway Commercial Industrial/Office Other Open Water Wetland Table 2 - Mean total imperviousness by land use type within each neighborhood Commercial Developed Park Golf Course High Density Residential Highway Industrial/ Office Institutional Institutional - High Imperviousness Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Natural/Park/ Open Open Water Other Very Low Density Residential Wetland Average % Impervious Legend 50th and France 87.3 72.6 52.0 61.8 86.5 Arden Park 64.6 0.0 34.3 63.4 39.4 32.6 65.6 7.3 100.0 36.6 100.0 Birchcrest 48.9 68.1 32.8 18.4 100.0 21.0 36.9 90.0 Braemar Hills 66.7 3.5 63.3 69.3 54.8 27.9 14.2 100.0 12.5 100.0 29.7 80.0 Bredesen Park 72.2 4.6 40.9 61.8 33.7 42.1 5.6 100.0 100.0 46.4 70.0 Brookview Heights 71.8 59.7 30.9 12.6 100.0 21.3 100.0 37.9 60.0 Cahill 72.4 49.9 74.1 60.4 63.5 24.3 100.0 41.9 100.0 70.5 50.0 Centennial Lakes 88.0 41.3 60.0 83.0 100.0 76.9 40.0 Chowen Park 42.2 38.9 7.7 100.0 38.6 30.0 Concord 53.2 38.6 53.6 60.6 35.3 19.4 100.0 100.0 45.5 20.0 Country Club 33.8 65.6 38.0 100.0 41.1 10.0 Countryside 22.3 37.7 32.7 28.6 49.1 25.7 100.0 18.8 100.0 32.0 0.0 Creek Knoll 62.2 34.2 76.7 14.9 100.0 36.9 Creek Valley 12.8 39.6 30.8 27.7 2.0 100.0 100.0 36.9 Dewey Hill 6.5 65.5 32.0 41.2 11.8 100.0 100.0 39.3 Edinborough 64.5 63.1 57.9 64.5 76.3 34.0 47.9 57.0 Fox Meadow 19.6 28.9 51.4 6.9 100.0 21.6 37.4 Golf Terrace Heights 65.6 27.5 7.2 68.3 61.3 35.1 100.0 28.7 Grandview 80.0 42.0 46.8 59.0 46.5 66.6 37.7 54.0 100.0 44.7 50.4 Highlands 12.5 26.0 35.3 28.4 10.7 100.0 27.8 100.0 31.8 Hilldale 0.0 21.5 100.0 100.0 39.7 Indian Hills 62.8 30.5 56.3 27.6 100.0 18.1 100.0 38.0 Indian Trails 65.8 56.0 71.7 28.6 4.6 13.3 100.0 33.5 Interlachen Park 57.5 6.6 25.8 100.0 100.0 17.6 Lake Cornelia 60.2 34.1 60.6 48.1 33.5 11.3 100.0 100.0 45.2 Lake Edina 90.7 9.2 0.0 62.4 34.6 15.2 100.0 100.0 43.9 Melody Lake 53.4 44.5 30.3 3.1 100.0 23.7 33.7 Minnehaha Woods 56.2 4.4 16.7 34.6 71.5 34.7 100.0 100.0 35.4 Morningside 68.2 15.2 45.1 32.1 2.7 15.4 100.0 100.0 32.3 Normandale Park 10.0 53.5 43.0 31.6 10.0 100.0 24.5 100.0 34.0 Pamela Park 72.0 8.4 59.0 59.2 37.1 28.0 100.0 100.0 35.9 Parklawn 77.2 6.7 61.9 72.8 26.7 100.0 51.6 Parkwood Knolls 66.4 19.7 47.5 59.0 29.5 51.7 3.6 100.0 22.1 100.0 31.7 Pentagon Park 78.0 40.4 60.5 71.3 0.0 100.0 75.2 Presidents 13.8 63.1 56.5 29.5 24.8 100.0 29.1 Promenade 80.2 52.8 63.6 73.8 71.9 Prospect Knolls 57.4 17.1 34.3 52.2 27.4 45.7 0.4 100.0 100.0 29.7 Rolling Green 17.4 21.4 100.0 100.0 27.1 South Cornelia 76.9 58.2 34.3 39.0 30.7 41.0 Southdale 81.2 67.7 59.0 60.7 84.5 49.9 100.0 76.1 Strachauer Park 7.1 55.5 39.7 39.1 Sunny Slope 39.8 68.7 75.0 29.4 100.0 41.0 The Heights 64.0 15.2 74.3 39.2 30.9 45.1 8.6 16.0 100.0 33.3 Todd Park 37.4 12.5 60.9 31.0 39.0 22.8 100.0 100.0 37.2 White Oaks 40.6 44.5 30.3 47.8 100.0 100.0 36.0 Commercial Developed Park Golf Course High Density Residential Highway Industrial/ Office Institutional Institutional - High Imperviousness Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Natural/Park/ Open Open Water Other Very Low Density Residential Wetland Maximum 90.7 67.7 40.4 72.6 71.8 83.0 75.0 84.5 60.4 76.7 34.7 100.0 44.7 27.8 100.0 Minimum 37.4 0.0 0.0 38.6 37.7 52.2 16.7 56.3 21.4 2.7 0.0 100.0 16.0 12.5 100.0 Average 77.6 18.7 5.4 58.7 53.8 71.7 41.7 71.6 31.7 42.6 10.5 100.0 31.3 20.1 100.0 Table 3 - Area (acres) of each land use type within each neighborhood Commercial Developed Park Golf Course High Density Residential Highway Industrial/ Office Institutional Institutional - High Imperviousness Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Natural/Park/ Open Open Water Other Very Low Density Residential Wetland Total Acres of Neighborhood 50th and France 18.91 0.97 0.004 0.06 20 Arden Park 8.87 0.003 0.60 4.40 2.48 114.16 1.98 12.47 6.20 151 Birchcrest 25.23 3.95 150.04 2.73 4.76 3.91 191 Braemar Hills 31.69 263.86 28.79 32.89 23.17 134.46 91.91 23.33 4.42 43.16 678 Bredesen Park 2.72 12.57 44.07 40.70 125.31 52.99 104.13 17.25 97.77 497 Brookview Heights 13.80 5.28 144.99 2.56 3.01 2.51 5.88 178 Cahill 64.78 26.48 255.13 0.26 0.03 7.41 4.52 14.58 5.43 379 Centennial Lakes 38.64 13.35 17.48 18.10 10.05 98 Chowen Park 1.26 176.30 4.25 1.33 183 Concord 1.87 3.97 28.21 48.29 192.44 1.15 17.91 1.38 295 Country Club 5.74 1.49 164.24 8.68 180 Countryside 35.12 14.79 42.68 355.49 5.11 1.98 17.09 4.60 4.05 481 Creek Knoll 2.83 33.47 1.05 13.15 4.27 55 Creek Valley 18.36 21.55 97.42 73.60 18.11 0.95 35.28 265 Dewey Hill 16.17 12.15 111.44 60.86 16.00 20.62 1.48 239 Edinborough 8.36 0.39 43.10 16.01 6.79 10.32 12.70 98 Fox Meadow 0.25 132.88 5.58 10.21 27.29 20.89 197 Golf Terrace Heights 5.92 5.57 127.51 18.80 7.81 130.09 10.04 306 Grandview 25.54 0.13 28.21 9.59 23.51 20.87 77.02 1.32 0.40 3.17 190 Highlands 13.72 0.30 12.26 226.84 19.85 16.89 10.81 4.34 305 Hilldale 0.74 59.42 5.42 12.99 79 Indian Hills 28.33 3.83 6.20 166.68 42.64 88.49 0.98 337 Indian Trails 5.69 13.63 14.02 88.52 4.76 22.82 0.18 150 Interlachen Park 1.96 153.62 53.14 13.46 0.88 223 Lake Cornelia 0.12 30.50 0.15 29.27 289.09 14.18 66.43 8.32 438 Lake Edina 2.06 14.78 0.07 11.31 112.77 7.03 25.43 0.58 174 Melody Lake 6.72 0.31 157.97 4.35 8.51 3.00 181 Minnehaha Woods 0.02 1.06 3.69 132.39 1.14 0.67 1.06 1.58 142 Morningside 7.90 12.08 7.79 192.01 10.28 6.02 3.15 0.82 240 Normandale Park 14.07 31.98 0.05 155.17 6.51 0.79 4.75 3.71 217 Pamela Park 4.98 51.10 0.01 3.89 153.82 0.08 4.08 10.94 229 Parklawn 28.42 38.14 58.45 7.95 0.77 4.91 139 Parkwood Knolls 11.34 20.33 4.76 3.68 369.33 18.96 42.00 30.65 118.87 4.30 624 Pentagon Park 86.52 0.26 6.88 49.05 0.18 2.53 145 Presidents 5.11 1.24 2.89 135.05 35.08 0.77 180 Promenade 59.92 8.69 42.49 9.46 121 Prospect Knolls 0.17 19.23 0.56 0.67 174.03 36.74 10.25 4.13 0.51 246 Rolling Green 0.26 126.78 4.65 5.31 137 South Cornelia 8.75 11.01 22.24 167.28 2.71 212 Southdale 248.23 0.15 61.71 12.39 13.86 8.14 3.24 348 Strachauer Park 5.89 7.85 101.19 115 Sunny Slope 0.35 6.11 0.07 55.82 8.01 70 The Heights 0.03 7.83 0.05 4.06 171.32 2.15 6.00 1.35 10.07 203 Todd Park 8.58 15.52 6.41 129.88 14.22 0.33 0.05 16.02 191 White Oaks 0.19 0.05 61.87 1.33 0.23 4.95 69 Commercial Developed Park Golf Course High Density Residential Highway Industrial/ Office Institutional Institutional - High Imperviousness Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential Natural/Park/ Open Open Water Other Very Low Density Residential Wetland Maximum 248 51 264 62 44 255 97 21 369 61 104 66 15 119 98 Minimum 0.02 0.003 0.07 0.01 1.24 0.05 0.004 3.95 0.26 0.03 0.08 0.05 1.35 4.42 0.18 Total Acres in Edina 683 315 602 272 404 456 312 52 5416 227 446 396 38 266 309 To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 8 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx 4.0 Results The average imperviousness for each land use type and the range of imperviousness among neighborhoods is shown in Figure 4. The imperviousness values assumed for the 2003/2011 CWRMPs are also shown in Figure 4. For some land use types such as Golf Course, Highway, Institutional, and Institutional – High Imperviousness, the 2016 analysis average value matches very closely with the 2003/2011 CWRMPs assumed value. For others, such as Commercial, High Density Residential, and Industrial/Office, the 2003/2011 CWRMPs assumed value is substantially higher when compared to the results of this 2016 analysis. For a few other land use types, such as Natural/Park/Open and Very Low Density Residential, the 2003/2011 CWRMPs assumptions appear to be low compared to the results of the 2016 analysis. Low and Medium Density Residential land use types both have wide ranges of imperviousness based on the 2016 analysis, and the 2003/2011 CWRMPs assumptions are on the high end of these new results. Open Water and Wetland land use types are 100% in both the 2003/2011 CWRMPs and this 2016 analysis; those will not change. Land use types Developed Park and Other were not used previously. The following figures (Figure 5 through Figure 17) show the resulting histograms of each of the land use types. Figure 4 - Average and range of imperviousness within all neighborhoods by land use type 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Imperviousness (%)Maximum Minimum Average 2003/2011 CWRMPs To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 10 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 5 Percent impervious histogram of the Commercial land use type Figure 6 Percent impervious histogram of the Developed Park land use type 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Commercial; N = 27 Neighborhoods Total Commercial area in Edina = 683 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 90% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 80% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Developed Park; N = 27 Neighborhoods Total Developed Park area in Edina = 315 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = N/A 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = N/A To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 11 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 7 Percent impervious histogram of the Golf Course land use type Figure 8 Percent impervious histogram of the High Density Residential land use type 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Golf Course; N = 13 Neighborhoods Total Golf Course area in Edina = 602 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 5% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) High Density Residential; N = 12 Neighborhoods Total High Density Residential area in Edina = 272 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 70% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 40% To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 12 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 9 Percent impervious histogram of the Highway land use type Figure 10 Percent impervious histogram of the Industrial/Office land use type 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Highway; N = 25 Neighborhoods Total Highway area in Edina = 404 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 50% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Industrial/Office; N = 13 Neighborhoods Total Industrial/Office area in Edina = 456 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 90% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 80% To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 13 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 11 Percent impervious histogram of the Institutional land use type Figure 12 Percent impervious histogram of the Institutional – High Imperviousness land use type 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Institutional; N = 20 Neighborhoods Total Institutional area in Edina = 312 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 40% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Institutional -High Imperviousness; N = 5 Neighborhoods Total Institutional -High Imperviousness area in Edina = 52 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 70% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 50% To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 14 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 13 Percent impervious histogram of the Low Density Residential land use type Figure 14 Percent impervious histogram of the Medium Density Residential land use type 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Low Density Residential; N = 41 Neighborhoods Total Low Density Residential area in Edina = 5416 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 40% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Medium Density Residential; N = 17 Neighborhoods Total Medium Density Residential area in Edina = 227 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 55% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 30% To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 15 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 15 Percent impervious histogram of the Natural/Park/Open land use type Figure 16 Percent impervious histogram of the Other land use type 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Natural/Park/Open; N = 29 Neighborhoods Total Natural/Park/Open area in Edina = 446 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 2% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Other; N = 8 Neighborhoods Total Other area in Edina = 38 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = N/A 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = N/A To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 16 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 17 Percent impervious histogram of the Very Low Density Residential land use type Table 4 shows the fraction of the area throughout the city in which the imperviousness from this 2016 analysis is below the assumptions used for the 2003/2011 CWRMPs. In other words, high numbers in Table 4 suggest that the previously used assumptions are conservative with respect to runoff volume because they may be overestimating the imperviousness of the land use type in some areas within Edina. Percentages in Table 4 around 40% to 50% suggest that imperviousness is underestimated for about half the area, and therefore, overestimated for the other half of the area. Low percentages in Table 4 (e.g., Very Low Density Residential) suggest that the previous assumptions in the 2003/2011 CWRMPs for associated land use types may be too low, and consideration should be given for increasing those imperviousness values. Table 4 Percent of total area of Edina where new average imperviousness value is below 2003/2011 CWRMP values Land Use Type Percent of Area below 2003/2011 CWRMP Imperviousness value Commercial ~100% Developed Park Not previously used Golf Course ~44% High Density Residential ~100% Highway ~41% Industrial/Office ~100% Institutional ~60% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 0% - 5%5% - 10%10% - 15%15% - 20%20% - 25%25% - 30%30% - 35%35% - 40%40% - 45%45% - 50%50% - 55%55% - 60%60% - 65%65% - 70%70% - 75%75% - 80%80% - 85%85% - 90%90% - 95%95% - 100%Fraction of Total Land Use AreaNumber of NeighborhoodsPercent Impervious (U of M 2011 data) Very Low Density Residential; N = 6 Neighborhoods Total Very Low Density Residential area in Edina = 266 acres 2003/2011 CWRMP Total Imp% = 12% 2003/2011 CWRMP Directly Connected Imp% = 8% To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 17 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Land Use Type Percent of Area below 2003/2011 CWRMP Imperviousness value Institutional - High Imperviousness ~60% Low Density Residential ~100% Medium Density Residential ~98% Natural/Park/Open < 18% Open Water ~100% Other Not previously used Very Low Density Residential < 10% Wetland ~100% A discussion of the results for four different land use types is presented here to provide guidance for interpreting the results. • Open Water: This land use type, by definition is 100% impervious. Therefore, the imperviousness values of this 2016 analysis match the 2003/2011 CWRMPs and do not need to be adjusted. • Commercial: There are 27 neighborhoods that contain the Commercial land use type. The total area of Commercial land use is about 680 acres, with nearly 250 acres of Commercial land use falling within the Southdale neighborhood. There are five neighborhoods with imperviousness less than 60%, and there is one neighborhood with imperviousness greater than 90%. However, those extremes comprise only about 13 acres of the 680 total acres of Commercial land use. Close to 50% of the area of Commercial land use is less than 80% impervious, and about 90% of the Commercial land use area is below 85% impervious. Finally, essentially all of the Commercial land use area is less than 90% impervious. Therefore, the assumption of 90% impervious used in the 2003/2011 CWRMPs for Commercial land use may be overestimated. Alternatively, 90% impervious can be thought of as a conservative assumption with respect to runoff volume. • Institutional: There are 20 neighborhoods that contain the Institutional land use type. The total area of Institutional land use is about 310 acres, with nearly 190 acres of Institutional land use within the Concord, Countryside, and Creek Valley neighborhoods. There is one neighborhood with imperviousness less than 20%, and there are two neighborhoods with imperviousness greater than 70%. However, those extremes comprise only about 13 acres of the 310 total acres of Institutional land use. Roughly 60% of the area of Institutional land use is less than 40% impervious. Therefore, the assumption of 40% impervious used in the 2003/2011 CWRMPs for Institutional land use is right in the middle of the imperviousness results of the 2016 analysis. • Very Low Density Residential: There are six neighborhoods that contain the Very Low Density Residential land use type. The total area of Very Low Density Residential land use is almost 270 acres, with about 230 acres of Very Low Density Residential land use within the Indian Hills, Indian Trails, and Parkwood Knolls neighborhoods. The three neighborhoods between 15% and 25% impervious make up about 85% of the Very Low Density Residential area. Close to 50% of the total area of Very Low Density Residential land use is less than about 20% impervious, and about To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 18 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx 95% of the Very Low Density Residential land use area is below 25% impervious. There are no neighborhoods with imperviousness less than 12%. Therefore, the assumption of 12% impervious used in the 2003/2011 CWRMPs for Very Low Density Residential land use may be underestimated which is consistent with the assumption that increasing development has impacted imperviousness. However, the increase in imperviousness does not appear to be significant enough to make the imperviousness values for this land use type consistent with the imperviousness values for the Low Density Residential land use type. There is still a difference in the imperviousness values of these two land use types. 5.0 Conversion from Total Imperviousness to Directly Connected Imperviousness Sections 1.0 – 4.0 of this memo have discussed total imperviousness for each land use type. However, what is important for hydrologic modeling is the directly connected imperviousness which is similar to effective impervious area. A July 2015 report on effective impervious area suggests that these terms are slightly different (reference [4]). The report describes how the effective impervious area is usually less, about 80% to 90% of the directly connected impervious area. Two possible approaches for converting from total to directly connected imperviousness are listed below. First, the simplest approach for converting the total imperviousness described in Section 4.0 to directly connected imperviousness is to simply use the same conversion ratios (ratio of directly connected to total) used in the 2003/2011CWRMPs as shown in Table 1 and then apply some engineering judgment to the results. For example, if the total imperviousness of Commercial land use was changed from 90% to 80%, and the same ratio was then used to convert total imperviousness to directly connected imperviousness (0.889), the result for Commercial land use would be 71%, or potentially rounded to 70% directly connected imperviousness. Second, an alternative method is proposed in a report by John Gulliver and others at the University of Minnesota (reference [4]). The proposed method of determining the directly connected impervious area fraction in ungauged urban watersheds is summarized in the following steps: • Extract total imperviousness from land use and the hydrologic soil groups from the SSURGO data set and calculate the weighted average saturated hydraulic conductivity of the soil. • Estimate the actual curve number of the watershed as a function of total imperviousness and the saturated hydraulic conductivity. • Determine the fraction of effective impervious area as a function of the actual curve number. • Assume that the effective impervious area is roughly 85% of the directly connected impervious area, and scale up the values to account for this difference with a factor of 1.176 (or 0.85-1). To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 19 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx The approach suggested in the paper by Gulliver could be followed to determine the directly connected impervious area for the purposes of the 2017 XP-SWMM modeling. However, there are some concerns about the applicability of the paper to this modeling. First, much of the method relies on regression equations that do not account for the spread in the data and the error bars, which appear to be relatively significant. Second, the suggested approach is likely more useful for simpler hydrologic modeling methods, such as the rational method. In XP-SWMM, hydrologic factors such as depression storage and infiltration parameters based on soil type are treated as independent inputs. In the method described in the paper, it appears that these other hydrologic factors are implicitly included in the estimated value of effective impervious area. Therefore, we do not recommend using this approach to estimate imperviousness for the 2017 XP-SWMM modeling. 6.0 Consequences and Risks Understanding the consequences and risks of over- or under-estimating the imperviousness can help determine an appropriate value for each land use type in the city of Edina. Figure 18 is a simple diagram to help illustrate this decision making process. Currently, there is a range of imperviousness throughout the city, and it varies by land use type (residential versus commercial versus park space, etc.). Accounting for the trend that the city is becoming more impervious, it is reasonable to expect that in the near future, the imperviousness will be higher than what it is today. However, with policies and regulations being put in place to limit the increase in imperviousness and to offset any additional imperviousness being created (e.g., using stormwater BMPs), the long term outlook is much more uncertain. If the current imperviousness is used in the modeling for the 2017 CWRMP, then the risk is that it will likely be outdated and too low in the near future. The consequence is that flooding of structures may increase, stormwater infrastructure may be undersized, and the level of service provided by the City will decrease creating frustration within the community. If the current trend of increasing imperviousness is extended into the future, the risk is that the imperviousness will be overestimated. The consequence is that more locations may be identified as flood risk locations and may require expensive updates to infrastructure. The flooding of structures may decrease because the stormwater infrastructure will generally be oversized. The level of service will increase, but it will come at a significant and potentially unnecessary cost to the community. Finally, choosing an imperviousness value that is higher than the current average, but one that captures the current trend of increasing imperviousness without extending it too far into the future may be the best selection. Risk of over- or under-estimating the imperviousness still exists, but the consequences may be less because the error in the selected value will likely be less. Therefore, for each land use type, selecting a value that is higher than 80% to 90% of the total area of that land use type is expected to be a reasonably protective, yet still accurate value. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 20 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx Figure 18 Total imperviousness estimation; consequences and risks diagram current status likely future ??? current trend low total imperviousness high Consequences and risks•Flood risk•Infrastructure size•Level of service current range of imperviousness likely near future range of imperviousness To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 21 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx 7.0 Conclusions An analysis of the imperviousness throughout the city of Edina for multiple land use types was completed using the most recent available imperviousness data set. For some of the land use types, the imperviousness has historically been over- or under-estimated, and for others, the current value has been estimated very well. The values for total imperviousness were updated based on the 2016 imperviousness analysis and consideration of the risks and consequences presented in the previous section. Recommended total imperviousness values for stormwater modeling associated with the 2017 CWRMP are listed in Table 5. Additionally, after discussion with City staff concerning the trends in residential development throughout the city, recommendations for updates to the directly connected imperviousness are also presented in Table 5. For most of the land use types, the recommended total imperviousness for the 2017 CWRMP is at or above the average imperviousness of the 2016 analysis. The two exceptions to this are the “Natural/Park/Open” and “Other” (essentially a railroad corridor) land use types. In both cases, these land use polygons tend to be small and narrow and the analysis was highly affected by the adjacent land use polygons which were often Industrial/Office or Commercial and were raising the average imperviousness. A closer look at the aerial imagery within the small and narrow land use polygons representing Natural/Park/Open and Other justifies using lower numbers for the total imperviousness. Table 5 Summary of imperviousness values and recommendation for impervious assumptions for the 2017 CWRMP update Land Use Type Total Area (acres) Imperviousness Value Assumptions (%) 2003/2011 CWRMPs 2016 Imperviousness Analysis Recommended for 2017 CWRMP Total Directly Connected Total (Range) Total (Average) Total Directly Connected Commercial 683 90% 80% 37% - 91% 78% 85% 80% Developed Park 315 not previously used 0% - 68% 19% 30% 20% Golf Course 602 5% 2% 0% - 40% 5% 5% 2% High Density Residential 272 70% 40% 39% - 73% 59% 65% 50% Highway 404 50% 50% 38% - 72% 54% 65% 65% Industrial/Office 456 90% 80% 52% - 83% 72% 75% 75% Institutional 312 40% 20% 17% - 75% 42% 60% 30% Institutional - High Imperviousness 52 70% 50% 56% - 85% 72% 80% 70% Low Density Residential 5,416 40% 20% 21% - 60% 32% 40% 25% Medium Density Residential 227 55% 30% 3% - 77% 43% 50% 40% Natural/Park/Open 446 2% 0% 0% - 35% 11% 2% 0% Open Water 396 100% 100% N/A 100% 100% 100% Other 38 not previously used 16% - 45% 32% 20% 20% Very Low Density Residential 266 12% 8% 13% - 29% 20% 25% 15% Wetland 309 100% 100% N/A 100% 100% 100% To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: City of Edina Imperviousness Assumptions for Stormwater Modeling Date: October 25, 2016 Page: 22 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271514 2017 CWRMP SW Modeling Updates\WorkFiles\Imperviousness Analysis\Imperviousness Analysis Summary.docx 8.0 References [1] Remote Sensing and Geospatial Analysis Laboratory, University of Minnesota, Marvin Bauer, "Twin Cities Metropolitan Area Land Cover Classification and Impervious Surface Area by Landsat Remote Sensing: 2011 Update," St. Paul, MN, 2011. [2] City of Edina, "Neighborhood Layer," Edina, MN, 2016. [3] City of Edina, "Land Use Data," 2000. [4] J. S. Gulliver, A. Ebrahimian and B. N. Wilson, "Determination of Effective Impervious Area in Urban Watersheds," Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul, Minnesota, July, 2015. Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Technical Memorandum To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Project:Edina Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Support (23271728.00) Executive Summary Barr was asked to review model-predicted flood impacts in the focal geography of the Morningside neighborhood to evaluate the sensitivity of those impacts to the magnitude of stormwater storage within the watershed. In particular, the focus was on underground storage methods within private property, the right-of-way, or under streets. This evaluation was conducted as a result of Task Force discussions about the potential benefits of requiring private homeowners to store stormwater on-site similar to requirements for commercial development. Barr reviewed the benefits achieved by storing the first 1-inch, 2-inches, and 3-inches of precipitation from storm events of varying size, from the 20%-annual-chance storm event (5-year storm; 3.59 inches) to the 1%-annual-chance storm event (100-year storm; 7.49 inches). For the private storage evaluation (underground storage vaults under a portion of each of the 570 residential parcels), storage was assumed for every parcel within the Morningside neighborhood. Barr found that storing the first 1-inch of storms of this magnitude had a negligible impact on flood levels. Storing the first 2-inches and 3-inches showed a more significant benefit with regards to reduction in peak flood levels. Depending on the storm event, and depending on the location within in the neighborhood, the results varied anywhere from flood level decreases of a few inches to decreasing nearly a foot and a half. However, this apparent benefit comes at an initial cost of approximately $15,000 per inch of stormwater stored,per residential parcel. To store 2-inches of runoff in the entire neighborhood (~570 residential parcels) would cost approximately $17 million. In addition, while the flood levels may be lowered, the number of homes that are removed from potential impacts from flood inundation is small. For example, one home may potentially be removed from flood inundation at Weber Pond depending on the storm event. Finally, the management and maintenance of these underground stormwater storage vaults distributed throughout an entire neighborhood is expected to be complicated and unprecedented. This is all to say, this solution would provide a moderate benefit for a very high cost. Additionally, a preliminary look at the compounding effect of climate change suggests that improvements realized by implementing additional private storage may eventually be negated by climate change (i.e., increased precipitation amounts, see Appendix B on Climate Change Impacts Analysis). To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 2 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Private Infrastructure Analysis Details A common example of private stormwater management infrastructure (infrastructure on a privately owned parcel), is a rainwater garden (Figure 1). Rainwater gardens are typically designed to store the first one inch of runoff generated from a storm, aimed at both reducing the volume of runoff and improving water quality downstream. Figure 1 Photo of a rainwater garden. Other examples of private infrastructure for stormwater storage can include tree trenches, cisterns, permeable pavement, and underground storage vaults. Figure 2 shows an example of an underground stormwater storage vault. To simplify our analysis, we assumed that all parcels in the Morningside neighborhood are approximately 60 feet wide (along the road), and also assumed that every parcel would have underground storage (below grade) that is 3 feet deep. Then we determined how wide the underground storage vault would need to be to contain 1 inch of runoff, 2 inches of runoff, or 4 inches of runoff. We found that underground storage vaults on every parcel in the Morningside neighborhood would need to be 5 feet wide to store 1 inch of runoff, 10 feet wide to store 2 inches of runoff, and 20 feet wide to store 4 inches of runoff. Figure 3 provides a graphic that shows the extent of underground storage needed for sample parcels in Morningside. Figure 2 Example of an underground storage vault (37th Avenue Greenway, Minneapolis). To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner,City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Page:3 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D -Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 3 Private stormwater storage sizing examples for storing varying amounts of runoff. Barr also analyzed using stormwater storage under streets and/or in the public right-of-way.Figure 4 provides a graphic that shows the approximate extent of underground storage available for a typical road within the Morningside neighborhood. Assuming two 15-foot wide (and 3 feet deep) underground storage vaults can be installed under all of the roads or right-of-way in the Morningside neighborhood, 3-inches of runoff could be stored in those vaults. To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner,City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Page:4 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D -Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 4 Stormwater storage sizing (width) available for typical roads or right-of-way in the Morningside neighborhood. To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner,City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Page:5 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D -Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 5 shows the subwatersheds in the Morningside neighborhood. Graphs are included below that show the results and range of benefits of residential/private stormwater storage for Weber Pond (subwatershed MS_40,Figure 6), for the area along Branson between Oakdale Avenue and Grimes Avenue (subwatershed MS_48,Figure 7), and for the area along Crocker Avenue between West 42nd Street and Morningside Road (subwatershed MS_2,Figure 8). Figure 5 Map showing subwatershed divides in and around the Morningside neighborhood To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner,City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Page:6 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D -Private Infrastructure.docx In Figure 6, the horizontal, maroon-dashed lines represent approximate low elevations based on structure footprints for the four lowest homes around Weber Pond. They may or may not represent actual low entry elevations of these homes. However, they give a good representation of the home elevations and how close they are to the flood levels. Figure 6 Peak water surface levels resulting from varying amounts of runoff stored using private infrastructure for varying storm events in the Weber Pond subwatershed (MS_40). At first glance, the reductions shown in Figure 6 appear smaller than would be expected. There are multiple other factors affecting the flood volume stored in Weber Pond. First, Weber Pond ultimately receives water from Edina and also from St. Louis Park and Minneapolis. While private infrastructure is overall beneficial, reducing the runoff to Weber Pond from Edina may allow more water from St. Louis Park and Minneapolis to fill the pond back up during an event. Second, at the peak flood elevations shown in Figure 6, stormwater flows out of Weber Pond both into Weber Park and over France Avenue to the east to Minneapolis. When ponds rise high enough to overflow banks, additional water does not tend to have a significant impact on the water level since water can start following natural overflow paths. To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner,City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Page:7 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D -Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 7 Peak water surface levels resulting from varying amounts of runoff stored using private infrastructure for varying storm events in subwatershed MS_48. To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner,City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Page:8 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D -Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 8 Peak water surface levels resulting from varying amounts of runoff stored using private infrastructure for varying storm events in subwatershed MS_2. Barr commonly estimates that the cost per cubic foot of underground stormwater storage is approximately $10 to $20. For one inch of runoff, for one 0.25-acre parcel, storage volume equals 900 cubic feet. This equates to a little under $15,000 (+/-$5,000) per parcel per inch of runoff stored. Figure 9 shows the approximate cost per parcel of underground storage using varying widths of underground storage units and varying amounts of runoff stored. To put the cost of private underground storage into perspective, Figure 10 shows a portion of the Morningside neighborhood (~180 parcels) and provides a breakdown of an approximate cost to capture two inches of runoff from every parcel. To:Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner,City of EdinaFrom:Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co.Subject:Appendix D -Private Infrastructure AnalysisDate:March 30, 2020Page:9 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D -Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 9 Approximate cost per parcel of underground storage using varying widths of underground storage units and varying amounts of runoff stored. Figure 10 Cost breakdown for using private stormwater storage for a portion of the Morningside neighborhood. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 10 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx In total, there are approximately 570 residential parcels in the Morningside neighborhood watershed drainage area, as shown in Figure 11. Figure 11 Parcels in the Morningside neighborhood watershed/drainage area. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 11 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx The results of Barr’s private storage analysis are summarized in Table 1 below. Recall that storing 1-inch of runoff from every parcel in Morningside had a marginal benefit in general on peak flood levels. Table 1 below shows that to store 2-inches of runoff in the entire neighborhood would cost approximately $17 million. While storing 2-inches of runoff does reduce flood levels, the number of homes that are removed from potential impacts from flood inundation is small. For example, as shown in Figure 6, depending on the storm event, this level of effort may potentially remove only one home from flood inundation at Weber Pond. Table 1 Summary of costs and benefits of private stormwater storage for the whole Morningside neighborhood. Inches of Runoff Stored Cost for All Parcels to Store the Runoff Flood Level Reduction Benefit (in feet) for Weber Pond Subwatershed (MS_40) 5-yr Storm (3.59" of precip) 10-yr Storm (4.29" of precip) 50-yr Storm (6.39" of precip) 100-yr Storm (7.49" of precip) 1 inch $ 8,550,000 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 2 inches $ 17,100,000 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.3 3 inches $ 25,650,000 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.5 Survey of Cities Single-dwelling unit residential standards Coverage and impervious maximums Metro Cities 2 Apple Valley Zoning R-5 R-2 R-3 FAR None None None Max. building coverage None None None Max. impervious surface None None None Blaine Zoning R-1 R-1A R-1AA Max. building coverage None None None Max. impervious surface None None None Bloomington Zoning R-1 RS-1 Max. building coverage None None Max. impervious surface 35% 35% Burnsville Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage None Max. impervious surface None Eagan Zoning R-1 R-1S Max. building coverage 20% 25% Max. impervious surface None 25% for shoreline None 25% for shoreline Eden Prairie Zoning R1-22 R1-13.5 R1-9.5 Max. building coverage None None None Max. Impervious surface None 30% for shoreline None 30% for shoreline None 30% for shoreline 3 Edina Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage 25% 30% if lot is less than 9,000 square feet Max. Impervious surface None Hopkins Zoning R-1A R-1B R-1c FAR None None None Max. building coverage 35% 35% 35% Max. Impervious surface None None None Lakeville Zoning RS-1 RS-2 RS-3 RS-4 Max. building coverage None None None None Max. impervious surface None None None None Maple Grove Zoning R-1 R-2 R-2B Max. building coverage None None None Max. impervious surface None None None Minneapolis Zoning R-1 R-2 R-3 Max. building coverage 45% 45% 45% Max. impervious surface 60% 60% 60% Minnetonka Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage None Max. Impervious surface None 30% Impervious within 150 ft of lake 75% impervious within 1000 ft of lake 4 New Brighton Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage 30% Max. Impervious surface 50% Plymouth Zoning RSF-1 RSF-2 RSF-3 Max. building coverage 30% 30% 35% Max. impervious surface None 25% within 1000 ft of water body None 25% within 1000 ft of water body None 25% within 1000 ft of water body St. Louis Park Zoning R-1 R-2 Max. building coverage 35% 35% Max. impervious surface None None Wayzata Zoning R-3A R-2A R-2 Max. building coverage 30% 20% 20% Max. impervious surface None None None Woodbury Zoning R-4 Max. building coverage 35% Max. impervious surface None Survey of Cities Single-dwelling unit residential standards Coverage and impervious maximums Metro Cities 2 Apple Valley Zoning R-5 R-2 R-3 FAR None None None Max. building coverage None None None Max. impervious surface None None None Blaine Zoning R-1 R-1A R-1AA Max. building coverage None None None Max. impervious surface None None None Bloomington Zoning R-1 RS-1 Max. building coverage None None Max. impervious surface 35% 35% Burnsville Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage None Max. impervious surface None Eagan Zoning R-1 R-1S Max. building coverage 20% 25% Max. impervious surface None 25% for shoreline None 25% for shoreline Eden Prairie Zoning R1-22 R1-13.5 R1-9.5 Max. building coverage None None None Max. Impervious surface None 30% for shoreline None 30% for shoreline None 30% for shoreline 3 Edina Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage 25% 30% if lot is less than 9,000 square feet Max. Impervious surface None Hopkins Zoning R-1A R-1B R-1c FAR None None None Max. building coverage 35% 35% 35% Max. Impervious surface None None None Lakeville Zoning RS-1 RS-2 RS-3 RS-4 Max. building coverage None None None None Max. impervious surface None None None None Maple Grove Zoning R-1 R-2 R-2B Max. building coverage None None None Max. impervious surface None None None Minneapolis Zoning R-1 R-2 R-3 Max. building coverage 45% 45% 45% Max. impervious surface 60% 60% 60% Minnetonka Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage None Max. Impervious surface None 30% Impervious within 150 ft of lake 75% impervious within 1000 ft of lake 4 New Brighton Zoning R-1 Max. building coverage 30% Max. Impervious surface 50% Plymouth Zoning RSF-1 RSF-2 RSF-3 Max. building coverage 30% 30% 35% Max. impervious surface None 25% within 1000 ft of water body None 25% within 1000 ft of water body None 25% within 1000 ft of water body St. Louis Park Zoning R-1 R-2 Max. building coverage 35% 35% Max. impervious surface None None Wayzata Zoning R-3A R-2A R-2 Max. building coverage 30% 20% 20% Max. impervious surface None None None Woodbury Zoning R-4 Max. building coverage 35% Max. impervious surface None Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Risi Karim, City Management Fellow Item Activity: Subject:Approve Human Services Task Force 2022-2023 Funding Recommendation Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve funding recommendations as presented by the Human Services Task Force. INTRODUCTION: The Human Services Task Force provided their preliminary recommendation to City Council at the November 16, 2021 City Council work session. Representatives of the Task Force will provide a presentation including history, process and their funding recommendations for the 2022-2023 budget. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: 2022-2023 Funding Recommendations, Nov. 16 Human Services Task Force: 2022-2023 Funding Recommendations, Nov. 16 Staff Presentation November 16, 2021 Mayor and City Council Risi Karim, City Management Fellow & Human Services Task Force Liaison 2021 Human Services Task Force Recommendation for 2022/2023 Funding Information / Background: The City of Edina supports organizations that serve Edina residents. The City provides special funding to organizations that address an immediate basic human need (i.e., elements required for survival and mental and physical health, such as food, water, shelter, protection from environmental threats, and supportive services to assist with activities of daily living). The Human Services Task Force is established by the City Manager to provide an informed and community- based recommendation on how funds could be distributed. The Task Force forms every two years and is made up of current City Advisory Board and Commission members. The Task Force charge is to solicit and consider proposals from organizations and provide recommendations of a two-year funding distribution amount to be considered for adoption by the City Council. The Task Force creates a Request for Proposal, accepts applications, analyzes and interviews applicants, and ultimately provides a funding recommendation. Because this is a budget distribution, the City Council has the final decision on the funding. The 2021 Task Force was comprised of 5 volunteer members: Michael Wood, Task Force Chair (Community Health Commission) Joni Bennett (Human Rights & Relations Commission) Rachel Pollock (Heritage Preservation Commission) Francesca Lichtenberger (Human Rights & Relations Commission, Student commissioner) Sabeehudeen Mirza (Human Rights & Relations Commission, Student commissioner) The 2021 Task Force members brainstormed recommendations going forward for future Human Services Task Forces. Highlights include: Use of mid-biennium review to record City staff observations and share with future task forces. Use of interview process to learn more about applicant organizations, not duplicate information in written applications. Staff will provide this feedback to the next Human Services Task Force to improve the process. The Human Services Task Force 2022-2023 funding recommendation memo is attached. City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Task Force Report EdinaMN.gov/hs Date: November 16, 2021 To: Mayor and City Council From: 2021 Human Services Task Force Subject 2022/2023 Human Services Funding Recommendations The Task Force The Human Services Task Force for 2021 consisted of three adult and two student commissioners, representing three commissions, who participated in planning meetings, interviews and deliberations: ● Michael Wood, Task Force Chair (Community Health Commission) ● Joni Bennett (Human Rights & Relations Commission) ● Rachel Pollock (Heritage Preservation Commission) ● Francesca Lichtenberger (Human Rights & Relations Commission, student commissioner) ● Sabeehudeen Mirza (Human Rights & Relations Commission, student commissioner) The work of the Task Force has been assisted by Staff Liaison Risi Karim, City Management Fellow. Task Force Process The Task Force has met four times to date: ● On June 28, Task Force members met via WebEx and: ○ Discussed the history of the Task Force and the general parameters of its work; ○ Elected a Task Force chair and revised the calendar of future meeting dates; ○ Discussed the Request for Proposal and selection criteria; and ○ Agreed to submit proposed revisions to Staff Liaison Karim. ● On July 26, Task Force members met again via WebEx and approved a final draft of the RFP. ● On August 23, Task Force members met at City Hall to review all nine responses to the RFP. They decided to interview the eight providers who met the selection criteria, and selected a format and prospective questions for provider interviews. ● On September 20, the Task Force met again at City Hall to interview providers, who appeared virtually. Following the interviews, the Task Force discussed and reached consensus on its recommendations for allocation of human services funding. Please see the recommendations below. Page 2 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Task Force Methodology Nine organizations responded to the RFP. Eight of the nine had received funding from the City of Edina in the current biennium, 2020-2021. One organization, Abbey’s Hope, had not previously applied for or received funding. Guided by the RFP specification that: The City of Edina funds organizations that address an immediate basic human need (i.e., elements required for survival and normal/healthy mental and physical health, such as food, water, shelter, protection from environmental threats, and supportive services to assist with activities of daily living, and the purpose for which Abbey’s Hope was seeking funding, a majority of Task Force members recommended that Abbey’s Hope not be interviewed or recommended for funding. That decision left eight organizations in consideration. After reviewing their applications and hearing from representatives of each, Task Force members were in full agreement that all eight organizations were meeting “immediate basic human needs” of various groups of Edina residents, were equally worthy, and deserved continued funding. As in past years, the total amount of funding requested, $244,000 for the biennium, or $122,000 per year, exceeds the amount that has been budgeted by the City Council for human services funding, $100,000 per year. Task Force members were in full agreement that the methodology used by the 2019 Task Force, of funding the same proportion of each applicant’s request, was wise and fair. This year, the amount that can be funded within budget is 81.97 % of each applicant’s request. Task Force Funding Recommendations Using the foregoing analysis and rationale, the Task Force recommends the following allocations of human services funding: Organization Requested two-year Funding Recommended Funding 2022 Recommended Funding 2023 Recommend Funding over two years Beacon Interfaith (case management, staffing for youth housing) $30,000 $12,295 $12,295 $24,590 Page 3 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Bridge for Youth (operation cost for shelter for youth, crisis council, food,) $20,000 $8,197 $8,197 $16,394 Cornerstone Advocacy Service (Domestic violence) $46,000 $18,853 $18,853 $37,706 Help at Your Door (Food delivery, driving for seniors) $30,000 $12,295 $12,295 $24,590 Normandale Center for Healing and Wholeness (support for seniors and caregivers) $18,000 $7,377 $7,377 $14,754 Oasis for Youth (support for homeless youth) $8,000 $ 3,279 $ 3,279 $6,558 Senior Community Services (senior support, outreach, caregiver support) $42,000 $17,213 $17,213 $34,426 VEAP (food shelf, mobile food pantry, supportive housing services) $50,000 $20,491 $20,491 $40,982 Page 4 City of Edina • 4801 W. 50th St. • Edina, MN 55424 Abbey’s Hope Foundation $36,000 -- - $- Totals $244,000 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 Recommendations Going Forward Task Force members implemented the recommendations of the 2019 Task Force and requests by City staff for more clarity and specificity in the Request for Proposal (RFP). Task Force members reiterate the recommendation of the 2019 Task Force that City staff provide future task forces with input including their experiences with applicant organizations. In addition, Task Force members recommend the following: 1. Future task forces continue to use the RFP to convey City goals and objectives to potential applicants. 2. Future task forces continue to use the interview process as modified this year, to learn more about applicant organizations beyond the information provided in the written applications, rather than to duplicate information already provided in the written applications. 3. A mid-biennium review be conducted of each organization funded, according to the plan stated in Section 4 of the RFP, to evaluate the progress made on each organization’s work plan. Each review should include a site visit by a Task Force member or the Human Services staff liaison and an update on how funds have been used in Year 1. The Task Force member and/or City staff member performing the mid-biennium review should record their observations so that they may be shared with future task forces. Task Force members thank the Council for providing this opportunity for citizen input into the allocation of funding for human services. Human Services Funding Task Force ReportFunding for 2022 & 2023Michael Wood, Task Force ChairJoni Bennett, Task Force Member •Michael Wood, Task Force Chair (Community Health Commission)•Joni Bennett (Human Rights & Relations Commission)•Rachel Pollock (Heritage Preservation Commission)•Francesca Lichtenberger (Human Rights & Relations Commission, student commissioner)•Sabeehudeen Mirza (Human Rights & Relations Commission, student commissioner)Task Force MembersEdinaMN.gov2 “The City of Edina funds organizations that address an immediate basic human need (i.e., elements required for survival and normal/healthy mental and physical health, such as food, water, shelter, protection from environmental threats, and supportive services to assist with activities of daily living)”.Human Services Funding Mission StatementEdinaMN.gov3 HistoryHuman services funding is a contract for services that a city would or could typically provide. Authorized by Minnesota State Constitution and Statute.Funding through this process started in 1977.Funding for two-year cycle corresponding to City budget.City Council decision. Advised by Community Task Force.EdinaMN.gov4 Selection ProcessEdinaMN.gov5•City of Edina issues a Request for Proposals•Published July 30Request for Proposal•Task Force reviews all RFP submissions TF Review•Task Force invites agencies to interviewTF Interviews•Task Force formulates its funding recommendationTF Recommendations•Task Force’s recommendation submitted to Council for approvalCity Council Approval •June 28Review history and goals of Human Services funding Elect TF chairBegin work on Request for Proposal•July 26Approve Request for Proposal•August 23Review submissions (9)Determine interview process2021 Task Force ActionsEdinaMN.gov6•September 20Conduct interviews & debriefFormulate funding allocation recommendation•October 25Approve report to Council•November 17Meet with and report to Council Funding History7Provider2021 2020 2019 2018 201720162015 2014 2013 2012Beacon Interfaith11,092 10,840 13,265 13,005Senior Community Services17,155 16,785 20,350 19,950 20,450 19200 19200 18,000 24,500 23,056Cornerstone17,198 16,827 20,400 20,000 15,650 14700 14700 14,700 14,500 13,650VEAP17,677 17,296 20,960 20,550 26,615 25000 25000 25,000 25,000 24,005Bridge for Youth (The Bridge)7,350 7,350 6920 6500 6500 6,500 5,300 4,932Help at Your Door (Store To Door)10,829 10,584 12,455 11700 11700 11,700 4,700 4,000Normandale Center12,833 12,547 15,300 15,000 5,005 4700 4700 4,700 4,200 3,400Oasis for Youth3,000 3,000 3,060 3,000 2,665 2500 2500 2,000 2,200 2,000Conflict Resolution Center2000 2,000 2,500 2022 Funding RecommendationsEdinaMN.gov8OrganizationOrganizationOrganizationOrganization 2022202220222022Beacon Interfaith Housing Collaborative $12,295Bridge for Youth $8,197Cornerstone $18,853Help at Your Door $12,295Normandale Center for Healing $7,377Oasis for Youth $3,279Senior Community Services $17,213VEAP$20,491 Based on amounts approved for Year 1.Not guaranteed in event of budget shortfall.Potential cost-of-living increases per other City budget items.Contingent on site visits and work plan progress reports.2023 Funding ConsiderationsEdinaMN.gov9 Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.B. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-116: Approving Final Layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Approve Resolution No. 2021-116 approving Final Layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan. INTRODUCTION: The public hearing was closed at noon on December 13. No comments were received. The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is in the process of developing Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan. This project is the first of four phases that will construct managed lanes from Highway 169 to the Minneapolis/St. P aul International Airport. MnDOT has asked the City of Edina to approve the proposed final layout. Project 1 triggers the statutory municipal consent process because it adds capacity to the trunk highway system. This process is intended to give municipalities an additional opportunity to provide formal input on the project design. P er state law, the City is required to conduct a public hearing on the proposed final layout as part of this process. See attached staff report and supporting materials. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: Approving Final Layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan Resolution No. 2021-166: Approving Final Layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan MnDOT Municipal Consent Letter Project 1 Final Layout (1 of 2) Project 1 Final Layout (2 of 2) December 7. 2021 Mayor and City Council Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner Resolution No. 2021-116: Approving Final Layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan Action Requested Motion to close the public hearing at noon on December 13, and to continue action at the December 21 City Council meeting. Introduction The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is in the process of developing Project 1 of the I- 494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan. This project is the first of four phases that will construct managed lanes from Highway 169 to the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. MnDOT has asked the City of Edina to approve the proposed final layout. Project 1 triggers the statutory municipal consent process because it adds capacity to the trunk highway system. This process is intended to give municipalities an additional opportunity to provide formal input on the project design. Per state law, the City is required to conduct a public hearing on the proposed final layout as part of this process. Background To address congestion in the southwest segment of I-494, MnDOT has been working with Cities of Bloomington, Richfield, Edina and Eden Prairie, the I-494 Corridor Coalition, and the I-35W Solutions Alliance to develop a vision for how the freeway can increase capacity and better serve the growing multimodal needs of the community. The full I-494 vision cannot be built all at once due to funding limitations and construction impacts. Instead, the nine proposed elements of the vision will be implemented in four phases of construction. Project 1 will include the following elements: Construction of a new turbine northbound-to-westbound ramp at the I-35W/I-494 interchange Construction of E-ZPass lanes between Highway 100 and I-35W in both directions Bridge replacement and access reconfiguration at Nicollet, Portland and 12th Avenues Construction of a new pedestrian/bicycle bridge near Chicago Avenue REPORT / RECOMMENDATION Page 2 The project will also include replacement of existing pavement, drainage, construction of retaining walls, sidewalks, bike lanes, signing, lighting and traffic management. Project 1 is being developed for letting in April 2023 as a design-build project. Strategic Objectives Project 1 supports several goals identified in the Transportation Chapter of the City’s 2018 Comprehensive Plan. The new E-ZPass lanes will support travel demand management objectives by providing a transit advantage, increasing the number of people who can be efficiently moved through the corridor. Other proposed elements, including the new ramp and improvements to pavement, signing and lighting, will improve safety for all modes of transportation. Community Outreach Since 2018, MnDOT has talked with thousands of stakeholders to guide the development of the I-494 vision. These conversations were critical in identifying community needs and key issues to address. Travel time and safety were identified as main priorities among users, and many stakeholders supported changes to access ramps between Nicollet and 12th Avenues. MnDOT has held public meetings at various locations in Richfield and Bloomington, and has maintained an online open house to share information and solicit feedback. Financial Impact The total estimated construction cost for Project 1 is $320 million. The project is funded through a combination of federal, state and local funds. At this time, the City of Edina is not expected to contribute any funds towards this project. Construction Impact It is anticipated that streets on the County and local system adjacent to I-494 will see additional traffic during construction. Key corridors that have been identified in Edina include France Avenue between I-494 and Highway 62, West 77th Street and Minnesota Drive from Highway 100 to France Avenue, and Valley View Road from Wooddale Avenue to West 66th Street. The Technical Advisory Committee is currently reviewing a preliminary traffic management plan that will identify the most impacted intersections on the adjacent local system and identify temporary mitigation measures for these locations. Attachments: Resolution No. 2021-166 MnDOT Municipal Consent Letter Project 1 Final Layout MN State Statutes 161.162-161.167 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-116 APPROVING FINAL LAYOUT FOR PROJECT I OF THE I-494 CORRIDOR VISION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN DECEMBER 21, 2021 WHEREAS, The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has submitted a final layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision implementation Plan; and WHEREAS, Project 1 is the first of four phases that will construct managed lanes from Highway 169 to the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute 161.164 requires adjacent municipalities to grant consent for projects that increase highway traffic capacity; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute 161.164 requires municipalities to conduct a public hearing on the final layout; and WHEREAS, Project 1 supports the strategic transportation goals in the City’s Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, The City of Edina recognizes that MnDOT has adequately considered feedback from adjacent municipalities and the general public in the development of Project 1; and WHEREAS, The City of Edina is represented on MnDOT’s Technical Advisory and Policy Advisory Committees; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Edina approves the final layout for Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan. PASSED AND ADOPTED this ______ day of _________________, 2021 by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota. 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 December 21, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Special Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______ day of __________, 20___. _______________________________ City Clerk Metropolitan District 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, MN 55113 September 24, 2021 Chad Millner City of Edina – Engineering Director 4801 W 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mr. Millner, MnDOT is in the process of developing Project 1 of the I-494 Corridor Vision. Project 1 will construct an E-ZPass lane on I-494 from TH 100 to I-35W in each direction, a turbine interchange at the I-494 over I-35W interchange, and change access at Nicollet, Portland, and 12th Avenues. This work will also include the replacement of the bridges at Nicollet, Portland, and 12th Avenues, as well as construct a new pedestrian/bicycle bridge near Chicago Avenue. Construction will include replacement of existing pavement, drainage, construction of retaining walls, sidewalks, bike lanes, signing, lighting, and traffic management. Project 1 is being developed for a letting on April 19, 2023 as a design-build project. Project 1 proposes the following benefits to the region: • Reduce traffic congestion and improve reliability of the average rush-hour trip • Improve safety for all modes • Provide a transit advantage to increase the number of people who can be efficiently moved through the area • Restore pavement to preserve infrastructure and provide a smoother ride • Preserve existing bridges • Improve drainage systems to reduce localized flooding and reduce run-off into the Minnesota River • Improve connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing I-494 Project 1 is the first of four phases of the I-494 Corridor Vision Implementation Plan which looks to construct managed lanes from Highway 169 to the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. The Implementation Plan was determined using a set of criteria which included constructability, community support, equity, asset management, cost/funding, and operations/safety. MnDOT is asking the City of Edina to approve the proposed layout as it requires the acquisition of right of way and is adding additional capacity. Municipal consent of MnDOT projects is described in Minnesota Statutes 161.162 through 161.167 (attached). The deadlines (per MN Statute 161.164) for the City’s responsibilities regarding municipal consent of the attached layout are as follows: • Within 15 days of receiving the final layout, schedule a public hearing. • Within 60 days of receiving the final layout, conduct the public hearing. • Provide at least 30 days’ notice of the public hearing. • Within 90 days of the public hearing, approve or disapprove the layout by resolution. MnDOT will attend the public hearing to present the final layout and answer questions, as required by statute. At this point, the total participation required by the city is estimated to be approximately $0 as identified in the attached estimate which is still being discussed with the cities and Hennepin County. Any cost participation and identified maintenance responsibilities will be handled as part of a cooperative construction agreement developed between MnDOT and the City. I would be happy to work with you as we traverse our way through this process. MnDOT will be available to give presentations and/or answer any questions that you may have regarding Project 1 or this process. Sincerely, Amber Blanchard, P.E. MnDOT Metro District Major Projects Manager/I494 Corridor Director CC: Andrew Lutaya, MnDOT West Area Engineer/Project Manager April Crockett, MnDOT West Area Manager file Equal Opportunity Employer FUMHUMHUMHFUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHFFFFFUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH 1 16 N S CENTERSECT O NI TNR W 2953003052953003052953003052953303355 10 153353303354040505560909510020251010 10 UMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMHFUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F F UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F ? UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F F F ?UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH FFF UMH UMH F UMH ? UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F FF ? UMHUMH UMH UMH ? ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH F F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMHUMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH F UMH UMHUMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ?? UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH ?? UMHUMH UMH FF UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH FFF UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH FF UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH F F UMH UMH FF FFF F FF FF F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH FFF UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH FFF UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F FF F ? F F F UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? ? ? ? UMH ? ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH ? UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH F UMH ? UMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMHUMH STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA M M M M M M EMERSON AVE.MIDWEST RAINBOW ROOFING LES JONES STUART CO IRVING AVE.8 0 TH 1/2 ST.ASSN.MULTI HOUSINGMINNESOTABLOOMINGTONINFINITI OFBLOOMINGTON SATURN OF REALITYBUY SELFOPTICALLYNDALEAPARTMENTSSOUTHTOWN82ND ST. 81ST. ST. COUNTY HENNEPIN FREMONT AVE.JAMES AVE.1301 1331 LIMOUSINE BLACK TIE TNI ETATSRE 35W AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FTTNN TRR21 21 8 9 1716 11 116 W WTNN TRR 24 6 16 27 W WTNN TRR24 24 6 5 3132 28 27 W WTNN TRR24 24 5 4 3233 28 27 W WTNN TRR24 24 4 3 3334 28 27 W WTNN TRR24 9 31 28 W W1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 16W E 1 4 1 4 1 4 ECT ONI W310315320325330335340310315320325330335340310145 150 155 145 150 15533534010120 125 130 135 140120 125 130 135 1400510101505105 10 100 5 1005 05105 0 1510 15 20 25 30 3510152025300 305315 310250255260265250255260265100 105 115 110 25 30 215 20041540025526026527027536036537037530 35 40 4550 150 100 105 110300 30 5350250200450400405 410 60 65 1015 1015202530354010 15 20 25 30 3520 25 10152025535 540 545 550 555 560 565 570 575 580 585 595 600 605 610 615 620 750 755 420 425 430 435 440 445 450 455 460 465 470 475 480 485 490 495 500 505 510 515 520 525 530 535 540 545 550 555 560 565 570 575 580 585 590 595 600 605 610 615 620 625 630205300 305 310 315600 6055005 0 5 510800805 810700705710 400405 410 100 105 110115200205210 100 105 110 500505300 305 400405 410 100 105 10 152025 303540 20 25304045 202530 300 305 95 100 400 405 10 15 2025 30 35 300 305 310 315200205 210 420 425 430 435 440 445 450 455 460 465 470 475 480 485 490 495 500 505 510 515 520 525 530 535 540 545 550 555 560 565 570 575 580 585 590 595 600 605 610 615 620 625 630 420 425 430 435 440 445 450 455 460 465 470 475 480 485 490 495 500 505 510 515 520 525 530 535 540 545 550 555 560 565 570 575 580 585 590 595 600 605 610 615 620 625 630 10 70 75 80 85 9095 1 0 0 20 25 30 35 6530354045 50 55 60 65 70 75 200205210 215 220 225 230 235 240 300 14100105 110 115 120 125 600 605 610 615 200205 210 500 505 510 515 520 100 105110115 600605200205 210 215 CLOVER DR.DUPONT AVEEMERSON AVE.DUPONT AVE.COLFAX AVE.BRYANT AVE.ALDRICH AVE.76TH ST. 77TH ST. AUTHORITY SPORTS KITCHEN MEXICAN DON PABLO'S BABIES R US BRIDAL DAVID'S BORDERS MARKET BOSTON REIMERCURY LINCOLN BLOOMINGTON FURNITURE HOM GALAXY GOLF COLUMBUS OF KNIGHTS BUY BEST LYNDALE AVE.LYNDALE AVE.EXTENDED STAY MIDWEST RAINBOW ROOFING LES JONES AUTO BODY LEGEND STUART CO ABRA AUTO BODY MASTER COLLISION ROGERS RICHFIELD LIQUOR AMERICAN BLVD. AMERICAN BLVD. HUMBOLT AVE.FREMONT AVE.GIRARD AVE. 76TH ST. 76TH ST.KNOX AVE.KNOX AVE.KNOX AVE.75TH ST. 75TH ST.GIRARD AVE.76TH ST. 77TH ST.THOMAS AVE.UPTON AVE.79TH ST.VINCENT AVE.78TH ST. 78TH ST. AMERICAN BLVD.SHERIDAN AVE.EDINBOROUGH WAYSOUTHTOWN DR.QUEEN AVE.BLOOMINGTON SATURN OF SOUTHTOWN SOUTHTOWN KOHL'S APPLEBEE'S GOODS SPORTING DICK'S BUY BEST BUSINESS SCHOOL OF MINNESOTA RENTAL BUDGET MOTORWERKS BMW LUCKY 13 CHEVROLET LUPIENT GN MANUFACTURING COLLISION MASTER ROGER'S GMAC RFC XERXES AVE.PENN AVE.PENN AVE.FRANCE AVE.YORK AVE.FRANCE AVE.AMERICAN BLVD.AMERI CAN BLVD. APARTMENTS FOUNTAINHEAD T.J. MAXX MCDONALD'S RED LOBSTERSONIC MARKET FARMERS RED ROBIN CPR WENDY'S PARTY CITY LUBE JIFFY DIAMONDS WEDDING DAY EXPRESS PANDA VERIZON STARBUCKS TCF BANK CHICK-FIL-A WALGREENS CARIBOU CVS TARGET HOBBY LOBBY DODGE RAM CHRYSLER JEEP OSAKA COWBOY JACKS RESOURCE NETWORK PROFESSIONAL RESOURCE HOMECARE EMBASSY SUITES XERXES SLUMBERLAND CONCIERGE APARTMENTS FOR CHILDREN ESPECIALLY RESIDENCE INN CIAO BELLA ECAPTIAL ADVISORS WELLS FARGO PLLC DROEL AVTEX SFM MUTUAL TEST CENTER PROMETRIC FIDER KELLY BANK BRIDGEWATER OFFICENTER FRANCE HILTON DENNY'S AMERICINN JOE SENSER'S TOYOTA WALSER JOSTENS FUDDRUCKERS GODFATHER'S MOBIL PERKINS TOTAL WINE TRADER JOE'S STAPLES MARSHALLS MICHAELS ACADEMY NEW HORIZON BARR ENGINEERING HOLIDAY INN IKE'S APOGEE RETAINING KEYSTONE JL INDUSTRIES HIAWATHA MANUFACTURING VENTURE BANK INN GUESTHOUSE OFFICE HOLIDAY HOME WALSER BUICK OLIVE GARDEN MERCEDES-BENZ SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY RUDOLPH TECHNOLOGIES DESIGN NEW WAVE CLOSESTS CALIFORNIA LTC WHEELCHAIRS EDITIONS ERIN TAYLOR DAYS INN PSI SOUTHGATE EL LORO ARTISAN RUGS CYRUS APARTMENTS LUXEMBOURG LA QUINTA INN SUITES STAYBRIDGE HILTON GARDEN INN HAMPTON INN RED LOBSTER CROWNE PLAZA BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS PERSON VUE APARTMENTS COVINGTON CREDIT UNION TOPLINE FEDERAL CHILI'S LELA SHERATON DOUBLETREE CRESCENT KITCHEN SCHOOL LIFETOUCH NATIONAL NORTHLAND GROUP DORAN KATAPULT BRAINIER FINGERPRINT CENTER DYSON SERVICE GENESSEE DA VINCI CUSTOMCARE ART STUDIO DREW BENSON CURRY SALES GARY ADKINS ADMIN SOCIAL SECURITY EXPRESS SCRIPTS D SOURCE DISTRIBUTING TWIN CITY FIREPLACE DNR SALES TRUE LACROSSE MN BERNATELLO'S P&L AUTOMOTIVE EDINA SERVICE CENTER CITY SPRINT RENT411 INTERNATIONAL CROSSWAYS 2800281477382908 29142920 2808 77457744 3000 30187745 W 81ST ST MINNESOTA DRW 77T H ST W 78TH STJOHNSON AVE SW 78TH ST MARKETPOINTE DR W 80TH ST CIROXBOROUGH AVE SCOMPUTER AVENOR MANDALE BLVD VIKING DR AMERICAN BLVD WNORMANDALE LAKE BLVD GREEN VALLEY DR NORMAN CR E E K T RAI L PICTURE DRNORMANDALE BLVDGLENROY RDEAST BUSH LAKE RDW 78TH ST CECILIA CIRAMERICAN BLVDW 78TH ST EAST BUSH LAKE RDROCK BETHEL'S UNIVERSAL HOSPITAL SOLUTIONS BRANDSPRING VERISK RETAIL GLASGOW DRLOCHMERE TERRACETNI ETATSRE944 TNI ETATSRE 94 4 DESIGNSPEED60POSTEDSPEED60DESIGNSPEED60POSTEDSPEED60DESIGNSPEED60POSTEDSPEED60DESIGNSPEED60POSTEDSPEED60DESIGNSPEED60POSTEDSPEED60DESIGNSPEED60POSTEDSPEED60COUNTY HENNEPIN TNI ETATSRE 35W AMERICAN BLVD. COUNTY HENNEPIN HENNEP IN 2 8 HENNEPIN 34 HENNEPIN 17 HENNEPIN 31 HENNEPIN 32 NORMANDALE BLVD.PACIFIC RAIL ROADDESIGNSPEED55POSTEDSPEED55DESIGN SPEED 55 POSTED SPEED 55 AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FTAREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' TNI ETATSRE 35W AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' SERVICE RD NORMANDALE AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'OC NUTY OC NUTY OCNUTY OC NUTY OC NUTY CLOSE AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AMER ICAN BLVD .AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' BLOOMINGTON of City RICHFIELD of City EDINA of City RICHFIELD of City BLOOMINGTON of City AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' CLOSE CLOSE CLOSE CLOSE CLOSE CLOSE INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY OPEN ACCESS CITY CAFENICK'S WRAPBORDER PROTECTIONUS CUSTOMS ANDKINDERPLATZTHE HARTFORD HOLIDAY INN HYUNDAI LUTHER BLOOMINGTON LUTHER COLLISION & GLASS CONCIERGE APARTMENTS PURE HOCKEY BLACK & VEATCH AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT NEW BRAIDED ACCESS RAMP TO 494 RAMP FROM 494 NEW BRAIDED ACCESS RAMP FROM 494 NEW BRAIDED ACCESS RAMP TO 494 NEW BRAIDED ACCESS 0.6 Bryant 0.6 0.32.02.51.3 0.2 0.2Hyland Lake HYLAND LAKE PARK RESERVE 2.2 0.22.6 Penn Lake 4.4Oxboro Lake 2.5 Lake Meadow2.01.6 Long 1.0 Wood Lake1.71.1FORT SNELLING NATIONAL CEMETERY 2.5MINNEAPOLIS- ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 0.20.10.30.10.9 RICHFIELD POP. Rich-field Lake 1.2 1.1 Grass Lake 0.6 Mother L. 2.3 Lake Harriet 5.2Lake Hiawatha Lake Edina L. L. wheadArro Indianhead 2.5 1.9Lake Cornelia 1.7 EDINA Harvey Lake2.0Mirror Lake 2.1Meadowbrook Lake 1.5 Lone Lake Shady OakLake 1.6 T T R 22 W R 21 W R 24 WRIVER MINNESOTA RIVERTo Jct. T.H. 13BURNSVILLE T 27 NTo J ct. T.H. 1 3 EAGAN D A K O T A T 28 NRailInc.Sys.NOKOMIS- HIAWATHA PARK FORT SNELLING STATE PIPE LI NE CO. BLOOMINGTON Lake 24"20"16"NGN. N. G. CO.16"DiamondNG NG16"N. N. G. CO.16"NG31 29 25 REGIONAL LAKES REGIONAL PARK Western 1.1ANDERSON LAKE PARK RESERVE BRYANT LAKE REGIONAL PARK L. 1 11 13 23 25 27 35 1 35 17 21 7 9 11 13 7 15 17 19 29 31 33 21 23 29 27 29 33 35 29 31 33 5 7 9 31 19 13 15 17 21 23 25 35 W.ST. E. W.CanadianPacificRailLake Snelling To Lakeville0.4To Prior LakeAnderson Lake 2.1SL 61 62 494 169 28 34 17 32 32 1 52 35 5 1 494 52 35 5 62 121 35W 62 31 17 22 21 21 100 62 53 100 169 61 93°15' 44°50' 25' 77 5 6 7A 12B 34A 4B 5 6B 11 12 13 10 17 494 34 52 46 48 152 32 31 39 53 2C 1 494 77 2A 35W 35W 158 158 169 28 1 39 212 212 46 Lake Nokomis Progressive WOLD-CHAMBERLAIN FIELD L.R.T.L. R.T. 1 PKWY.BLAKEVERNON VE.A 61 61 76TH MINNESOTA VALLEY POP. 47,941 35,228 POP. 82,893 MINNESOTA VALLEY NWR MINNESOTA VALLEY NWR PARK HISTORICAL Bush Lake 190.8SAVAGE 5 169 NWR AVE.S.28THAVE.AVE.CEDARMINNEHAHA ST.46TH E.S.ST.LYNDALE50THS.W.AVE.S.BLVD.INTERLACHEN BLVD.BAKERRD.W. 58TH ST.AVE.XERXESW.54TH ST.S.DIAMOND S.LK.RD.S.E.60TH ST. E.34TH54TH POS TRD.AVE.34THRD.SHAKOPEE12THPORTLAND90TH ST.AVE.AVE.AVE.AVE.ST.AVE.80TH 84TH ST. ST.PENN82ND LYNDALENICOLLETE. O LD ST.70TH W. W. ST.90TH W. W. R D.VIEW VALLEY RD. LAKE ANDERSON ST. SHAKOPEE W.106TH OLD NORMANDALEDR.PKWY.BLVD.98TH FRANCEW. ST.RD.94TH ST. MINNE HAHA REGIO NAL PARK UMHUMHMINNESOTA 100 14I-494: HWY 169 TO AIRPORT - PROJECT 1 9/24/2021 The alignment andgrades shown onthis map are tentativeand subject to changewithout notice.Staff Approval The traffic volumes shown areByFROM S.P.T.H.JOBPPMS ActivityLAYOUT No.VICINITY OF Prepared20Scale: Hor. 1 inch =ft.Date:estimated for year20___Prepared _____________DESIGN FILE:DATE:Copy To:For:LAYOUT HISTORYTO100Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.T.H.4944942119LakeoftheWoods Upper Lower Red Red Lake Lake LeechLake Lake Winnibigoshish LAKE SUPERIOR Mille Lacs Lake ROSEAUKITTSON LAKE OF THE WOODS MARSHALL NOBLES JACKSON MARTIN MURRAY BROWN REDWOODLYON LINCOLNROCK FARIBAULT MOWER OLMSTED WABASHA DODGESTEELEWASECANICOLLET RICE GOODHUE FILLMORE HOUSTON WINONA SIBLEY SCOTT DAKOTA McLEODCARVER WASHINGTONCHISAGOISANTI WRIGHTMEEKER RENVILLEKANDIYOHICHIPPEWA SWIFT LAC QUI PARLE BIG STONE POPE STEARNSTRAVERSEGRANTDOUGLAS TODD MORRISONWADENAOTTER TAIL WILKINBENTON KANABECPINEMILLE LACS AITKIN CARLTON ST. LOUIS LAKE COOK ITASCA KOOCHICHING BELTRAMI CLEARWATERNORMAN POLK RED LAKE PENNINGTON CLAY BECKER HUBBARDCASS SHERBURNE RAMSEYANOKA WING CROW STONE PIPE- WOOD COTTON-EARTH BLUE MEDICINE YELLOW SUEUR LE WAN WATON- BORN FREE- HENNEPIN STEVENS MEN MAHNO- COUNTY HENNEPIN LOCATION: COUNTY HENNEPIN COUNTY HENNEPIN C.S.A.H. 28 (E. BUSH LAKE RD.)2040April 16Technical Memorandum".Build Alternatives Traffic ForecastFrom: "I-494:Airport to Highway 169BLOOMINGTON, RICHFIELDAND EDINA 100 SCALE IN FEET PART 1OF 212TH AVE2785-424Purpose and Need:1A 100 SCALE IN FEET 100 SCALE IN FEET STAFFDATE:Metro District Preliminary Design EngineerReviewed ByReviewed ByProgrammed Letting Date APRIL 2023Level 1 LAYOUT APPROVAL2020202020Reviewed ByApproved ByApproved ByState Design EngineerState Geometrics EngineerReviewed By2020Metro District EngineerMetro District Traffic EngineerMetro District Maintenance Operations EngineerAND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS LAYOUT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION NAME:LIC. NO.S:\KO\M\Mntmd\145574\4\43\Project_1\Project 1_LayoutAPPROVALAUGUSTT9Y012 6233- August 2021 - All comments addressed and Layout 1A submitted for Approval 8-18-2021. Guide. - Update the fully reconstructed ramp sections to follow the soon to be released Facility Design- Provide a 0.5% landing where practical.- Update entrance ramps to be metered.- Update the EB lane configuration from 35W to Lyndale to improve lane continuity.- Raise the profile of 494 under Penn to help with existing drainage issues.- Increase the 2' & 4' shoulders to 8' where possible to help with drainage and maintenance.- July 2021 - Comments were recieved from all functional groups and included the following:- June 2021 - 494 Project 1 Layout 1 submitted to MnDOT Metro LAC and GDSU for review 6-23-2021- June 2021 - $60 million was awarded to Project 1 via an INFRA grant Traffic/Geometrics/Project partnersgeometric refinements have happened from meetings and comments we have gotten from Since October the project team has defined a Project 1 based on needs and funds available. Many- October 2020 - 494 Vision Layout submitted to MnDOT Metro LAC and GDSU for OTS review 10-30-2020.I-494 over 35W bridges. Interchange. MnDOT Metro District committed to finding $10 million to $15 million to replace thefunding that provides $134 million to MnPASS on 494 and $70 million to Phase 1 of the TurbineCurrent funding available for construction of part of the vision is the Corridors of Commerce (COC)and address bridge and pavement conditions on I-494 between US 169 and TH 5.I-494 corridor; enhance safety and mobility for people walking, biking, driving, and using transit;The purpose of the I-494 Project is to improve travel and travel time reliability across the 100 SCALE IN FEET PROPOSED RAISED MEDIAN, CURB PROPOSED SHOULDER PROPOSED MEDIAN BARRIER PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS EXISTING ROW PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED GUARDRAIL PROPOSED NOISE WALL PROPOSED ROW CLOSE ROADWAY ACCESS CLOSED EXISTING SIGNAL SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PROPOSED BRIDGE PROPOSED ROADWAY REHAB/REPLACEMENT PROPOSED PAVEMENT ROADWAY REMOVAL PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM PROPOSED BASIN POND PROPOSED INFILTRATION BASIN EXISTING WETLANDS LEGEND CONSTRUCTION BY OTHERS PERMANENT EASEMENT MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PARCEL BOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION OUTSIDE ROW IMPACTED PARCELS PROPOSED RAISED MEDIAN, CURB PROPOSED SHOULDER PROPOSED MEDIAN BARRIER PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS EXISTING ROW PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED GUARDRAIL PROPOSED NOISE WALL PROPOSED ROW CLOSE ROADWAY ACCESS CLOSED EXISTING SIGNAL SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PROPOSED BRIDGE PROPOSED ROADWAY REHAB/REPLACEMENT PROPOSED PAVEMENT ROADWAY REMOVAL PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM PROPOSED BASIN POND PROPOSED INFILTRATION BASIN EXISTING WETLANDS LEGEND CONSTRUCTION BY OTHERS PERMANENT EASEMENT MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PARCEL BOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION OUTSIDE ROW IMPACTED PARCELS PROPOSED RAISED MEDIAN, CURB PROPOSED SHOULDER PROPOSED MEDIAN BARRIER PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS EXISTING ROW PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED GUARDRAIL PROPOSED NOISE WALL PROPOSED ROW CLOSE ROADWAY ACCESS CLOSED EXISTING SIGNAL SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PROPOSED BRIDGE PROPOSED ROADWAY REHAB/REPLACEMENT PROPOSED PAVEMENT ROADWAY REMOVAL PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM PROPOSED BASIN POND PROPOSED INFILTRATION BASIN EXISTING WETLANDS LEGEND CONSTRUCTION BY OTHERS PERMANENT EASEMENT MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PARCEL BOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION OUTSIDE ROW IMPACTED PARCELS PROJECT LOCATION MATCHLINE - SEE LAYOUT PART 2MATCHLINE - SEE INSET A MATCHLINEINSET A INSET B MATCHLINE MATCHLINE - SEE INSET B 100 SCALE IN FEET QUEEN AVE.HOME2 SUITES82ND ST.PENN AVE. AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' F F F F STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ?? ? ? ?? ?? ? ? UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH ? UMHUMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMHUMH ???? UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMHUMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH F UMH UMH F F F F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F FF UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH F UMHF UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F UMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMH F F F F UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH F F F UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH F UMH UMH ?? UMH UMH UMH UMH ? ? UMH UMHUMH UMHUMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMHUMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMHUMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMHUMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F UMH UMH ? UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMHUMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH F F F F UMH UMH UMH UMH ? ? ? ? ???? ? ? ? ? ? ? ???? ? ? ? ? ?? UMH STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE STOCK PILE CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA CONSTRUCTION UNDER AREA UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH UMH R C R C R C 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 16 N S 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 4 1 16W E1 16W E1 16W E1 16W E1 16W E 1 16W E1 16W E1 16W E1 16W E1 16W E 1 16W E TNN T R R24 24 2 1 35 36 2827 W WTNN T R R24 24 3 2 34 35 2827 W W25025035 60 06053035405 410760 765 645 635 640 645 650 655 660 665 670 675 680 685 690 695 700 705 710 715 720 725 730 735 740 205 404550552025303540635 640 645 650 655 660 665 670 675 680 685 690 695 700 705 710 715 720 725 730 735 740 635 640 645 650 655 660 665 670 675 680 685 690 695 700 705 710 715 720 725 730 735 740 20253035404550556065707530 35 10 15 20 20 25 30 40 45 10 15 20 25 30 35 20 25 30 3020 25 30 60 65 70 110115 120 70 75 75 80 80 85 90 95 100 10580 85 90 95 60 3035 40 LYNDALE AVE.GOODWILL RICHFIELD LIQUOR TNI ETATSRE 944 TNI ETATSRE 944 AMERICAN BLVD.AMERICAN BLVD. 77TH ST.STEVENS AVE.2ND AVE.3RD AVE.4TH AVE.CHICAGO AVE.PILLSBURY AVEHARRIET AVE.12TH AVE.12TH AVE.11TH AVE.10TH AVE.ELLIOT AVE.NICOLLET AVE.OLD CEDAR AVE S5TH AVE S4TH AVE SAMERICAN BLVD E 77TH ST 14TH AVE13TH AVEBLOOMINGTON AVEPAYLESS CAR RENTAL IKEA MINNESOTA GREAT WOLF LODGE SERVICE INTERNAL REVENUE HILTON GARDEN INN GARDEN GRILLE & BAR HIRED MANAGEMENT BON APPETIT FIRSTSERVICE RESIDENTIAL WORKS COMPUTING ALLINA HEALTH CLINIC COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT RESIDENCE INN COMFORT INN AIRORT OUTBACK STEAKHOUSE& SUITES NORTHWOOD INN METRO SALES INC PLANET FRIENDLY ECOSMARTE CANVAS HEALTH SCHOOL ADLER GRADUATE RICOH AUDI APARTMENTS COMMUNITY COURT RICHLAND COURT INN & SUITES BAYMOUNT EXPRESS SUPERAMERICA SEASONS PARK LOFFLER PRO SKIN CHURCH EVANGELICAL FREE METRO SALES & CO WILLIAM L GRIFFIN CES VERITIV EXPRESS EMBROIDERY LINDSTROM CED JK CABINETS PLUS REFRIGERATION SOLID EMBROIDERY VENEL MARILU PRODUCTS CAPP INDUSTRIES AIR SPECIALITIES ALIANCE NYQUIST FANTASTIC CARSOUP.COM TOWERS RICHFIELD APARTMENTS BUENA VISTA APARTMENTS CORINTHIAN AUTO SALES UNIVERSITY KHAN'S RESOURCES PERSONNEL & SUITES QUALITY INN DENNY'S & SUITES MICROTEL INN PET LODGE LUCKY DOG WORLDWIDE PREMIER TRANS. FIDELITY JONES ELDER VALLEY PROGRESS ADVOCACY CORNERSTONE THEATRES MANN PRODUCTS LEE INTEGRATORS ECSI SYSTEM AVVR ELECTRICITY BLOOMINGTON APARTMENTS SOUTH POINTE WALMART WALGREENS FREIGHT TOOLS HARBOR NAIL TODAY LIQUORS OTTO'S SUBWAY TOTALLY KIDS PIZZA HUT INDIA CAFE KABOB'S INDIAN GRILL CHURCH BRAZILIAN CHURCH METHODIST DOMINO'S PIZZA 1ST WOK & ASSOCIATES WILLIAMS BAKERY DENNY'S LOGISTICS RADIANT BUILDERS PLEKKENPOL BATTERY CENTER INTERSTATE ALL SUPPLY MARS DEPOT RATTAN TOOL DELEGARD GRAINGER LEARNING CENTER BRIGHT STARS SUPER 8 INN LA QUINTA ALIGNMENT RICHFIELD WHEEL BODY BON AUTO ARBY'S PLUMBING BLAYLOCK RBCU APARTMENTS BUENA VISTA CHURCH OF THE ASSUMPTION HERTZ ACADEMY PARTNERSHIP BELL TACO MENARDS TAQUERIA ANDALE WILLIAMS SHERWIN- NEW ORLEANS COURT PAINTS VIKINGS GENERAL KENNY'S TIRES JOHNSON BIG STORAGE PUBLIC COLLISION LAMETTRY'S SUITES CANDLEWOOD MITSUBISHI BMW SERVICES PHYSICAL DISTRIBUTION SAM'S CLUB CULVER'S REPAIR AUTO TECH 7/8 LIQUORS METRO PCS LEHMAN'S GARAGE STORAGE CENTRAL SELF MCDONALD'S SAM'S CLUB GAS KEY COLLISION HOME DEPOT SELF STORAGE THE LOCK UP MICRON HOLIDAY LURO BOOTS IWASH MOUNA'S HONDA CARPET ONE GARAGE ELSEN BROTHER'S CENTER A VILLA FOODS KWIK WAY CHICAGO AVE.TREE DOLLAR5TH AVE.E. 78TH ST. E. 78TH ST E. 78TH ST. HENNEPIN 52 HENNEPIN 35 PROGRESSIVE RAIL ROAD2ND AVE S4TH AVE SWENTWORTH AVE SAREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'CLOSE AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT CLOSECLOSECLOSE CLOSE CLOSE CLOSECLOSECLOSE AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FTAREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' OC NUTY OC NUTY AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' AMERICAN BLVD. AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 'PORTLAND AVE.JIMMY JOHNS AREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT COUNTY HENNEPIN CLOSE POSTEDSPEED60DESIGNSPEED60POSTEDSPEED60DESIGNSPEED60CLOSE CLOSECLOSEAREA 26 SQ FTPERIMETER 50FTREM 95 SQ FT APARTMENTS SEASONS PARK APARTMENTS SEASONS PARK CEMETERY ASSUMPTION CHURCH RichfieldofCity BLOOMINGTONof City OF AMERICA WATER PARK ROOSEVELT PARK SPEEDWAY 3RD AVE S77TH ST. 76TH ST. SUPER CASH CRICKET AREA = 15 SQ'REM = 48 SQ 'PERIMETER = 30 ' ACCESS FROM 494 REMOVED 494 REMOVED ACCESS FROM ACCESS FROM 494 REMOVED ACCESS TO 494 REMOVED ACCESS TO 494 REMOVED ACCESS TO 494 REMOVED PROPOSED RAISED MEDIAN, CURB PROPOSED SHOULDER PROPOSED MEDIAN BARRIER PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS EXISTING ROW PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED GUARDRAIL PROPOSED NOISE WALL PROPOSED ROW CLOSE ROADWAY ACCESS CLOSED EXISTING SIGNAL SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PROPOSED BRIDGE PROPOSED ROADWAY REHAB/REPLACEMENT PROPOSED PAVEMENT ROADWAY REMOVAL PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM PROPOSED BASIN POND PROPOSED INFILTRATION BASIN EXISTING WETLANDS LEGEND CONSTRUCTION BY OTHERS PERMANENT EASEMENT MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PARCEL BOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION OUTSIDE ROW IMPACTED PARCELS PROPOSED RAISED MEDIAN, CURB PROPOSED SHOULDER PROPOSED MEDIAN BARRIER PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS EXISTING ROW PROPOSED RETAINING WALL PROPOSED GUARDRAIL PROPOSED NOISE WALL PROPOSED ROW CLOSE ROADWAY ACCESS CLOSED EXISTING SIGNAL SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION LIMITS PROPOSED BRIDGE PROPOSED ROADWAY REHAB/REPLACEMENT PROPOSED PAVEMENT ROADWAY REMOVAL PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM PROPOSED BASIN POND PROPOSED INFILTRATION BASIN EXISTING WETLANDS LEGEND CONSTRUCTION BY OTHERS PERMANENT EASEMENT MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY PARCEL BOUNDARY CONSTRUCTION OUTSIDE ROW IMPACTED PARCELS I-494: HWY 169 TO AIRPORT - PROJECT 1 9/24/2021 The alignment andgrades shown onthis map are tentativeand subject to changewithout notice.Staff Approval The traffic volumes shown areByFROM S.P.T.H.JOBPPMS ActivityLAYOUT No.VICINITY OF Prepared20Scale: Hor. 1 inch =ft.Date:estimated for year20___Prepared _____________DESIGN FILE:DATE:Copy To:For:TO100Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc.T.H.4944942119LakeoftheWoods Upper Lower Red Red Lake Lake Leech Lake Lake Winnibigoshish LAKE SUPERIOR Mille Lacs Lake ROSEAUKITTSON LAKE OF THE WOODS MARSHALL NOBLES JACKSON MARTIN MURRAY BROWN REDWOODLYON LINCOLNROCK FARIBAULT MOWER OLMSTED WABASHA DODGESTEELEWASECANICOLLET RICE GOODHUE FILLMORE HOUSTON WINONA SIBLEY SCOTT DAKOTA McLEODCARVER WASHINGTONCHISAGOISANTI WRIGHTMEEKER RENVILLEKANDIYOHICHIPPEWA SWIFT LAC QUI PARLE BIG STONE POPE STEARNSTRAVERSEGRANTDOUGLAS TODD MORRISONWADENAOTTER TAIL WILKINBENTON KANABECPINEMILLE LACS AITKIN CARLTON ST. LOUIS LAKE COOK ITASCA KOOCHICHING BELTRAMI CLEARWATERNORMAN POLK RED LAKE PENNINGTON CLAY BECKER HUBBARDCASS SHERBURNE RAMSEYANOKA WING CROW STONE PIPE- WOOD COTTON-EARTH BLUE MEDICINE YELLOW SUEUR LE WAN WATON- BORN FREE- HENNEPIN STEVENS MEN MAHNO- COUNTY HENNEPIN LOCATION:C.S.A.H. 28 (E. BUSH LAKE RD.)2040April 16Technical Memorandum".Build Alternatives Traffic ForecastFrom: "I-494:Airport to Highway 169BLOOMINGTON, RICHFIELDAND EDINA 100 SCALE IN FEET PART 2OF 22785-42412TH AVE1A 100 SCALE IN FEET STAFFS:\KO\M\Mntmd\145574\4\43\Project_1\Project 1_LayoutAUGUSTAPPROVALT9Y012 6233MINNESOTA 77 MINNESOTA 77 MATCHLINE - SEE LAYOUT PART 1 Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.C. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Aaron T. Ditzler, PE, Assistant City Engineer Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-123: Morningside D&E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-461 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. 2021-123, approving the Morningside D&E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, and approving the Grimes Avenue bike boulevard. INTRODUCTION: On December 13, 2021, the City Council reviewed the Engineering Study and conducted a public hearing on the Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Project. The City provided individuals several ways to provide public input in the public hearing. Between November 24, 2021, when public hearing notices were mailed and noon Wednesday, Dec. 15, when the public hearing closed, 4 comment were received on BetterTogetherEdina.org (BTE). As you might recall, 3 people called in to the virtual meeting to provide live testimony. Throughout the process, residents have been told it was not necessary to provide testimony in more than one way; all feedback is considered equally, regardless of the way in which it was submitted. The testimony included support for the Grimes Avenue bike boulevard, including both pavement markings and signing, a request for protection of Weber Woods trees relating to the 2023 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy improvements north of West 42nd Street, a request for clarification of the deferment of assessment payment for those over 65 years of age or older, a question why Sidell Trail isn’t included in the assessment since property owners use Morningside Road, a question why burying overhead utilities is not included in the improvements, and questions about construction coordination. Staff recommends adopting Resolution No. 2021-123, approving the Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-461, including the Grimes Avenue bike boulevard. For staff-initiated projects, authorizing projects with special assessments requires a minimum of 4 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass. Recall the estimated pending assessment is $9,300 per REU. ATTACHMENTS: Description Resolution No. 2021-123 Better Together Edina: Resident Public Hearing Testimony Engineering Study BA-461 Certificate of Mailing BA-461 Staff Presentation, Dec 13 2021 Staff Presentation 12-21-21 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-123 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT FOR MORNINGSIDE D & E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-461 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 3rd day of November 2021, fixed a date for a council hearing on Improvement No. BA-461, the proposed improvement of Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction; and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weekly published notices of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 13th day of December 2021, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible to update aging infrastructure. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 3. The city engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 4. The city council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of tax exempt bonds. Dated: December 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 December 21, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Special Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______ day of __________, 20___. _______________________________ City Clerk Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 15 December 2021 Public Hearing Comments - Morningside D & E Roadway Reconstruction Better Together Edina Project: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction VISITORS 12 CONTRIBUTORS 2 RESPONSES 4 0 Registered 0 Unverified 2 Anonymous 0 Registered 0 Unverified 4 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 13, 2021 15:14:29 pm Last Seen:Dec 13, 2021 15:14:29 pm Q1.First & Last Name Matt Banfield Q2.Address 4305 Morningside Rd Q3.Comment I am concerned that Sidell Trail is not part of this project's funding. They depend completely on Morningside Rd for access and Edina's sewer and water, construction equipment to build the development contributed to street damage, and despite whatever water abatement was part of the development, it represents major new impermeable surface area. I am also concerned there was never a proposal or discussion to bury power lines. If we are to invest in these changes, it would make sense to spend money that will enhance property values. Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 15, 2021 08:27:19 am Last Seen:Dec 15, 2021 08:27:19 am Q1.First & Last Name jason strodl Q2.Address 4201 grimes ave s. Q3.Comment thank you for your detailed presentation at the 12/13/21 meeting. it answered some very important questions. although i still have a couple more questions. I'll address them in separate comments for clarity... Q: You stated curbs, gutters, and driveways will be removed and replaced as a result of the roadwork. I'm not sure I fully understand how much of each driveway will be removed and replaced. Are you referring to just the curb cut (or driveway apron) up to the sidewalk and/or property line? Will the sidewalk at the driveway also be replaced? Or are you intending to replace the driveway all the way from street to garage? Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 15, 2021 08:31:55 am Last Seen:Dec 15, 2021 08:31:55 am Q1.First & Last Name jason strodl Q2.Address 4201 Grimes Avenue South Q3.Comment When the underground work is being done in front of a property and the street is torn up, it seems like a good time for a homeowner to repair/replace any part of their sewer line that might be in need. How will this be coordinated with the City's scope of the project? For example, will the homeowner have the option to have the City's contractors repair their own sewer pipe and add the cost to their assessment? Or is it the responsibility of the homeowner to coordinate the timing with a separate contractor for that portion of the sewer line. Can you also confirm where the homeowner's sere responsibility begins and ends? Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 15, 2021 08:34:38 am Last Seen:Dec 15, 2021 08:34:38 am Q1.First & Last Name jason strodl Q2.Address 4201 Grimes Avenue South Q3.Comment While the construction work is being performed and the asphalt road surfaces are removed and trenches large enough to bury 6' diameter pipes are dug, how will homeowners be able to access their garages/properties? ENGINEERING STUDY MORNINGSIDE D/E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Branson Street, Crocker Avenue, Grimes Avenue, Littel Street, Lynn Avenue, Morningside Road, Oakdale Avenue, West 42nd Street IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-461 DECEMBER 1, 2021 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA 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. 42003 12/1/21 Aaron Ditzler Reg. No. Date Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of local bituminous streets, replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter, installation of new concrete curb and gutter and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $7,843,103, excluding the Flood Risk Reduction Strategy costs. 29% of the roadway cost will be funded by will be funded through property taxes and 71% will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $9,300 per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $4,521,300 and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Sidewalk improvements are estimated to cost $86,700 and will be funded through the Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund. INITIATION: The project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure” and the “Strong Foundations” City budget goal. This project addresses updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, watermain system, storm sewer system, sanitary sewer system and pedestrian facilities. LOCATION: The project includes Branson Street, Crocker Avenue, Grimes Avenue, Littel Street, Lynn Avenue, Morningside Road, Oakdale Avenue and West 42nd Street. Approximately 240’ of Morningside Road west of Oakdale Avenue is within the Cities of Edina and St. Louis Park. A detailed location map of the project is shown in Figure 1. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 3 Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadways in this neighborhood were originally constructed before the 1930s (see Photo 1). Photo 1: Morningside D&E Neighborhood, 1969 Maintenance records indicate bituminous surfacing and concrete curb and gutter installation occurred in 1978, and seal coating was performed within the project area in 1994. All of the streets in the neighborhood have concrete curb and gutter. The roadway width ranges from 25’ to 35’ and the average roadway width is 28’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb or edge of pavement. A recent geotechnical Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 5 evaluation of the project area performed by Braun Intertec showed the roadway section varies from 3” to 4.5” of pavement over an apparent aggregate base followed by primarily silty sandy soils. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 76 and the average PCI for Morningside D&E is 5. An example of the current pavement condition can be seen in Photo 2. Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Staff measured traffic volumes and speeds at several locations within or near the neighborhood. Average daily traffic volumes within the neighborhood range between 210 and 1,318 vehicles per day with 85th percentile speeds between 23.2 and 31.3 miles per hour. Traffic and crash data for this project is shown in Appendix A. Multi-Modal Transportation Pedestrian Facilities Sidewalks are present on all streets in project area except Littel Street, and the sidewalks are in average condition. Sidewalks are also present immediately adjacent to the project area on Grimes Avenue, Morningside Road, West 42nd Street and West 44th Street (see Appendix B). Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 6 Bicycle Facilities There are no bicycle facilities within the project area; however, there is a signed bike route immediately adjacent to the project area on West 44th Street (see Appendix C). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 9” vitrified clay pipe (VCP) installed in 1979. Historical records indicate there have been a moderate number of sewer back-ups or blockages in the area (see Appendix D). Watermain The watermain system consists of 6”, 8” and 12” cast iron pipe (CIP) installed in 1977 and 6” and 8” CIP which was cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) lined in 2015. The CIPP lined system has experienced no breaks, and the 1977 CIP pipes have experienced a moderate number of breaks (see Appendix D). Most of the fire hydrants were installed between 1977 and 2015. Many homes in the neighborhood were constructed prior to the availability of municipal water. Although several have had private wells properly sealed, City records suggest some remain unsealed. Based on Utility Billing records, there are no properties in the project area that rely on private wells for domestic water. Staff will communicate the benefits of sealing private wells to property owners. Storm Sewer The storm sewer network is in the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. The system consists of 12” - 48” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), 9-15” vitrified clay pipe (VCP) and 15” high density polyethylene (HDPE) installed between 1968 and 2016. There are a moderate amount of storm sewer inlets and pipes located within the project area. Stormwater infiltration basins were constructed in 2016 adjacent to Little Street to accommodate Sidell Trail drainage. The majority of Morningside D and E streets within the project area drain to Weber Pond (and subsequently, the City of Minneapolis), while a small portion drains to overland into the City of St. Louis Park. Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications, cable and fiber optic utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overheard and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Street lighting consists of standard lantern style lights mounted on fiberglass poles located throughout the project area as shown in Appendix E. DESIGN INPUT: City Council 2018 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan This plan, part of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, was developed to guide the City’s efforts to create a comprehensive pedestrian and bicycle network. As shown in Appendix B, there are proposed bicycle lanes on Grimes Avenue between West 44th Street and Morningside Road. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 7 2015 Living Streets Policy This policy balances the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The City will apply the Policy to all street projects, including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation or change in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. The Living Streets Plan includes 15 principles to guide implementation of the Policy, divided into four categories: All Users and All Modes, Connectivity, Context Sensitivity and Sustainability. Below is a summary of how these principles are incorporated into this project: All Users and All Modes – This project will improve mobility and access to the transportation network for a variety of users, including pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors and people with disabilities. Replacement of the pavement surfaces and traffic control signage will enhance safety and convenience for all users. Connectivity – This project involves maintaining a transportation system that can accommodate all modes of travel. Existing facilities form a multimodal network within the neighborhood. Context Sensitivity – Engineering strives to preserve and protect natural features within or adjacent to construction sites where feasible, including trees, waterways and sensitive slopes. Residents within the project area were invited to complete a questionnaire soliciting input on project design components, including multi-modal transportation, street lighting and local drainage problems. Sustainability – Engineering works closely with Public Works to implement infrastructure improvements with consideration of lifecycle costs and future maintenance. The new roadway section can be easily maintained long-term with the use of proactive rehabilitation treatments, which will significantly extend the life of the pavement. Reductions in impervious surfaces benefit water quality and may lessen the demand for chemicals to manage snow and ice (such as chloride). Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work; this includes utilizing trenchless technologies, such as pipe bursting or cured-in-place pipe liners. This project will also reduce inflow and infiltration of clean water into the sanitary sewer system, minimizing regional wastewater treatment, reducing the risk of sewage surcharges, and limiting the risk of back-ups to residential properties. Relevant portions of the Living Streets Plan can be found in Appendix F. 2018 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified multiple areas of flood inundation within the project area for both the 10-percent and 1-percent-annual-chance flood event (also referred to as the 10-year and 100-year frequency event, respectively). The first area is a backyard depression south of Branson Street (see Figure 2). Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 8 Figure 2: Branson Street Backyard Flood Zone (MS_7) A backyard depression area collects 5.8 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties, and surface overflows between 4303, 4301, and 4215 Branson Street and drains to the City’s storm sewer system. 10-12 structures could be impacted by the 10- and 100-year flood zones. The second area is Grimes Avenue, Branson Street and backyard depressions adjacent to both streets (see Figure 3). Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 9 Figure 3: Grimes Avenue and Branson Street Roadway and Backyard Flood Zones (M3_3, MS_8, MS_48) This modeled inundation area impacts both the roadway and backyard sections of Branson Street and Grimes Avenue. Approximately 17.1 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties discharge to the City’s storm sewer system that runs along Morningside Road as well as a rear yard storm sewer alignment until it connects to the system near Morningside Road and Crocker Avenue. The stormwater eventually drains into Weber pond (and subsequently, the City of Minneapolis). 12-15 structures on Branson Street and Grimes Avenue could be impacted by the 10- and 100-year flood zones. The third area is on Littel Street and the backyard depression south of Littel Street (see Figure 4). Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 10 Figure 4: Little Street Roadway and Backyard Flood Zone (MS_19, MS_20) This modeled inundation area impacts both the roadway and backyard sections of Littel Street. Approximately 5.2 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties discharge to the City’s storm sewer system and into two infiltration basins. 3.5 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties discharge to the City’s storm sewer system that runs along Lynn Avenue, West 42nd Street and into Weber pond. 3 structures on Lynn Avenue and Littel Street could be impacted by the 10- and 100- year flood zones. The fourth area on Crocker Avenue and the backyard depression west of Crocker Avenue (see Figure 5). Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 11 Figure 5: Crocker Avenue Roadway and Backyard Flood Zone (MS_2, MS_22 This modeled inundation area impacts both the roadway and backyard sections of Crocker Avenue. A backyard depression area collects 5.6 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties, and surface overflows between 4236 and 4238 Crocker Avenue and drains to the City’s storm sewer system. 7-9 structures could be impacted by the 10- and 100-year flood zones. Approximately 10.7 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties discharge to the City’s storm sewer system that runs along Crocker Avenue, West 42nd Street and into Weber pond. 3 structures on Lynn Avenue and Littel Street could be impacted by the 10- and 100-year flood zones. 3-5 structures could be impacted by the 10- and 100-year flood zones. The fifth area is a backyard depression adjacent to 4209 Grimes Avenue (see Figure 6). Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 12 Figure 6: Grimes Avenue Backyard Flood Zone (MS_9) A backyard depression area collects 2.9 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties that drains into the City’s storm sewer system that runs along Grimes Avenue. 3 structures on Grimes and Alden Avenues could be impacted by the 10- and 100-year flood zones. The sixth area includes the majority of West 42nd Street (see Figure 7). Figure 7: West 42nd Street Roadway Flood Zone (MS_1, MS, 45) 1.7 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties discharge to the City’s storm sewer system that runs along West 42nd Street and into Weber pond. The 1- Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 13 percent and 10-percent-annual-chance events do not appear to impact structures on West 42nd Street. Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works Department. They support replacement of concrete curb and gutter, as well as replacement of deficient watermain components (including fire hydrants, gate valves and water services). Police and Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire Departments. The Fire Department supports watermain improvements, including adding fire hydrants as necessary to meet public safety standards. They noted that temporary fire hydrants should be of a consistent style for ease of access, that emergency access should always be maintained during construction and that drive widths and turn arounds should meet fire code. Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on October 28, 2021, a draft engineering study was provided for review. Relevant minutes from the ETC meetings are included in Appendix G. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to an open house in September 2019. Materials from these meetings are available upon request. Additionally, virtual neighborhood informational presentations were posted on Better Together Edina in August 2020 and October 2021. Residents were notified of the virtual meetings and were able to directly ask questions to staff from the Better Together Edina website, as well as telephone and email. Materials from this presentation can be found in Appendix H. On June 11, 2021, residents in Morningside D and E were asked to complete a questionnaire, soliciting feedback on motorized and non-motorized transportation, street lighting and local drainage problems within the project area. The questionnaire was completed by 65 of 254 property owners, a return rate of 26%. The following is a summary of feedback received from residents: 35 of 65 (54%) were concerned or very concerned with the speed of traffic in the neighborhood; 29 (45%) were not concerned. 37 (57%) were concerned or very concerned with motorist behavior in the neighborhood; 28 (43%) were not concerned. 38 (58%) identified an unsafe intersection within the neighborhood. 60 (92%) walk, run, or jog in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. 26 (40%) ride a bicycle in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. 18 (28%) reported parking on the street at least 2-3 times per week; 34 (52%) reported parking on the street less than once per month. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 14 *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaires and responses can be found in Appendix I. Relevant correspondence from residents regarding the project can be found in Appendix J. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of Engineering, Public Works and other City staff. Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadways are proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing bituminous pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. A minimum of 8” of aggregate base material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement of 2.5” of bituminous non-wear and 1.5” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. Grimes Avenue, Morningside Road and West 42nd Street are designated as a Local Connector Streets in the Living Streets Plan. Per the plan’s design guidelines, Local Connector Streets have a typical width of 24’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb) with a 5’ sidewalk on one side. Local Connector streets that vary from these guidelines include: Grimes Avenue between West 44th Street to Morningside Road is proposed to be reconstructed to 30’ to provide adequate access to the Morningside neighborhood while accommodating parking on both sides of the street adjacent to Edina Morningside Church. West 42nd Street is proposed to be reconstructed to 27’ to accommodate parking on both sides of the street. Morningside Road is proposed to be reconstructed to 28’ to accommodate parking on both sides of the street and match the existing street width at the east and west project limits. All remaining roadways within the project area are designated as Local Streets in the Living Streets Plan. Per this plan’s design guidelines, Local Streets have a typical width of 27’ (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb) without sidewalks or 24’ with a 5’ sidewalk on one side. Littel Street is proposed to be reconstructed to 24’ since parking is currently restricted on the south side and only three residential properties directly access this street. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 15 Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land uses, existing demand and costs of construction and maintenance. Given the existing demand for parking, staff believes that parking changes should not occur in the project area, with exception of Oakdale Avenue between Branson Street and Morningside Road. This segment is proposed to be changed from parking on both sides to parking on the east side only to be consistent with the Living Streets Plan. The existing and proposed roadway widths, sidewalks and parking recommendations are shown in Table 1. Street Existing Right-of Way Width (face to face), feet Existing Roadway Width (face to face), feet Proposed Roadway Width (face to face), feet Existing Sidewalk Parking Grimes Avenue, West 44th Street to Morningside Road 60 32-34 30 Both sides Two-sided Grimes Avenue, Morningside Road to West 42nd Street 40 26 24 Both sides East side only Morningside Road 60 30-33 28 Both sides Two-sided West 42nd Street 50 30-32 27 North side only Two-sided Branson Street 40 24 24 Both sides North side only Crocker Avenue 40 25 24 East side only East side only Littel Street 44 24 24 None North side only Lynn Avenue 40 26 24 Both sides East side only Table 1: Street Widths, Sidewalks and Parking Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 16 Street Existing Right-of Way Width (face to face), feet Existing Roadway Width (face to face), feet Proposed Roadway Width (face to face), feet Existing Sidewalk Parking Oakdale Avenue, West 44th Street to Branson Street 40 24 27 1 None 2 Two-sided Oakdale Avenue, Branson Street to Morningside Road 40 26 24 East side only East side only Oakdale Avenue, Littel Street to West 42nd Street 40 26 24 Both sides East side only 1 The City will likely mail a questionnaire this winter to the Oakdale Avenue property owners Avenue south of Branson Street to provide feedback on two options: 24-foot-wide street with parking on only one side to ensure adequate fire lanes for the Fire Department 27-foot-wide street with parking on both sides, consistent with the Edina Living Streets Plan guidelines 2 Sidewalk exists on the west side between 4344 and 4356 Oakdale Table 1: Street Widths, Sidewalks and Parking (cont.) Roadway Signage All traffic signage within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix E). All new signs will conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Multi-Modal Transportation Pedestrian Facilities Spot replacement of sidewalks will occur where utility improvements are proposed. Sidewalk installation is not proposed where gaps are present due to lack of demand and existing topography. The grass boulevards that will separate the new curb and the existing sidewalks may vary from the existing boulevard widths on some streets due to proposed street width changes. Figure 8 shows all existing pedestrian and proposed bicycle facilities. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 17 Figure 8: Existing Pedestrian Facilities All adjacent pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and portions of the existing sidewalk will be reconstructed as necessary. Because the sidewalk segments are not along Municipal State Aid routes, adjacent to City property nor included in the City’s Active Routes to School Plan, they will continue to be maintained by the adjacent property owners. Bicycle Facilities As previously mentioned, the Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan recommends bike lanes on Grimes Avenue between West 44th Street and Morningside Road. Because the narrow 40’ right-of-way width prohibits bicycle lanes, Staff recommends Grimes Avenue include Bike Boulevard pavement markings and signage to accommodate both the Cities of Edina and St. Louis Park Master Plans. Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer main has been televised, and portions will be repaired using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. These repairs will address the issues of sags, cracks and groundwater infiltration into the sewer main. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 18 Watermain Non-invasive pipe condition assessment testing was not performed on the watermain within the project area because the majority of the watermain was CIPP lined in 2015. Staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed on the watermain that has not been CIPP lined. Watermain will be replaced using a combination of pipe bursting and open cut methods along the following streets. 1. Branson Street 2. Grimes Avenue between West 44th Street and Morningside Road 3. Oakdale Avenue south of Branson Street Water service leads connected to replaced watermain will be replaced as well. With the exception of the gate valves and hydrants replaced in 2015 with the CIPP lining project, all gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced and, if needed, additional hydrants will be installed to meet current public safety standards. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. As part of the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan, staff plans to engage property owners who have unsealed private wells and encourage them to have them properly sealed. Storm Sewer Based on the scope of utility work, concrete curb and gutter will be replaced throughout the project, providing a continuous, functional conduit for stormwater. The storm sewer network will significant modifications to resolve existing drainage issues at various locations throughout the neighborhood. Some of the existing structures will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition. Sump drains will be installed where feasible to allow property owners to connect their sump pump discharges directly into the storm sewer system. Barr Engineering Co. was hired by the City to prepare a Flood Risk Reduction Strategy (FRRS) and to recommend improvements relating to the FRRS “Bigger” option for the Morningside C, D and E neighborhoods. The FRRS can be found in Appendix K and the proposed Morningside D and E project area improvements are shown in Figure 9. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 19 Figure 9: Proposed FRRS Storm Sewer Improvements During the project design phase, staff will: 1. Review the feasibility of lowering roadway elevations to facilitate lot drainage to either the front yard or the street. 2. Determine the proposed number of storm drains based on inlet capacity recommendations from Barr Engineering Co. 3. Communicate and coordinate with adjacent property owners as necessary. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on November 15, 2021 to discuss the proposed 2022 reconstruction projects and preliminary improvements. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 20 in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. RIGHT-OF-WAY/ EASEMENTS: Existing right-of-way in this neighborhood varies from 40’ to 60’. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW. Many properties have vegetation, boulders or other landscaped items within the right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed to complete the necessary work. PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $7,843,103, excluding the Flood Risk Reduction Strategy costs (see Table 2). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. Item Amount Total Cost Funding Source Roadway $ 2,285,103 Special Assessments Roadway $ 950,000 Property Taxes Roadway Total: $ 3,235,103 Sanitary Sewer $ 613,800 Watermain $ 1,912,900 Storm Sewer * $ 1,994,600 Utility Total: $ 4,521,300 City Utility Funds Sidewalk Total: $ 86,700 PACS Fund Project Total: $ 7,843,103 Storm Sewer – Flood Risk Reduction Strategy $ 12,250,000 City Utility Funds Table 2: Estimated Project Costs *Excludes Flood Risk Reduction Strategy costs Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 21 ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 246.21 roadway residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Morningside D & E project area. The estimated assessment per REU is $9,300 (see Figure 10). The preliminary assessment roll can be found in Appendix L. Figure 10: Preliminary Roadway Assessment Map All single-family residential properties located entirely within the project area receive an assessment of 1 REU, except for the properties shown in the tables below. There are 14 single-family residential properties located in the project limits that have been previously assessed a partial REU or are corner lots with an adjacent street that will be assessed with a future project. Tables 3 & 4 show their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 22 PID House Number Street Type of Property Proposed REU REU Factor Assessable REU 702824130108 4200 42ND ST W Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824130121 4224 42ND ST W Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824130118 4308 42ND ST W Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824130117 4324 42ND ST W Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824130113 4408 42ND ST W Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824130112 4500 42ND ST W Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824130122 4125 KIPLING AVE Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824420138 4245 SIDELL TR Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 702824420129 4248 SIDELL TR Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 Table 4: Previously Assessed Single-Family Residential Properties There is one city owned properties located in the project limits. Table 5 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s current assessment policy. PID House Number Street Description Comments Proposed REU 702824420085 4232 LYNN AVE Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 Table 5: City-Owned Properties Table 3: Single-Family Residential Corner Properties with Future Additional Assessment PID House Number Street Previous Project Previous REU Assigned Proposed REU Assessable REU 702824440116 4022 44TH ST W West 44th Street – 2011 1 1 0 702824430131 4100 44TH ST W West 44th Street – 2011 1 1 0 702824410127 4201 GRIMES AVE Morningside B – 2014 0.33 1 0.67 702824410109 4114 MORNINGSIDE RD Morningside B – 2014 1 1 0 702824440122 4115 MORNINGSIDE RD Morningside B – 2014 1 1 0 Engineering Study Morningside D/E Neighborhood Reconstruction BA-461 December 1, 2021 23 There is one place of worship property located in the project limits, Table 6 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. PID House Number Street Type of Property Gross Square Footage Institutional REU (Based on Square Footage) Assessable REU 702824430148 4201 MORNINGSIDE RD Church 15,207 3.04 3.04 Table 6: Institutional – Places of Worship PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule outlines the past and future tasks to be performed related to the project: Neighborhood Open House (all 2021/2022 projects) September 26, 2019 Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation (all 2022 and Future projects) March 11, 2021 Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation (all 2022 projects) October 2021 ETC Engineering Study Review October 28, 2021 Receive Engineering Study December 13, 2021 Open Public Improvement Hearing December 13, 2021 Close Public Improvement Hearing December 21, 2021 Public Improvement Hearing Council Decision December 21, 2021 Bid Opening March/April 2022 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2022 Complete Construction Fall 2022 Final Assessment Hearing October 2023 RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the project can be completed during the 2022 construction season. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure in the Morningside D and E neighborhood. APPENDIX: A. Traffic and Crash Data B. Comprehensive Plan Update – Pedestrian Facilities C. Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities D. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks E. Streetlights and Signs F. Living Streets Plan G. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes H. Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation Materials I. Resident Questionnaire J. Correspondence from Residents K. Flood Risk Reduction Strategy L. Preliminary Assessment Roll APPENDIX A Traffic and Crash Data A B E C D F G 1 Location Year ADT 85% Speed A 2014 2021 (July) 1011 1697 26.5 28.6 B 2011 226 26.3 C 2005 2021 (July) 806 826 31.3 27.5 D 2005 1126 30.2 E 2020 1318 29.6 F 2016 328 24.2 G 2016 210 23.2 1 – Peds Peds Bikes 2019 2021 2021 NB+SB = 209 NB + SB = 159 NB = SB = 69 EB+WB = 243 EB + WB = 191 EB = WB = 80 14325Crash DataLocationSeverityYear Month Time1Property damage – Collision with motor vehicle2018 February 9:00 am.2Property Damage – Collision with motor vehicle2014 November 8:00 am.3Property Damage – Collision with motor vehicle2014 November 8:00 am.4Minor Injury – Collision with bicyclist2012 July 5:00 pm.5Possible Injury – collision with motor vehicle2019 December 5:00 pm.Morningside D & E APPENDIX B City Comprehensive Plan Update – Pedestrian Facilities Map ?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y Mud Lake )y ?ÞA@ ?úA@ Minneha h a C r e e k Nine Mile Creek Nine Mile C r e e kBLAKE RDSCHAEFER RDVERNON AVEFRANCE AVE SXERXES AVE SCAHILL RD70TH ST W 66TH ST W YORK AVE SINTERLACHEN BLVD MALONEY AVE 44TH ST W 50TH ST W 54TH ST W 58TH ST W GLEASON RD70TH ST W 76TH ST W DEWEY HILL RD VALLEY VI E W R D VALLEY VIEW RD MINNESOTA DR78TH ST W / Engineering DeptJanuary 2020 Pedestrian Facilities Proposed FacilitiesExisting Facilities Existing Sidewalk Existing Park Pathway Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail New Primary Sidewalk New Secondary Sidewalk New Shared-Use Path Upgrade to Shared-Use Path Twin Loops Facility Existing Shared-Use Path Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail APPENDIX C City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities Map æ ¹» æ æ æ¹»æ æ ¹º¹º ¹º ñ ñ ¹»æ æ æ ¹º ¹º æ ¹º æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ ¹º ñ ¹» æ æ ñ æ æ æ ñ ñ ñ ?ÞA@ )y ?úA@ Mud Lake LakeEdina Mir r o r L a k e Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Me l o d y L a k e LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake AldenPark VanValkenburgPark FoxMeadowPark HighlandsPark Todd Park Weber FieldPark KojetinPark BrowndalePark WooddaleParkWilliamsParkUtleyPark FrankTupaPark SherwoodPark ArdenPark YorkPark ChowenPark PamelaParkSt JohnsPark StrachauerPark RoslandPark BristolParkCorneliaPark ArnesonAcresPark LakeEdinaParkFred RichardsPark YorktownPark EdinboroughPark GardenPark MelodyLakePark TingdalePark CountrysidePark BredesenPark WalnutRidgePark KrahlHill Creek Valley Park HeightsPark NormandalePark McGuirePark LewisParkBraemar Park and Golf Course(Courtney Fields) Minneha h a C r e e k Nine Mile Creek Nine Mile C r e e k Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadCityHall St Peters Lutheran Church & School FireStation Public Works &Park Maintenance CalvaryChurchPublicLibrary ConcordSchool EdinaCovenant CorneliaSchool ColonialChurch HighlandSchool CalvaryLutheran EdinaHighSchool Our Lady ofGrace Church& School SouthviewJr High CrossviewLutheran CountrysideSchool St Albans Episcopal Valley ViewJr High Creek Valley School NormandaleLutheran WooddaleChurch St PatricksCatholic New CityCovenantChurch NormandaleElementary St StephensEpiscopal EdinaCommunityCenter GoldenYearsMontessori CalvinChristianSchool GoodSamaritanMethodist EdinaMorningsideChurch ChristPresbyterianChurch ChapelHillsCongregtional Shepard of the HillsLutheran Edina Community Lutheran Church FireStationBlake RdVernon AveFrance Ave SXerxes Ave SCahill Rd70th St W Interlachen Blvd Maloney Ave 44th St W 50th St W 54th St W 58th St W Gleason Rd70th St W 76th St W Dewey Hill Rd Valley View R d Valley View Rd Minnesota Dr78th St W Wooddale AveTracy AveParklawn AveConcord AveBenton Ave Gl e a s o n R dMalibu RdGreen Farms RdMcCauley Trl SMirror Lakes DrLin c o l n D rWashington AveDivision St Vernon AveGolf Ter Code AveWilryan AveNormandale RdWest Shore DrCornelia DrFrance Ave SYork Ave S77th St WOhms LnHilary Ln Olinge r B l v d 66th St W Antrim Rd63rd St W Xerxes Ave S69th St W Bush Lake RdMetro Blvd66th St W 62nd St W Valley Ln Brookside Ave?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y 74th St W Valley View Rd Engineering Dept.January 2020 / O:\Users\engineering\Projects\Bicycle_Facilities_Asbuilts.mxd Upgrade to Buffered Bike Lane Proposed Bicycle Facilities Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Neighborhood Slow Street Standard Bike Lane New Buffered Bike Lane New Shared Use Path Upgrade to Shared Use Path Twin Loops Facility Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail 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 ?ÞA@ )y ?úA@ Mud Lake LakeEdina Mi r r o r L a k e Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Mel o d y L a k e LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake AldenPark VanValkenburgPark FoxMeadowPark HighlandsPark Todd Park Weber FieldPark KojetinPark BrowndalePark WooddaleParkWilliamsParkUtleyPark FrankTupaPark SherwoodPark ArdenPark YorkPark ChowenPark PamelaParkSt JohnsPark StrachauerPark RoslandPark BristolParkCorneliaPark ArnesonAcresPark LakeEdinaParkFred RichardsGolf Course YorktownPark EdinboroughPark GardenPark MelodyLakePark TingdalePark CountrysidePark BredesenPark WalnutRidgePark KrahlHill Creek Valley Park HeightsPark NormandalePark McGuirePark LewisParkBraemar Park and Golf Course(Courtney Fields) Minneh a h a C r e e k Nine Mile Creek Nine Mile C r e e k Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadCityHall St Peters Lutheran Church & School FireStation Public Works &Park Maintenance CalvaryChurchPublicLibrary ConcordSchool EdinaCovenant CorneliaSchool ColonialChurch HighlandSchool CalvaryLutheran EdinaHighSchool Our Lady ofGrace Church& School SouthviewJr High CrossviewLutheran CountrysideSchool St Albans Episcopal Valley ViewJr High Creek Valley School NormandaleLutheran WooddaleChurch St PatricksCatholic New CityCovenantChurch NormandaleElementary St StephensEpiscopal EdinaCommunityCenter GoldenYearsMontessori CalvinChristianSchool GoodSamaritanMethodist EdinaMorningsideChurch ChristPresbyterianChurch ChapelHillsCongregtional Shepard of the HillsLutheran Edina Community Lutheran Church FireStationBlake RdVernon AveFrance Ave SXerxes Ave SCahill Rd70th St W Interlachen Blvd Maloney Ave 44th St W 50th St W 54th St W 58th St W Gleason Rd70th St W 76th St W Dewey Hill Rd Valley View R d Valley View Rd Minnesota Dr78th St W Wooddale AveTracy AveParklawn AveConcord AveBenton Ave Gl e a s o n R dMalibu RdGreen Farms RdMcCauley Trl SMirror Lakes DrLin c o l n D rWashington AveDivision St Vernon AveGolf Ter Code AveWilryan AveNormandale RdWest Shore DrCornelia DrFrance Ave SYork Ave S77th St WOhms LnHilary Ln Olinge r B l v d 66th St W Antrim Rd63rd St W Xerxes Ave S69th St W Bush Lake RdMetro Blvd66th St W 62nd St W Valley Ln Brookside Ave?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y 74th St W Valley Vie w Rd Engineering DeptMay 2018 / O:\Users\engineering\Projects\Bicycle_Facilities_Asbuilts.mxd Existing Bicycle Facilities Bike Lanes Bike Lanes-Shared Lane Markings Shared Lane Markings Bike Boulevards Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Advisory Bike Lanes Green Shared Bike Lanes Signed Bike Routes Bike or Shared Use Paths APPENDIX D Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks 4 4 1840124112 4211 4208 4236 41404100 42004356 421543084232 4166 4405 43044306 4248 44094239 4412 44104194 3936 4220 4234 4218 4219 4238 4234 42144212 4218 4208 4216 4240 4235 4216 4238 4213 4231 4243 4209 4239 40104 0 0 0412241764213 4209 4233 4 0 0 4418 842064 0 0 2 4417416442114018 4210 40084307 4226 4419 43114401411743054244 4225 4235 4238 422542304406 41054003430143034401 4120 4221 41604201 4236 401440164226 4220 4109 3 4220 4003 4216 4324 4215 42054206 4116 4005 4211 41504232 4117 4105 4231 4208 4121 4114 4217 4 0 0 6 4215 4100 4224 4121 4232 4113 4116392 4222 412641124108 4501 4222 4407 4412 4410 4205 4010420743244103 4234 4230 4203 4224 4104 4212 4113 4200 41204213 4219 4212 440842164404 4410 440543154109 4234 4246 4121 4242 4406 4 0 5 2 400644044231 44004238 4226 41084235 43174370 4239 4233 4 0 1 39304227 4230 4238 4234 4212 440544064221 400441034235 4247 4244 4240 44144205441341114214 4402421242424243 4217 4237 4229 4222 4242 410941154230 42104226 4248 4246 41124237 4223 4312 4413 4239 4242 4229 4243 4227 4208 4223 4400 4228 4219 4236 42134232 4248 41074411 4200 4240 4310 43084215 4232 4223 4240 40224206 440341254124 4245 4212 4237432142254225 4221 4409 422343084213 43154306 441 64311412843104242 431342184215 4217 411343174108 43044240 4219 430542004227 4228 4102 4 0 0 9431143164228 42244502 4 0 0 7 4224 4228 4204 43144231 43074232 42414504 4302421245004227 42024231 43094208 440543124212 4220 44074 4 0 7422443004224 4216 4244 4015 4223 40214403 4236 4216 4211 4233 4220 4227 4 4249 4215 43164219 4241 422944084301 440744094365 4 0 1 1 4120 43304112 4116 440143004 0 1 4 4305 430943094361 440643064313401142064312 4209 40014368 430740204200 43053915420142174304417143034244 414143084307 4205 4315 4204 4247 41554313 41014215 41073947 4313 4005 4 0 0 8 4224 4202 4360 4246 4245 4 0 1 2 4 0 1 0 4309 4001 4 4400 4 3 2 4 430243 01413041014201 42494310 4338 421042074350 4364 4202420842124 4330 40044300 42144334 4245 41324 3 1 8 421341094342 4247 4211411141134311 4248 401342004243 4307 4303 4344 4301 42474246 44164411420042094315 4352 4 0 4 84221 4315 4246 4353 4420 43134204420841104201 4348 40174411 430344154417 4115 4201 4405 4201 4401 42284232 4236 4240 4244 4245PROJECT LIMITSLYNN AVEGRIMES AVECROCKER AVESIDELL TRLMORNINGSIDE RD W 4 4 T H S T B R A N S O N S T LITTEL STOAKDALE AVEW 42ND ST KIPLING AVELYNN AVEMONTEREY AVEOAKDALE AVECITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF EDINA/ Engineering Dept October 2021 Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks Morningside D and E Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMI N NESOTAINCORPORAT E D 1888 , e Legend Sewer Blockages Watermain Breaks APPENDIX E Street Lights and Signs 4 4 1840124112 4211 4208 4236 41404100 42004356 421543084232 4166 4405 43044306 4248 44094239 4412 44104194 3936 4220 4234 4218 4219 4238 4234 42144212 4218 4208 4216 4240 4235 4216 4238 4213 4231 4243 4209 4239 40104 0 0 0412241764213 4209 4233 4 0 0 4418 842064 0 0 2 4417416442114018 4210 40084307 4226 4419 43114401411743054244 4225 4235 4238 422542304406 41054003430143034401 4120 4221 41604201 4236 401440164226 4220 4109 3 4220 4003 4216 4324 4215 42054206 4116 4005 4211 41504232 4117 4105 4231 4208 4121 4114 4217 4 0 0 6 4215 4100 4224 4121 4232 4113 4116392 4222 412641124108 4501 4222 4407 4412 4410 4205 4010420743244103 4234 4230 4203 4224 4104 4212 4113 4200 41204213 4219 4212 440842164404 4410 440543154109 4234 4246 4121 4242 4406 4 0 5 2 400644044231 44004238 4226 41084235 43174370 4239 4233 4 0 1 39304227 4230 4238 4234 4212 440544064221 400441034235 4247 4244 4240 44144205441341114214 4402421242424243 4217 4237 4229 4222 4242 410941154230 42104226 4248 4246 41124237 4223 4312 4413 4239 4242 4229 4243 4227 4208 4223 4400 4228 4219 4236 42134232 4248 41074411 4200 4240 4310 43084215 4232 4223 4240 40224206 440341254124 4245 4212 4237432142254225 4221 4409 422343084213 43154306 441 64311412843104242 431342184215 4217 411343174108 43044240 4219 430542004227 4228 4102 4 0 0 9431143164228 42244502 4 0 0 7 4224 4228 4204 43144231 43074232 42414504 4302421245004227 42024231 43094208 440543124212 4220 44074 4 0 7422443004224 4216 4244 4015 4223 40214403 4236 4216 4211 4233 4220 4227 4 4249 4215 43164219 4241 422944084301 440744094365 4 0 1 1 4120 43304112 4116 440143004 0 1 4 4305 430943094361 440643064313401142064312 4209 40014368 430740204200 43053915420142174304417143034244 414143084307 4205 4315 4204 4247 41554313 41014215 41073947 4313 4005 4 0 0 8 4224 4202 4360 4246 4245 4 0 1 2 4 0 1 0 4309 4001 4 4400 4 3 2 4 430243 01413041014201 42494310 4338 421042074350 4364 4202420842124 4330 40044300 42144334 4245 41324 3 1 8 421341094342 4247 4211411141134311 4248 401342004243 4307 4303 4344 4301 42474246 44164411420042094315 4352 4 0 4 84221 4315 4246 4353 4420 43134204420841104201 4348 40174411 430344154417 4115 4201 4405 4201 4401 42284232 4236 4240 4244 4245PROJECT LIMITSLYNN AVEGRIMES AVECROCKER AVESIDELL TRLMORNINGSIDE RD W 4 4 T H S T B R A N S O N S T LITTEL STOAKDALE AVEW 42ND ST KIPLING AVELYNN AVEMONTEREY AVEOAKDALE AVECITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF EDINA/ Engineering Dept October 2021 Existing Street Lights Morningside D and E Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMI N NESOTAINCORPORAT E D 1888 , e Legend Existing Street Lights 1238 !"$bcdpf bcdpf 89:{± ±² 89:z bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf !"$!"$!"$!"$ bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf !"$!"$ÅÆÇ!"$!"$ bcdpf GFH`!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$ bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf !"$bcdpf !"$ !"$!"$!"$ÅÆÇ !"$ bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf !"!" 89:m 89:m 89:m 89:m1238 !"$bcdpf1238 !"$!"$ !"$ !"$bcdpf bcdpf!"$ bcdpf bcdpf 89:l bcdpf bcdpf 4 4 1840124112 4211 4208 4236 41404100 42004356 421543084232 4166 4405 43044306 4248 44094239 4412 44104194 3936 4220 4234 4218 4219 4238 4234 42144212 4218 4208 4216 4240 4235 4216 4238 4213 4231 4243 4209 4239 40104 0 0 0412241764213 4209 4233 4 0 0 4418 842064 0 0 2 4417416442114018 4210 40084307 4226 4419 43114401411743054244 4225 4235 4238 422542304406 41054003430143034401 4120 4221 41604201 4236 401440164226 4220 4109 3 4220 4003 4216 4324 4215 42054206 4116 4005 4211 41504232 4117 4105 4231 4208 4121 4114 4217 4 0 0 6 4215 4100 4224 4121 4232 4113 4116392 4222 412641124108 4501 4222 4407 4412 4410 4205 4010420743244103 4234 4230 4203 4224 4104 4212 4113 4200 41204213 4219 4212 440842164404 4410 440543154109 4234 4246 4121 4242 4406 4 0 5 2 400644044231 44004238 4226 41084235 43174370 4239 4233 4 0 1 39304227 4230 4238 4234 4212 440544064221 400441034235 4247 4244 4240 44144205441341114214 4402421242424243 4217 4237 4229 4222 4242 410941154230 42104226 4248 4246 41124237 4223 4312 4413 4239 4242 4229 4243 4227 4208 4223 4400 4228 4219 4236 42134232 4248 41074411 4200 4240 4310 43084215 4232 4223 4240 40224206 440341254124 4245 4212 4237432142254225 4221 4409 422343084213 43154306 441 64311412843104242 431342184215 4217 411343174108 43044240 4219 430542004227 4228 4102 4 0 0 9431143164228 42244502 4 0 0 7 4224 4228 4204 43144231 43074232 42414504 4302421245004227 42024231 43094208 440543124212 4220 44074 4 0 7422443004224 4216 4244 4015 4223 40214403 4236 4216 4211 4233 4220 4227 4 4249 4215 43164219 4241 422944084301 440744094365 4 0 1 1 4120 43304112 4116 440143004 0 1 4 4305 430943094361 440643064313401142064312 4209 40014368 430740204200 43053915420142174304417143034244 414143084307 4205 4315 4204 4247 41554313 41014215 41073947 4313 4005 4 0 0 8 4224 4202 4360 4246 4245 4 0 1 2 4 0 1 0 4309 4001 4 4400 4 3 2 4 430243 01413041014201 42494310 4338 421042074350 4364 4202420842124 4330 40044300 42144334 4245 41324 3 1 8 421341094342 4247 4211411141134311 4248 401342004243 4307 4303 4344 4301 42474246 44164411420042094315 4352 4 0 4 84221 4315 4246 4353 4420 43134204420841104201 4348 40174411 430344154417 4115 4201 4405 4201 4401 42284232 4236 4240 4244 4245PROJECT LIMITSLYNN AVEGRIMES AVECROCKER AVESIDELL TRLMORNINGSIDE RD W 4 4 T H S T B R A N S O N S T LITTEL STOAKDALE AVEW 42ND ST KIPLING AVELYNN AVEMONTEREY AVEOAKDALE AVECITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKCITY OF EDINA/ Engineering Dept October 2021 Existing Traffic Signs Morningside D and E Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMI N NESOTAINCORPORAT E D 1888 , e APPENDIX F Living Streets Plan Living Streets Plan 2015 Safety Health Choice Economy 8 2. Living Streets Policy INTRODUCTION The Living Streets Policy was developed to provide the framework for a Living Streets Plan. The policy initially stood alone and included sections to guide the creation of the Living Street Plan. This revised policy is now an integral part of the Living Streets Plan. The Living Streets Policy ties directly to key community goals outlined in the City’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Those goals include safe walking, bicycling and driving; reduced storm water runoff, reduced energy consumption, and promoting health. The Living Streets Policy also compliments voluntary City initiatives such the “do.town” effort related to community health, Tree City USA and the Green Step Cities programs related to sustainability. In other cases, the Living Streets Policy will assist the City in meeting mandatory requirements set by other agencies. The Living Streets Policy is broken up into three parts: Vision, Principles and Implementation. The Policy is followed by a description of core services provided by the City of Edina that are related to or implemented in part through Living Streets. POLICY Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The Living Streets Policy defines Edina’s vision for Living Streets, the principles Living Streets will embody, and the plan that will guide implementation of their construction. LIVING STREETS VISION Edina is a place where ... • Transportation utilizing all modes is equally safe and accessible; • Residents and families regularly choose to walk or bike; • Streets enhance neighborhood character and community identity; • Streets are safe, inviting places that encourage human interaction and physical activity; • Public policy strives to promote sustainability through balanced infrastructure investments; • Environmental stewardship and reduced energy consumption are pursued in public and private sectors alike; and • Streets support vibrant commerce and add to the value of adjacent land uses. Mini Fact Expect cyclists on the road. Watch for cyclists on the road. Treat them as you would any slow-moving vehicle. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 9 LIVING STREETS PRINCIPLES Fifteen principles guide implementation of the Living Streets Policy in the areas of all users and all modes, connectivity, context sensitivity and sustainability. The City will incorporate these principles when planning for and designing the local transportation network and when making public and private land use decisions. All Users and All Modes Principle 1: Living Streets are high-quality transportation facilities that meet the needs of the most vulnerable users such as pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors and the disabled; and Principle 2: Living Streets provide access and mobility for all transportation modes while enhancing safety and convenience for all users. Connectivity Principle 3: The City designs, operates and maintains a transportation system that provides a highly connected network of streets that accommodate all modes of travel; Principle 4: The City seeks opportunities to overcome barriers to active transportation by preserving and repurposing existing rights-of-way and adding new rights- of-way to enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit; Principle 5: The City prioritizes improvements to non-motorized connections to key destinations such as public facilities, public transit, the regional transportation network and commercial areas; Principle 6: The City will require new developments to provide interconnected street and sidewalk networks that connect to existing or planned streets or sidewalks on the perimeter of the development; and Principle 7: Projects will include consideration of the logical termini by mode. For example, the logical termini for a bike lane or sidewalk may extend beyond the traditional limits of a street construction or reconstruction project, in order to ensure multimodal connectivity and continuity. Context Sensitivity Principle 8: Living Streets are developed with input from stakeholders and designed to consider neighborhood character and promote a strong sense of place; Principle 9: Living Streets preserve and protect natural features such as waterways, urban forest, sensitive slopes and soils; Principle 10: Living Streets are designed and built with coordination between business and property owners along commercial corridors to develop vibrant commercial districts; Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 10 Principle 11: Living Streets coordinate with regional transit networks and regional authorities; and Principle 12: The City will consider the fiscal context of projects and potential financial impacts when implementing Living Streets at the project level. Sustainability Principle 13: Living Streets will improve the current and future quality of life of the public, Principle 14: Living Streets will reduce environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of roadways; and Principle 15: The City will increase the life span and resilience of its infrastructure and will build infrastructure with consideration for lifecycle costs and ease of maintenance. LIVING STREETS IMPLEMENTATION The City of Edina will develop Living Streets in the regular course of business of maintaining, expanding or redeveloping the road network and will be guided by the Vision and Principles established above. Implementation will happen predominantly through the neighborhood street reconstruction program, but also though specific stand-alone stormwater utility, pedestrian, bicycle or safety projects. Project prioritization is not specifically part of the Living Streets Plan. Prioritization of projects takes place in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and Budget and is determined by the City Council with guidance from the Living Streets Vision and Principles. The City will actively promote and apply the Living Streets Policy and Plan by: • Applying the Living Streets Policy and Plan to all street projects, including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation or changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. This also includes privately built roads, sidewalks, paths and trails. • Drawing on all sources of transportation funding and actively pursuing grants, cost-sharing opportunities and other new or special funding sources as applicable. • Through all City departments supporting the vision and principles outlined in this Plan in their work. • By acting as an advocate for Living Streets principles when a local transportation or land use decision is under the jurisdiction of another agency. Projects that implement Living Streets will be guided by pedestrian and cyclist network plans and roadway classifications and will consider the physical, social, ecologic, regulatory and economic context in a given project area. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 11 The project delivery system used to build Living Streets will: • Systematically engage Edina residents and project stakeholders to better inform project-level recommendations. • Keep Edina residents and project stakeholders informed about Living Streets and the range of services they help provide. • Follow minimum Living Streets design requirements and standards. • Manage construction impacts to residents and users of streets. Network The creation of a Living Streets network of road, pedestrian and bicycle facilities provides mobility, accessibility and access to people, places and spaces. The resulting interconnection of neighborhoods links people to goods and services and to one another, and increases quality of life for those who live in, work in, or visit the city. Existing and planned transportation networks are identified in the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan and other approved/adopted plans. Network plans include: • Roadway Network (Functional Classification, Jurisdictional Classification) • Sidewalk Facilities • Bicycle Facilities (Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan) • Active Routes to School Comprehensive Plan • Transit Service Network plans are approved by the City Council. In most cases, modification requires an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan. The expansion, creation and improvement of pedestrian and bicycle networks will be well planned and prioritized: • Expansion of existing networks and providing connections to key traffic generators or destinations provide immediate benefit to all network users and is a top priority. • Network connections serving vulnerable users such as children, seniors and the disabled are a top priority. • Network connections serving high-volume uses such as schools, retail destinations or regional public transit are a top priority. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 12 Context Contextual variety can either constrain or create opportunity in roadway and other infrastructure projects. The following are contexts that will be considered and will influence the planning, design and implementation of Living Streets. Exceptions Living Streets principles will be included in all street construction, reconstruction, repaving and rehabilitation projects, except under one or more of the conditions listed below. City staff will document proposed exceptions as part of a project proposal. • A project involves only ordinary maintenance activities designed to keep assets in serviceable condition, such as mowing, cleaning, sweeping, spot repair, concrete joint repair or pothole filling, or when interim measures are implemented on a temporary detour. Such maintenance activities, however, shall consider and meet the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. CONTEXTS OF LIVING STREETS Ecological Water resource, ponds, wetlands, lakes, streams Natural resouces, trees, and urban forest Air quality Climate Sun and shade Materials, waste, energy, sustainability Regulatory State Aid roadway Watershed rules Operational Maintenance operations Traffic control or functional constraints Project Type Public Neighborhood street reconstruction Neighborhood street reconstruction with major associated utility work State Aid street reconstruction Stand-alone sidewalk, bicycle or utility project Public partner lead State County Transit agency Parks district Private development Will remain private Future public Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 13 • The City exempts a project due to an excessively disproportionate cost of establishing a bikeway, walkway or transit enhancement as part of a project. • The City determines that the construction is not practically feasible or cost effective because of significant or adverse environmental impacts to waterways, flood plains, remnants or native vegetation, wetlands or other critical areas. • Available budget is constrained or project timing allows more efficient construction at a later date. Engagement Members of the public have an interest in understanding and providing input for public projects. Project recommendations will be developed with a transparent and defined level of public engagement. The public will have access to the decision-making process and decision makers via public meetings and other correspondence and will be provided the opportunity to give input throughout the process. Project reports will discuss how their input helped to influence recommendations and decisions. The City of Edina’s Living Streets will continue to engage and solicit public input as a vital component of the project implementation process. See Chapter 5 for a more detailed discussion regarding the purpose of and opportunities for public engagement. Design The guidelines contained in the Living Streets Plan will be used to direct the planning, funding, design, construction, operation and maintenance of new and modified streets, sidewalks, paths and trails. The guidelines allow for context-sensitive designs. The Design Guidelines (see Chapter 6): • Keep street pavement widths to the minimum necessary. • Provide well-designed pedestrian accommodation in the form of sidewalks or shared-use pathways on all arterial, collector and local connector streets. Sidewalks shall also be required where streets abut a public school, public building, community playfield or neighborhood park. Termini will be determined by context. • Provide frequent, convenient and safe street crossings. These may be at intersections designed to be pedestrian friendly, or at mid-block locations where needed and appropriate. • Provide bicycle accommodation on all primary bike routes. • Allocate right-of-way for boulevards. • Allocate right-of-way for parking only when necessary and not in conflict with Living Streets principles. • Consider streets as part of our natural ecosystem and incorporate landscaping, trees, rain gardens and other features to improve air and water quality. The Design Guidelines in this Plan will be incorporated into other City plans, manuals, rules, regulations and programs as appropriate. As new and better practices evolve, the City will update this Living Streets Plan. Minimum standards will guide how vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle networks interact and share public right of way. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 14 Benchmarks and Performance Measures The ability to measure the performance of a plan, as well as knowing that it is functioning as it is intended, is vitally important to overall success and the ability to sustain it. With this in mind, the City will monitor and measure its performance relative to the Living Streets Policy. Benchmarks that will demonstrate success include: Every street and neighborhood is a comfortable place for walking and bicycling. This does not mean that every street in the city will have walking and biking facilities. It means that each neighborhood will provide a network of these facilities such that walking and biking to and through neighborhoods is a comfortable experience. Every child can walk or bike to school or a park safely. It is essential that alternatives to driving to school or parks be provided to children and their caregivers. These alternatives – walking or bicycling – will be both safe and convenient modes of transportation. See the Edina Active Routes to School Plan for more information. Seniors, children, and disabled people can cross all streets safely and comfortably. Opportunities to cross all streets in Edina, including local, collectors and arterial streets, will be provided. These crossings will be safe and comfortable for all users, regardless of age or ability. An active way of life is available to all. Opportunities for active living should be made available to all members of the Edina community by connecting centers of activity via active, multimodal transportation. Each resident of and visitor to Edina will have the ability to lead an active way of life. There are zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries. Perhaps the ultimate safety benchmark is zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries. Modeled from the Vision Zero Initiative (www.visionzeroinitiative.com), an aspirational yet primary goal of Living Streets is to achieve this high level of safety on the City’s roadways. Reduce untreated street water flows into local waterways and reduce storm water volume. Cost-effective stormwater best management practices (BMPs) are strategically selected to go above and beyond regulatory requirements to provide for flood protection and clean water services through the use of infrastructure that retains, settles, filters, infiltrates, diverts or reduces the volume of stormwater that flows to local surface waters. Retail streets stay or become popular regional destinations. Part of Edina’s Living Streets vision is that “streets support vibrant commerce.” While most of the city’s streets are residential, Edina’s business districts are a vital part of the community. The benefits of Living Streets extend to retail streets as well, making them more attractive to businesses and consumers alike. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 15 The City will draw on the following data to measure performance: • Number of crashes or transportation-related injuries reported to the Police Department. • Number and type of traffic safety complaints or requests. • Resident responses to transportation related questions in resident surveys. • Resident responses to post-project surveys. • The number of trips by walking, bicycling and transit (if applicable) as measured before and after the project. • Envision ratings from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. • Additional performance measures may be identified as this Policy is implemented. Mini Fact Motorists must stop behind all crosswalks. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy APPENDIX G Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Transportation Commission Public Works Multi-Purpose Room October 28, 2021 I. Call To Order Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call: Commissioners Ahler, McCarthy, Plumb-Smith, Johnson Late: Commissioners Kitui, Clark Absent: Commissioners Brown, Kane, Lewis, Richman Staff present: Transportation Planner Andrew Scipioni, Assistant City Engineer Aaron Ditzler, Project Engineer Charlie Gerk III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion was made by Commissioner Plumb-Smith and seconded by Commissioner McCarthy to approve the agenda. Quorum was not reached. Motion failed. Commissioner Kitui arrived at 6:06. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Motion was made by Commissioner McCarthy and seconded by Commissioner Ahler to approve the September 23, 2021 meeting minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried. V. Community Comment Paul Rosland with Suburban Waste Services stated that the Commission’s organized trash collection report indicates more impact than there actually would be, noting that there is minimal impact with regard to the environment, economy, quality of life or traffic. Rosland also noted that the intersection study cited in the report didn’t accurately account for recycling and organics trucks. Jason Vierkant with Vierkant Disposal testified that residents won’t get the quality of service with organized collection that they receive now. Vierkant also noted that there are significant impacts to garbage haulers when cities go to organized collection and that he almost lost his business in Bloomington after they recently switched. VI. Reports/Recommendations A. 2022 Roadway Reconstruction Projects Assistant City Engineer Aaron Ditzler and Project Engineer Charlie Gerk presenting the proposed 2022 roadway reconstruction projects for review and comment. Comments from Commissioners included; • Morningside D/E o Why wouldn’t the City consider extending the existing Grimes Ave sidewalk north to West 42nd St? Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 o Would the proposed bike boulevard have sharrows? o Support narrowing W 42nd St and Morningside Rd due to multiple speed complaints. • Blake Rd o East of the project area on Interlachen Blvd, would the bike lane improvements continue in the future? o Support the proposed 6’ bike lanes. o How will bikers move through the proposed roundabout? o Every time the City has added a roundabout, it has been a positive experience. o Where does the proposed shared-use path start? o Support the concrete bike lanes instead of asphalt. o Is it possible to include bollards on the bike lane for additional protection and separation? B. East Grandview Transportation Study. Staff presented the East Grandview Transportation Study for review and comment. Comments from Commissioners included; • What are the benefits of the proposed “dog bone” roundabout compared to the two mini roundabouts recommended at the intersection of Eden Ave and Grange Rd? • Would the proposed westbound left turn at W 50th St and Grange Rd include a dedicated signal cycle? This might be needed for the neighborhood traffic making U-turns to travel east. • Support the proposed pedestrian bridge over Highway 100. • The proposed shared-use path on Grange Rd might be unsafe if the freeway ramps remain. • Is there a way to provide temporary ped/bike facilities over the Eden and Vernon Ave bridges to connect to the proposed shared-use paths on the east side? • Recommend the City conduct a feasibility study on implementing bike lanes on Eden Ave. Commissioner Clark arrived at 6:59. C. Organized Trash Collection Final Report The Commission reviewed the final draft report for the organized trash collection initiative. Motion was made by Commissioner McCarthy and seconded by Commissioner Plumb- Smith to approve the organized trash collection report with the amended recommendation: “The Transportation Commission believes that there is sufficient evidence to support establishing organized trash collection in Edina and recommends that City Council create a plan to establish organized trash collection, including a communication plan to educate the community and solicit public input.” All voted aye. Motion carried. Commissioner Kanti Mahanty left at 7:32. Commissioner Clark left at 8:01. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 D. Traffic Safety Report of September 28, 2021 The Commission reviewed and commented on the Traffic Safety Report of September 28, 2021. E. 2021 Work Plan Updates • #1 Organized Trash Collection – Commission approved the final report. • #2 Street Funding Task Force – City will host a Town Talk on the recent changes to street funding. The virtual event will be Monday, November 1 from 7-8 pm, hosted by City Manager Scott Neal with presentation by Engineering Director Chad Millner and Ann Swenson, chair of the Street Funding Task Force. More information can be found on BetterTogetherEdina.org. • #3 CloverRide – New rack cards have arrived with updated route and schedule information. City will provide DARTS with a letter of support for federal grant to purchase two wheelchair- accessible transit vehicles. • #4 Traffic Safety Reports – Commission reviewed the September 28 report. • #5 Capital Improvement Projects – Sidewalk construction has begun on the roadway reconstruction projects. • #6 Traffic Impact Studies & TDM – Commission reviewed 7001 France study. Staff is expecting studies for projects at 7300 Bush Lake Rd and 4660 W 77th St. • #7 Metro Transit Connectivity – No update. F. Proposed 2022 Regular Meeting Dates Staff presented the proposed regular meeting dates for the 2022 calendar year. Motion was made by Commissioner Plumb-Smith and seconded by Commissioner Kitui to approve the proposed 2022 regular meeting dates. All voted aye. Motion carried. VII. Chair and Member Comments – Received. VIII. Staff Comments – Received. IX. Adjournment Motion was made by Commissioner McCarthy and seconded by Commissioner Plumb-Smith to adjourn the October 28, 2021 meeting at 8:25 p.m. All voted aye. Motion carried. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE J F M A M J J A S O N D # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 NAME Ahler, Mindy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 100% Brown, Chris 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88% Johnson, Kirk 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 100% Kane, Bocar 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90% Kitui, Janet 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Lewis, Andy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88% McCarthy, Bruce 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 70% Plumb-Smith, Jill 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90% Richman, Lori 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 80% Clark, Anna (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 70% Kanti Mahanty, Stephen (s) 1 1 2 100% Lafferty, Peter 1 1 Resigned 2 N/A Scherer, Matthew Resigned 0 N/A Atri, Nihar (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Term Expired 6 67% Khariwala, Anand (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Term Expired 7 78% APPENDIX H Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials The CITYofEDINA2022 Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionInformational Meeting The CITYofEDINAAgenda•Introductions•Why Reconstruct•Project Scopes•What You Can Expect•Funding Sources•Timeline•Communication•How to Prepare•Questionswww.EdinaMN.gov2-A The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov3-AEngineering - Design & Construction DivisionChad MillnerDirector of EngineeringAaron DitzlerAssistant City EngineerEvan AcostaGraduate EngineerEdinah MachaniEngineering TechnicianLiz MooreEngineering CoordinatorCharlie GerkProject EngineerTom HaatajaSr. Engineering TechnicianJon MooreSr. Engineering Technician The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov4-C2022 Projects Areas•Morningside D/E •-254 Properties•Blake Road (MSA) •- 62 properties The CITYofEDINA•Streets grouped into neighborhoods•- Maximizes economics of scale•- Extends pavement life•Proactive Pavement Management Program•Prioritized based on;•- Pavement condition•- Underground utility issues5-Cwww.EdinaMN.govWhy My Street? The CITYofEDINAWhy Reconstruct?•Previously reconstructed in the 1970s-1990s *•Utility issues to address beneath roadway•More cost-effective than other maintenance strategies (mill & overlay, seal coat)www.EdinaMN.gov6-A The CITYofEDINAExisting Conditions - Roadways•Pavement reaching end of useful life•Some streets have curb and gutter, some do not•Some properties already have concrete driveway aprons, some do notwww.EdinaMN.gov7-A The CITYofEDINAExisting Conditions - Utilities•Watermain- Loss in pipe wall thickness- Main and service breaks- Undersized mainswww.EdinaMN.gov8-C•Sanitary Sewer- Cracks, breaks, sags, etc.- Inflow and infiltration•Storm Sewer- Structure deficiencies- Undersized pipes- Curb and gutter failing The CITYofEDINA•Mailboxes•Irrigation systems and pet fences•Landscaping•Outwalks/stepsExisting Conditions – Right-of-Waywww.EdinaMN.gov9-C The CITYofEDINAWhat / Where is the ROW?•Surface and space above and below public roadways used for travel purposes and utilities•Typically, 60’ width•(MSA Streets 66’)•Property corners located during surveywww.EdinaMN.gov10-A The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements - Roadways•Replacement of curb & gutter (all or sections)•Subgrade corrections as needed•New roadbed and pavement surfacewww.EdinaMN.gov11-A The CITYofEDINALiving Streets Plan•Approved by City Council in 2015•Balances needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders•Incorporates;•- Minimum roadway design elements•- Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Planwww.EdinaMN.gov12-C The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements - Driveways•Aprons will be replaced / installed to comply with City standards•Special driveway materials•Reimbursement Policywww.EdinaMN.gov13-A The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements - Utilities•May include localized watermain and service replacements•New fire hydrants and gate valves•May include localized sanitary sewer repairs and rehabilitation•Storm sewer upgradeswww.EdinaMN.gov14-A The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements – Sump Drain•Installed when feasible and warranted•Homeowners encouraged to connect to City Sump Drain•Notification will be given when connecting is available•Sump connection permit available thru City websitewww.EdinaMN.gov15-C The CITYofEDINA•Recommend inspecting private services prior to construction•Repairs/upgrades can be coordinated with street work•Associated costs can be added to special assessmentUtility Ownershipwww.EdinaMN.gov16-AResident Owned UtilitiesB –Water ServiceC & D – Sanitary Service The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements –Ped / Bike•Based on Pedestrian and Bicyclist Master Plan•Final design evaluated based on network consistency and construction conflictswww.EdinaMN.gov17-C The CITYofEDINAPrivate Utilities•Gas, Electric, Telephone, Cable may upgrade or repair their utilities before construction begins•Potential City-required relocations•Goal: streamline projects and minimize neighborhood disturbance•Streetlight upgrades typically not included with projectwww.EdinaMN.gov18-A The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Dust, mud, noise, and vibrations•Localized flooding during rainfall•Occasional delays due to inclement weather•Residents will be asked to limit water use occasionally•Homes may be connected to temporary watermainwww.EdinaMN.gov19-A The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Construction materials stored temporarily in ROW•5-10 feet of disturbance behind back of curb•Construction equipment stored on streets•Tree removals as necessary (property owners notified)www.EdinaMN.gov20-C The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Driveways and roads will be periodically inaccessible•Driveways will be inaccessible for 7 days to allow driveways to curewww.EdinaMN.gov21-C The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Items within the City’s right-of-way may be damaged•-You can remove plants and other landscape features before the project•- Irrigation and pet fences will repaired•Disturbed areas will be seededwww.EdinaMN.gov22-A The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•We will;•- Provide opportunities for input•- Keep you informed•- Do our best to minimize inconveniences•Our contractor will accommodate residents with special access needswww.EdinaMN.gov23-A The CITYofEDINACity Utility Funds•Collection of utility service charges paid to the City•Covers 100% of:•- Storm sewer •(curb and gutter, •driveway aprons, •sump drain pipe) •- Sanitary sewer•-Watermainwww.EdinaMN.gov24-C The CITYofEDINAPedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund•Revenue from Xcel and CenterPoint Energy franchise fees•Promotes non-motorized transportation throughout the City•Covers 100% of:•-Sidewalks /shared-use paths•- Bike lanes•-Associated signage and pavement markingswww.EdinaMN.gov25-C The CITYofEDINADo Taxes Cover Street Projects?•~22% of property taxes go to the City for expenses including Police, Fire, Parks, and Public Works•- Snowplowing•- Pothole repairs•- Other street maintenance (sealcoating, overlays, patch repairs)•Beginning in 2022, taxes will pay for a portion of street reconstructionwww.EdinaMN.gov26-A The CITYofEDINASpecial Assessments•Assigned to benefitting properties of public improvements•Covers portion of roadway costs•- Roadway and driveway removals•-Asphalt pavement•- Restoration•- Indirect Costs – engineering, finance, soil investigations, mailingswww.EdinaMN.gov27-A The CITYofEDINAResidential Equivalent Units•Assessments distributed based on REUs•- Factor used to compare properties to a single-family residence•Additional factors for commercial, industrial, and public-use propertieswww.EdinaMN.gov28-CScenarioLand Use ClassREU FactorASingle-Family Residential1.0BMulti-Family Residential – Duplex0.8C Multi-Family Residential – Apartment/Condos 0.5IInstitutional – Places of Worship0.2* The CITYofEDINAProject Details – Blake Road A, B and C•62 properties (36.13 REUs)•0.42 miles of road•Partial watermain, water services replacement•Full replacement/installation of curb & gutter•Roundabout at Interlachen Blvd•Two 6’ on street concrete bike lanes •5’ concrete walk south of Interlachen Blvd•8’-10’ asphalt path north of Interlachen Blvdwww.EdinaMN.gov29-A The CITYofEDINAProject Details – Morningside D & E•254 properties (248.04 REUs)•1.98 miles of road•Full replacement/installation of curb & gutter•Spot sidewalk repair•Localized watermain improvements•Watermain services•Substantial storm sewer improvementswww.EdinaMN.gov30-C The CITYofEDINAMorningside Flood Infrastructure Project•Improvements in 2022 and 2023•Separate but coordinated project with roadway reconstruction•https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningsidewww.EdinaMN.gov31-C The CITYofEDINARevised Roadway Cost Assessment - Local www.EdinaMN.gov32-ASample Assessment During TransitionConstruction Year% of Local Roadway Costs Assessed $10,000 $15,000 $20,0002020100%$10,000 $15,000 $20,000202178.90%$7,890 $11,835 $15,780202273.64%$7,364 $11,046 $14,728202368.38%$6,838 $10,257 $13,6762024-203563.12%-5.26%$6,312-$526 $9,468-$789 $12,624-$1,05220360%$0$0$0 The CITYofEDINARevised Roadway Cost Assessment - MSAwww.EdinaMN.gov33-ASample Assessment During TransitionConstruction Year% of MSA Roadway Costs Assessed $5,000 $7,500 $10,000202020%$5,000 $7,500 $10,000202115.78%$3,945 $5,918 $7,890202214.73%$3,682 $5,523 $7,364202313.68%$3,419 $5,129 $6,8382024-203512.62%-1.05%$3,156-$263 $4,734-$395 $6,312-$52620360%$0$0$0 The CITYofEDINAPreliminary Assessments*Residential equivalent unit (1 single-family home = 1 REU)www.EdinaMN.gov34-ANeighborhood% of Roadway Costs Assessed Estimated Assessment Range per REU*#of REUsSquareYards of PavingSquare Yards of Paving per REUMorningside D, E 73.64% $6,900 - $10,200 248.04 27,928 112.6Blake Road A, B, C14.73% $10,300 - $15,200 34.63 11,602 335.0 The CITYofEDINATypical Project Timelinewww.EdinaMN.gov35-AJuly –September2021 Engineering studies/estimates providedDecember 2021 Public hearingsJanuary – March 2022 Plan preparation and biddingApril – May 2022 Construction beginsOctober – November 2022 Construction concludesSpring 2023 Warranty workFall 2023Final assessment hearing The CITYofEDINAAssessment Timingwww.EdinaMN.gov36-CInitial Public HearingsDecember 2021Project ConstructedSummer 2022Final Assessment HearingOctober 2023Assessment Filed with County November 2023Assessment on Tax Statement January 2024 The CITYofEDINAPayment Options•Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid interest charges•Pay min. 25% ; balance rolls to property taxes over 15 years •Roll entire amount to property taxes over 15 years•Defer payment if 65 years of age or older and meet specific income requirements•- Finance charges are 1% over City’s borrowing interest rate•- 2020 interest rate was 3.53%•-Assessing Department – 952-826-0365www.EdinaMN.gov37-C The CITYofEDINACommunicationwww.EdinaMN.gov38-A•Regular Mail-All meetings, public hearings, and questionnaires- Final assessment notices (one year after construction)•Door hangers and flyers -Time-sensitive information (water shut-offs, concrete, temporary inaccessibility)•Better Together Edina – City Website Project Page The CITYofEDINABetter Together Edina•Best way to stay informed•www.bettertogetheredina.org/blake-rd-abc•www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningside-d-e•Free, access to periodic updates on project progress and scheduleswww.EdinaMN.gov39-A The CITYofEDINAProviding Input•Questionnaires mailed to your home, weigh in on;•-Traffic/pedestrian issues•- Street drainage issues•- Streetlight upgrades•Public hearing in December 2021•- Opportunity for residents to voice comments and concernswww.EdinaMN.gov40-C The CITYofEDINAQuestionnaire Resultswww.EdinaMN.gov41-CNeighborhoodResponses Received to DateMorningside D & E26% (65 / 254)Blake Road A, B & C19% (9 / 48) The CITYofEDINAHow To Prepare•Complete project questionnaire•Begin financial planning•Coordinate home and yard improvement projects around street reconstruction schedule•Review Better Together Edina updates•Ask questions, stay informedwww.EdinaMN.gov42-A The CITYofEDINAEngineering Department7450 Metro BoulevardHours: 7:00 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.952-826-0371Contact Uswww.EdinaMN.gov43-ALiz MooreEngineering Coordinator952-826-0449LMoore@edinamn.govAaron DitzlerAssistant City Engineer952-826-0443ADitzler@edinamn.gov The CITYofEDINAQuestions?www.EdinaMN.gov44-A•Ask questions on Better Together Edina Q&A page•‐www.bettertogetheredina.org/blake‐rd‐abc•‐www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningside‐d‐e•Call or email The CITYofEDINAThank you for your time!www.EdinaMN.gov45-A APPENDIX I Resident Questionnaires Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey SURVEY RESPONSE REPORT 30 January 2019 - 15 August 2021 PROJECT NAME: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction SURVEY QUESTIONS Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 1 of 44 Q1 How concerned are you with the speed of traffic in your neighborhood or on your street? 29 (45.3%) 29 (45.3%) 23 (35.9%) 23 (35.9%) 12 (18.8%) 12 (18.8%) Not Concerned Concerned Very Concerned Question options Optional question (64 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 2 of 44 Q2 How concerned are you with the volume of traffic or number of vehicles in your neighborhood or on your street? 29 (44.6%) 29 (44.6%) 23 (35.4%) 23 (35.4%) 13 (20.0%) 13 (20.0%) Not Concerned Concerned Very Concerned Question options Optional question (65 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 3 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM See above regarding traffic on 42nd street. Edina could generate more $ policing this intersection than on 100/62. It's a goldmine for traffic citations. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 01:59 PM 44th/Grimes. More and more drivers are using 44th street as well as bikes. As I mentioned above, not only is traffic increasing but people are rolling through stop signs. It is getting busier every year and has increased since the work on Sunnyside to slow and divert traffic. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:09 PM Please see above. Thank You Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:12 PM Crocker Avenue tends to become congested as the street is quite narrow. Not everyone observes the no parking signs on the west side of the street. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 05:32 PM Grimes Ave is used as an alternative to France Ave and gets lots of traffic from trucks, buses, and vehicles using it to get to homes in the neighborhood as well as to Weber Park and Golden Years. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:09 PM Grimes is becoming more of a cut through as neighborhood density increases Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:28 PM Along 42nd Ave -- used by many outside the neighborhood as shortcut to avoid excelsior and France ave. These people are usually going at excessive speeds. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 05:50 AM Lots of vehicles due to construction, but not permanent Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:12 AM 42nd, between France and Quentin. Noise. Q3 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 4 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:28 AM The amount of construction trucks is RIDICULOUS. There should be no more than one new build allowed on a street at a given time in Morningside. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 09:34 AM Concern regarding construction vehicles on the "L" consisting of Oakdale Ave S and Branson Street. Very often construction vehicles are blocking the street and during the school year there are issues with buses getting through. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:24 AM The traffic at the 4-way stop on Morning side and Grimes is busy, and Grimes carries a lot of traffic on school days. The street is fairly narrow, and there is a lot of construction parking on the street which makes for a lot of congestion. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:11 PM There are a lot of young kids (under the age of 10) in this area of Morningside and the construction recently has been excessive, with large trucks and heavy machinery on a daily basis. Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 04:56 AM Morningside Road Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 08:40 AM So many contractors and construction work takes a toll on our roads, large potholes Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:42 AM 42nd and grimes due to school and cut through from country club and to countryclub Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 11:17 AM Morningside Rd Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 03:12 PM Lots of traffic on 44th and Morningside; can get very tight with parking on both sides of the street Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM west 42nd street and Monterey ave. Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 09:13 AM Too many vehicles (mostly construction) parking on the hill from Morningside Rd to Oakdale Ave. Terrible visibility; an accident waiting to happen. Construction vehicles blocking street, Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 5 of 44 driveways; parking in No Parking zones. Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 12:26 PM Grimes is not a through street, it is residential. Screen Name Redacted 6/20/2021 03:54 PM see above. Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 05:06 AM On west 42nd Street as a through street coming west off of France Avenue Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 12:03 PM France and 42nd, very difficult to cross at France. Would really like a crosswalk with flashing lights so pedestrians can cross Screen Name Redacted 6/22/2021 08:02 AM My main concern is the large volume of construction vehicles for all the teardowns in my neighborhood. One side of Branson St. is commonly lined with construction vehicles, adding congestion for the residents. Screen Name Redacted 6/22/2021 12:32 PM When multiple properties within a block or two are under construction at the same time, it can cause traffic flow and congestion problems. This increases in the spring-fall construction season, which also coincides with increased summer automobile traffic as well as pedestrian and bike traffic. Screen Name Redacted 6/24/2021 12:55 PM Too many large trucks for construction Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 02:25 PM Morningside Rd serves as a through street Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM Grimes ave at 42 and Morningside. Drivers do not stop at the sign. Sometimes 2 cars go through the intersection at one time. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 01:32 PM Branson St- Road curves, cars park on one side of the street, lots of kids. Potential for kids to run out and be hit by fast moving cars Screen Name Redacted See previous comment ... lots of traffic to and from that school Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 6 of 44 7/10/2021 03:57 PM Screen Name Redacted 7/14/2021 06:33 PM Oakdale Ave (Morningside neighborhood) - the construction parking and trucks have been overwhelming for the last two years. Screen Name Redacted 8/06/2021 08:04 AM W42nd Street and Monterey. St. Louis Park doesn't allow left turns off northbound France Avenue during rush hour traffic. Edina absorbs all of the traffic trying to get to Hwy 100. W42nd Street is the last turn allowed before Excelsior Blvd. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM There is a lot of traffic on Grimes between 42nd and Morningside because the only other North-south through streets are France and Wooddale, and the two schools adjacent to Weber fields generate a lot of traffic from busses and parents. When cars are parked on one side of the street, there is only room for one vehicle at a time to pass through the pinch points. Screen Name Redacted 8/13/2021 08:15 AM It seems to be a throughfare for traffic Optional question (35 response(s), 30 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 7 of 44 Q4 How concerned are you with motorist behavior in your neighborhood? (Examples of poor motorist behavior include speeding, rolling through stop signs, failing to yield, and driving aggressively.) 20 (30.8%) 20 (30.8%) 28 (43.1%) 28 (43.1%) 17 (26.2%) 17 (26.2%) Concerned Not Concerned Very Concerned Question options Mandatory Question (65 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 8 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM Most drivers don't even tap the brakes here. I have successfully pegged several cars with baseballs, softballs, etc. and will continue to do so until my arm requires Tommy John surgery. And then with successful rehab, I might be able to crank it up to 80MPH again. There are over 20 kids living within 100 ft of this intersection. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 01:59 PM See above. Same. Speeding, rolling through stop signs, increased traffic. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 02:54 PM Grimes at any of the 4 stop signs from 42nd thru Sunnyside. Generally female in suburbans or similar, or any Audi & BMW generally male or puff blonde. Stopsigns are advisory for this crew have had many near misses with being rea ended Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:10 PM Same as question 1...Speed on some roads Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:34 PM Don't need new rules, enforce aggressively the rules in place Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:09 PM 42nd and Monterey/42nd and Monterey- numerous friendly reminders and conversations by myself and neighbors to motorists to to stop if you see kids, pedestrians. We have come to expect minimal stops and basically a yield sign at other times. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:12 PM Stop signs in the neighborhood tend to be regarded more as yield signs or in some cases, not observed at all. In particular, the four way stop at Morningside and Grimes. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:09 PM Speed, rolling stop signs Screen Name Redacted At the corner of 44th and Grimes, the traffic on 44th regularly does Q5 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 9 of 44 6/15/2021 05:19 AM not stop at the stop sign. It is unsafe for the other vehicles, but I am mostly concerned for children crossing the street there. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:12 AM 42nd, between France and Quentin. A "straight-away" in a residential neighborhood lends itself to speeding and going through stop signs. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:28 AM See #4 remarks. A vast number of construction vehicles don't observe speed limits. They are rude, obstruct driveways, park in no parking zones and tell neighbors to F off and use profanities regularly. City Homes hires the worst offenders. Low class subs all around. I have been called a F' Bit' for asking politely to gain access to my own property. It's a real problem. Morningside isn't anti build; it's pro-respect. We would like contractors to observe Edina's ordinances and speed limits when visiting our city and recognize they may have a job to do but we live here and pay property taxes and abide by laws. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:15 AM rolling through stop signs at intersection of morningside and grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 09:34 AM As noted above - vehicles not noticing the dead end sign and lack of stop sign at intersection of Oakdale/Branson. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:24 AM The traffic at the 4-way stop on Morning side and Grimes is busy, and Grimes carries a lot of traffic on school days. The street is fairly narrow, and there is a lot of construction parking on the street which makes for a lot of congestion. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:11 PM The roads are too torn up to drive fast and the only Stop Sign in the area is at Morningside and Oakdale, which is much needed and paid attention to given the blind hill coming up Morningside from the West. Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 03:12 PM 44th and Morningside Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM w42nd street and Monterey. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 10 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 04:07 PM There is are several areas of low visibility due to hedges and cars just plow around those corners at full speed. For example Oakdale and Littel, 42nd Street near Grimes and Kiping Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 09:13 AM All of the reasons listed above, plus the ubiquitous construction vehicles who flout parking restrictions at will (and are rude if you ask them to move: You and what army?) Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 12:26 PM Nobody stops at stop signs on 44th and Grimes or Morningside and Grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/19/2021 07:27 PM There’s no enforcement of traffic laws against locals so no one follows the law, especially teens. Screen Name Redacted 6/20/2021 06:32 PM There should be a stop sign on Branson where it meets Oakdale Ave S. Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 05:06 AM On West 42nd Street and Lynn Avenue; On West 42nd Street and France Avenue. With recent social unrest, traffic can access West 42nd Street from France and use a through street. Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 08:41 AM Speeding, as stated Screen Name Redacted 6/24/2021 12:55 PM speeding mostly. the cyclists run the stop signs. Screen Name Redacted 6/25/2021 03:03 PM Rolling through stop signs on busier intersections, such as Grimes + 44th Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 07:56 AM See speed comments above. Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 02:25 PM Morningside Rd Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 05:03 PM Close and fast passing of cyclists is very common, making it a worry to let kids cycle alone. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 11 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 7/02/2021 09:04 AM 42nd /Morningside Lynn - cars fly down hill. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM I have witnessed a child on a bike being struck by a driver at Grimes and Morningside. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 01:32 PM Morningside Rd/Grimes, 44th/Grimes, Grimes/42nd, Grimes northbound to 42nd there is a hill and you can't see traffic coming up hill till it's too late and they travel too fast---Rolling through stop signs and high speeds Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 09:29 PM 44th and France, Grimes and 44th intersection, Grimes and Woodale intersection, 42nd and grimes intersection, Grimes and Morningside intersection Frequent near misses during walks, most cars roll through intersections especially on 44th when they are released in waves from 44th and France signal intersection. Screen Name Redacted 7/10/2021 03:57 PM lots of people driving to and from the school Screen Name Redacted 8/06/2021 08:04 AM W 42nd Street and Monterey. Same as above Screen Name Redacted 8/08/2021 08:45 AM All locations, but particularly Oakdale Avenue and Morningside Road. We walk, drive and bike the neighborhood daily and the safety of us, our dogs and children of others is threatened by fast and inattentive driving. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM Many drivers on Grimes avenue are distracted. Motorists tend to develop a lot of speed on the long block heading north, and if heading south they often "gun their engines" heading up the hill as if developing momentum will help their car make it to the top. There is a lot of speeding traffic in front of my house. Optional question (37 response(s), 28 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 12 of 44 Q6 In general, these behaviors impact you most when you are: 17 (26.2%) 17 (26.2%) 11 (16.9%) 11 (16.9%) 37 (56.9%) 37 (56.9%) Driving Bicycling Walking, jogging, or running Question options Mandatory Question (65 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 13 of 44 Q7 Do you feel any intersection in your neighborhood is unsafe? 38 (58.5%) 38 (58.5%) 27 (41.5%) 27 (41.5%) Yes No Question options Mandatory Question (65 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 14 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM You know which one. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 01:59 PM I am not sure it is quite up to "unsafe" but it can be. 44/grimes. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 02:54 PM Kiopling and Morningside the hedges on the Northeast need to be trimmed way back Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:10 PM The cross walk on 44th at Kojetin Park is a little dangerous. Many cars do not stop for pedestrians and drive very fast. It can get scary when with our young kids. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:34 PM 44th and Grimes. very bad sight lines due to bushes on NW corner. Oakdale and Litel - unable to see around corner due to bushes at NE corner - drivers cut the corner with no visual ability Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:09 PM 42nd and Monterey, 42nd and Oakdale stop signs Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:12 PM Morningside and Grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 05:32 PM The corner of Morningside and France is very blind when trying to turn onto France Ave from Morningside Road Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 05:19 AM 44th/Grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 05:50 AM France Ave. and 43rd street Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:28 AM The Morningside / Oakdale Ave intersection hill. There are blind spots for traffic due to incline/decline. If you are walking across Morningside and a car is approaching (usually speeding) they have to screech on the brakes. I have seen too many kids and dog Q8 Which intersection do you feel is unsafe? Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 15 of 44 walkers nearly missed. It would be a wise decision for the city to add a marked/painted pedestrian crosswalk at Sidell Trl/Morningside or Oakdale / Morningside with pedestrian crossing indicator lights (similar to what was installed at the Vernon Ave & City Hall crosswalk. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:47 AM 44th street and grimes avenue Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:52 AM Crossing France can be difficult Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 09:34 AM Oakdale Ave S/Branson Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:24 AM Grimes and 42nd; Grimes and morning side Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 04:56 AM Wooddale and Morningside Road Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:42 AM morningside road and wooddale - a stop sign should be added onto Wooddale so it is a 4 way stop Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 11:17 AM Sunnyside and Grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM W42nd and Monterey Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 05:50 AM 42nd and France Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 04:07 PM Oakdale and Littel due to vegetation blocking visibility Monterey/42nd/Oakdale has stop signs, but the street alignment is strange, and it is hard to tell how to handle moving to or from Oakdale and Monterey unless you are making a R turn. When turning L from 42nd to Oakdale drivers stopped at the stop sign and heading east often start going before you can complete your turn. The intersections at 44th, France and Sunnyside are a mess. The parking on street should be removed and L turn lanes should Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 16 of 44 be installed. With the increased businesses and apartments, one person turning left can snarl traffic on France for a few light cycles. Parking should be replaced, spilling over to our neighbors is not a kind option. Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 09:13 AM Morningside Rd and Oakdale Ave Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 12:26 PM 44th and Grimes, Morningside and Grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/19/2021 07:27 PM Grimes and 42nd Screen Name Redacted 6/20/2021 03:54 PM Morningside & Wooddale might be better if it were a 4-way stop, especially now that Wooddale is a bike route. Screen Name Redacted 6/20/2021 06:32 PM Where Branson meets Oakdale Ave S. Need to have a stop sign on Branson. Also where Oakdale meets Morningside - there should be a cross walk across Morningside with some flasher lights when people are crossing. Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 05:06 AM West 42nd Street and France Avenue Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 12:03 PM France and 42nd Screen Name Redacted 6/24/2021 12:55 PM 42 st and France ave Screen Name Redacted 6/25/2021 03:03 PM 44th and Grimes. Most traffic is safe and respectful of pedestrians, but I have witnessed many cars rolling through the stop sign or even one car speeding around stopped traffic and running the sign. Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 02:25 PM Morningside and Grimes Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM Morningside and Grimes 44th and Grimes 42nd and France Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 17 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 09:29 PM Any with cars, in winter time intersections with standing water due to drains being placed such that they do not clear and you have to climb the snowbank and walk in the street to get around the pool of water. Screen Name Redacted 7/10/2021 03:57 PM when on morningside road heading east to France Av, there's a very slight downhill slope. In winter this stretch gets icy and since it's just very slightly graded downward toward France there can be a big sheet of ice ... and since it's at France with a stop sign it's dangerous. This can be icy when most other streets aren't based on how the water drains/flows and then can re-freeze Screen Name Redacted 7/14/2021 06:33 PM Morningside Road and Oakdale Ave. Screen Name Redacted 8/06/2021 08:04 AM W 42nd Street and Monterey Screen Name Redacted 8/08/2021 08:45 AM Morningside Road and Oakdale Avenue. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM 42nd & Grimes vehicles often do not stop, signal, or actually look both ways. It's difficult for me to back out of my driveway. 42nd & France is also difficult to cross as a pedestrian and turn onto as a vehicle. Optional question (38 response(s), 27 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 18 of 44 Q9 Which, if any, of the following factors contribute to your feeling that the intersection is unsafe? (select all that apply) 10 (23.3%) 10 (23.3%) 10 (23.3%) 10 (23.3%) 22 (51.2%) 22 (51.2%) 10 (23.3%) 10 (23.3%) 7 (16.3%) 7 (16.3%) 3 (7.0%) 3 (7.0%) 14 (32.6%) 14 (32.6%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Lack of traffic control (traffic signal, stop sign, yield sign)Issues with sight lines or clear view Drivers failing to stop at stop sign Drivers failing to yield Drivers turning corner too fast Street(s) too wide Other (please specify)Insufficient lighting Question options 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 Optional question (43 response(s), 22 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 19 of 44 Q10 In general, the intersection feels most unsafe when you are: 17 (37.8%) 17 (37.8%) 4 (8.9%) 4 (8.9%) 24 (53.3%) 24 (53.3%) Driving Bicycling Walking, jogging, or running Question options Optional question (45 response(s), 20 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 20 of 44 Q11 How frequently do you walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood? 50 (78.1%) 50 (78.1%) 10 (15.6%) 10 (15.6%)4 (6.3%) 4 (6.3%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (64 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 21 of 44 Q12 If you walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood, what are your primary reasons for doing so? (select all that apply) 63 (96.9%) 63 (96.9%) 27 (41.5%) 27 (41.5%) 1 (1.5%) 1 (1.5%) 1 (1.5%) 1 (1.5%) 10 (15.4%) 10 (15.4%) Health/exercise Travel to/from destination (such as store, coffee shop)Commute to/from work Access transit Other (please specify) Question options 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Optional question (65 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 22 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM Would love a major cross walk at 42nd and France (similar to the one on 47th and Xerxes) Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:28 PM People trimming their bushes free from the sidewalk. Many sidewalks are overgrown from adjacent bushes! Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:28 AM Plans to increase tree canopies. With all the teardown loads of trees have been removed. And few if any are replaced. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 10:00 AM Sidewalks Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:24 AM Less hills. (kidding) Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 11:17 AM Get rid of construction traffic. Quit authorizing teardowns. Morningside used to have affordable housing and character. Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM adding cross walk lights on W.42nd. More stop signs on w42nd and morningside rd. SLP has stop signs every block to keep car speed down and to help prevent side streets from becoming over used by cars that are trying to use side streets as shortcuts. Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 04:07 PM sidewalks are appreciated, please finish connectors- W side of Grimes heading to 42nd street, Lynn from 40th to 42nd street, Monterey where it curves coming up the hill Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 09:13 AM Additional sidewalks Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 05:06 AM Crosswalk at West 42nd Street and France Avenue would be fabulous! Q13 If you don't walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood as often as you would like, what reconstruction improvement might increase your walking, jogging, or running? Please list all that you can think of. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 23 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 05:03 PM Clear priority at 4 ways for pedestrians to cross. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM Speed bumps or other traffic calming improvements. Slower traffic speeds as less traffic is unrealistic Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 09:29 PM Hard barriers extending into the roadway to minimize the crossing distance. Paint and flex posts are near worthless as deterents. Screen Name Redacted 8/06/2021 08:04 AM sidewalks are good for Morningside Screen Name Redacted 8/08/2021 08:45 AM Crosswalks at heavily walked uncontrolled intersections. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM Please add a marked crosswalk at the top of the grimes hill where the sidewalk ends. Pedestrians crossing there have a clear view of the street in both directions and are easily seen by drivers against the background. In addition, the no parking near the crosswalk will eliminate a critical pinch-point. Optional question (16 response(s), 49 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 24 of 44 Q14 How frequently do you ride a bicycle in your neighborhood? 9 (13.8%) 9 (13.8%) 17 (26.2%) 17 (26.2%) 24 (36.9%) 24 (36.9%) 9 (13.8%) 9 (13.8%) 6 (9.2%) 6 (9.2%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (65 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 25 of 44 Q15 If you ride a bicycle in your neighborhood, what are your primary reasons for doing so? (select all that apply) 51 (91.1%) 51 (91.1%) 29 (51.8%) 29 (51.8%) 4 (7.1%) 4 (7.1%)6 (10.7%) 6 (10.7%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Health/exercise Travel to/from destination (such as store, coffee shop)Commute to/from work Other (please specify)Access transit Question options 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 Optional question (56 response(s), 9 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 26 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 09:45 AM 44th street is a heavily used bike route, and even though it is a wide roadway, there are no painted bike lanes. This could improve bicyclist safety. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM Crossing 42nd and France with family is challenging. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:20 PM Fewer hills, haha Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:28 PM Smoother roads -- less cars parked along the roadway. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:47 AM Connecting bike lane or trail to lake Harriet Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:24 AM More bike trails would be ideal, but bike lanes on streets linking the parks would be helpful. Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:42 AM Do not add bike lanes they create a greater confusion then help for young drivers and old drivers - leave it alone Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM More stop signs to keep car traffic speed down and prevent them from using side streets as highways Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 04:07 PM better sight lines at intersections Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 09:13 AM Bicyclists who do not obey traffic laws, blowing through stop signs and lights, hogging the road in packs, are a danger to everyone. Bike lanes not effective on busy/narrow roads, especially when the center line (yellow) for cars is eliminated. Not enough room for either. Q16 If you don't ride a bicycle in your neighborhood as often as you would like, what reconstruction improvement might increase your bicycle riding frequency? Please list all that you can think of. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 27 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 12:26 PM Speed of traffic, failure to yield at intersections Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 05:06 AM Crosswalk at West 42nd Street and France Avenue. Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 05:03 PM Fixing the numerous dangerous potholes on every block. Reduce on-street parking that narrow the road and obscures cyclists from motorists. Screen Name Redacted 7/02/2021 09:04 AM Biking is for TRAILS and the bike lanes are Hazardous to bikers and drivers. CARS are for roads. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM Traffic calming and speed and traffic enforcement Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 01:32 PM Safer roads and sidewalks Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 09:29 PM Separated, protected (curb) bike lanes Screen Name Redacted 7/10/2021 03:57 PM fewer cars, especially with cars and constuction vehicles on both sides of Morningside road, and speed limit should be reduced like in S. Mpls Screen Name Redacted 8/08/2021 08:45 AM Only allowing parking on one side of the road. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM Just a sign to remind drivers to look for bicycles. Optional question (20 response(s), 45 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 28 of 44 Q17 How frequently do you or a member of your household park on the street? 8 (12.3%) 8 (12.3%) 10 (15.4%) 10 (15.4%) 13 (20.0%) 13 (20.0%) 26 (40.0%) 26 (40.0%) 8 (12.3%) 8 (12.3%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (65 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 29 of 44 Q18 How frequently do visitors to your household park on the street? 3 (4.6%) 3 (4.6%) 23 (35.4%) 23 (35.4%) 28 (43.1%) 28 (43.1%) 9 (13.8%) 9 (13.8%) 2 (3.1%) 2 (3.1%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (65 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 30 of 44 Q19 How satisfied are you with the availability of on-street parking in your neighborhood? 21 (32.3%) 21 (32.3%) 21 (32.3%) 21 (32.3%) 12 (18.5%) 12 (18.5%) 10 (15.4%) 10 (15.4%)1 (1.5%) 1 (1.5%) Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Question options Optional question (65 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 31 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM NA. No concerns. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:12 PM Due to the narrowness of Crocker Avenue, there is no parking allowed on the west side of the street. This is necessary, but it does create a lack of available parking space on the street. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:20 PM Older homes on street all had single, car-width driveways leading to detached garages behind the house. Newer homes are being built with double wide driveways and garages in front. Since parking is only allowed on the north side of our street, when a double driveway takes the place of a single driveway on that side, all the houses near it lose a street parking spot. Ironically, the new homeowners don't even park in front of their own house, they park in front of the older homes because we have room for 2 cars. Developers should not be able to do this. It affects everyone on both sides of the street and on either side of the new house, and it's an impact nobody thinks about. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 05:50 AM with construction, people working on the new houses park in front of fire hydrants, and on the wrong side of the street, and block the passage of other cars. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:28 AM It's the construction parking creating the parking stress in Morningside. Reduce the tear down permits to no more than one per street in Morningside. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:47 AM Construction adversely impacts street parking Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:15 AM we can only park on one side of the street where we live, which is fine. The issue is neighbors have "claimed" certain spots on the street and they park across the street at the bottom of our driveway, which makes it annoying backing out of our driveway Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:15 AM I like that there is parking only on one side of the street (branson) Q20 Any additional comments about parking? Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 32 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:52 AM The continued construction on Branson street means that construction people often take all the parking spots on our narrow street. It is really aggravating Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:37 AM Construction traffic is a nightmare and often takes all or most of the available on-street parking Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:11 PM Parking enforcement could be improved, especially when several homes are under construction in the neighborhood. Several times over the past few weeks, contractors have blocked the road (double parked), blocked driveways for neighbors, or parked haphazardly which has created situations that are tough to navigate. Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 08:40 AM Like that parking is allowed only on one side to maintain flow of traffic, but this obviously reduces available parking Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:42 AM leave parking restricted on blocks so 1 side you can park on that side and you can't on the other side Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 03:12 PM Streets can be tight with parking on both sides Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM We have a single car garage with a short driveway (one car is in garage the other car is in the driveway or parked in the street. Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 04:07 PM keep business parking off nearby neighboring streets Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 12:26 PM No Screen Name Redacted 6/25/2021 03:03 PM Our street is extremely busy with construction parking. Sometimes it is not very controlled, making it challenging to get through the street and/or challenging to get out of the driveway. I worry about emergency vehicles being able to get through at times, if needed. Screen Name Redacted On street parking frequently makes roads like Morningside road a Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 33 of 44 6/27/2021 05:03 PM slalom course of vehicles weaving in and out. making it unpleasant to cycle or even drive on. Screen Name Redacted 7/02/2021 09:04 AM I would like to park in the street past November IF there is no snow. It would be nice to start the policy on the first snow and not on a specific date. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM Please enforce the 30 foot set back from corners. Especially at Morningside and Grimes. Sight lines are diminished and cars cannot make turns when something activity is happening at the church or drop off or pick up. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 01:32 PM Neighbor across the street park their cars on the street and only place to park is our side of the street. There are always cars parked outside our house and never space when we need it. Widen road and allow pkg on both sides of the street? Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 09:29 PM Too much of it. Would prefer paid street parking but at our density I know is not feasible. Screen Name Redacted 7/10/2021 03:57 PM the amount of construction vehicles is crazy Screen Name Redacted 7/14/2021 06:33 PM There are so many construction trucks in the neighborhood and in front of my house most days that it's almost impossible to park on the street. Screen Name Redacted 8/08/2021 08:45 AM Glad that parking is now limited to only one side of the street on Oakdale Avenue. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM I believe it is unsafe for people to park vehicles near the crest of the hill on Grimes. Optional question (27 response(s), 38 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Q21 Please tell us anything else you would like us to know about existing traffic or street Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 34 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 09:45 AM Street condition is worsening throughout the Morningside area, largely as a result of the residential construction activity. Heavy trucks are harder on the roads and continual cutting, patching, and repairing for utility hookups is damaging to the roadways. It would be nice if this activity, which is resulting in more damage to the roadways, bears a higher share of the cost of roadway repair. This could be done by fees/taxes associated with residential construction permit process. I do not know if this is part of the project scope but residential construction activity and recent tree trimming by utilities resulted in a number of lost trees on our boulevards. Replacing boulevard trees along Morningside Rd should be made a priority. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM Truck volume due to the number of teardowns is directly responsible for the fast deterioration of our streets. It's ridiculous that residents should have to pay for these excessive repairs. Tax the remodelers. Or have trucks pay to access the job site. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 02:54 PM Morningside is generally off the grid so we are not a thruway. The North South connector of Woodale has been choked down to unreasonable levels from Excelsior thru to 50th. This was the main North South connector ands still should be. Narrowing the street thru Country Club impedes my ability to safely navigate to our doctors at Southdale. Given the mess which 100 and France have become Wooddale is the only safe alternative - Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:34 PM 20 MPH on side streets would be fine. Bigger issue is speeding and complete stops at intersections. This is a walking/running/biking neighborhood. People need to treat it as such. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:09 PM Need repair/ replacement as planned- Thank You!!!! Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:09 PM Grimes is poorly maintained and as a through street should not be sssessed to Morningside residence, but cover by taxes/public works budgets instead of wasting money on 100 year flood management fit lots in a flood plane that Edina developed and collects taxes for. It would have been more cost effective to by up high risk flood lots and turn them into park than pursue the flood conditions in your neighborhood. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 35 of 44 management initiatives - poor city planning Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:28 PM The everyother street stop sign on 38th and 39th st. drives traffic down 42nd st. There's a high flow of vehicles that were East Bound on Excelsior, that instead turn SE on 39th st. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:12 AM Surfaces of streets are poor, which creates safety issue for bicyclists. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:15 AM the street itself is a mess - pot holes, uneven. no issues with traffic,but very difficult to drive or bike down our street (branson) Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:52 AM Could there some way be a limit of the number of construction workers who can park on the street for each home being built. On Branson there are 3 with another tear down expected this month. Plus one on Oakdale. Could some of the workers be required to park further away and double up to get here. We only have parking on one side. It's really difficult. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:11 PM Branson and Oakdale streets are in terrible shape!! There is more pothole patch than original asphalt and the potholes keep coming back because of the Construction and Truck traffic. Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:21 AM 4219 Oakdale Ave. S. Edina, MN Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:42 AM I would finish so sidewalks are on all streets ie Kipling - upper Oakdale not sure where else - I would even consider putting a sidewalk on the south side of 42nd Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 11:17 AM Road is such that entire street drains down our driveway. Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM We have a difficult time backing out of our driveway because of traffic on w42nd street. If we need to park on the street the cars go speeding very close preventing getting in or out of our vehicle. Screen Name Redacted street lights can affect sleep and should use appropriate light Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 36 of 44 6/17/2021 04:07 PM wavelengths Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 12:26 PM Moves to fast for the density of the neighborhood. A lot of children Screen Name Redacted 6/19/2021 07:27 PM Please future proof the streets by including conduit through which fiber optic cable could be run. Screen Name Redacted 6/20/2021 06:32 PM The street is in pretty terrible shape. I'm not going to lie, it feels pretty ridiculous that street repairs are not included in our existing taxes which are some of the highest in the area. Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 08:41 AM My primary concern regarding speeding isn’t listed, and that is that I have 2 kids and we have many kids in our neighborhood that are outside playing every day. Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 02:25 PM 4350 Morningside Rd, Minneapolis, MN 55416, USA 4350 Morningside Rd, Minneapolis, MN 55416, USA Screen Name Redacted 6/29/2021 05:49 AM Traffic is fine except when construction crews fill streets with driving, parking, or temporarily blocking traffic while unloading, etc. Screen Name Redacted 7/02/2021 09:04 AM Our roads look like 3rd world and I have spent a lot of time in the 3rd world. They are unacceptable and in horrible condition. Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM Enforce the speed limits on Grimes. Please Screen Name Redacted 7/14/2021 06:33 PM City Homes has built a lot of homes in the Morningside neighborhood and they have increased the damage to roads and problematic parking. Screen Name Redacted 8/08/2021 08:45 AM Nothing else. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM Thank you for the sidewalk on 42nd!!!!!!! it's always busy and makes a huge difference. I believe a crosswalk is required at the top of the hill where the sidewalk ends. See 14 above. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 37 of 44 Optional question (27 response(s), 38 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 38 of 44 Q22 Do you favor improving streetlights in your neighborhood? (residential streetlights are funded by special assessment) 16 (25.4%) 16 (25.4%) 40 (63.5%) 40 (63.5%) 7 (11.1%) 7 (11.1%) Yes No Other (please specify) Question options Optional question (63 response(s), 2 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 39 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 09:45 AM Morningside Rd Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 12:53 PM W. 42nd Street. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 01:59 PM 44th Street Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 02:54 PM Lynn Avenue Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:10 PM Branson St. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:34 PM Lynn between Morningside and 42st Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:09 PM 42nd street Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 04:12 PM Crocker Avenue Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 05:32 PM Grimes Ave Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:09 PM Grimes Ave. S. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:20 PM Branson Street Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 07:28 PM 42nd St. Screen Name Redacted Grimes Ave Q23 What is your street name? Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 40 of 44 6/15/2021 05:19 AM Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 05:50 AM Branson St. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:12 AM 42nd Street Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:28 AM Oakdale Ave S Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 06:47 AM Branson Street Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:15 AM Lynn Ave Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:15 AM Branson Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:51 AM Oakdale Ave S Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 08:52 AM Branson Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 09:34 AM Oakdale Ave S Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 10:00 AM Crocker Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:24 AM Grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 11:37 AM Oakdale Avenue S Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:11 PM Branson St. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 41 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 05:37 PM lynn ave Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 04:56 AM Crocker Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 08:40 AM lynn Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:21 AM 4219 Oakdale Ave. S. Edina, MN Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:42 AM Crocker Avenue Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 11:17 AM Morningside Road Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 02:12 PM Branson Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 03:12 PM Morningside Rd Screen Name Redacted 6/16/2021 09:02 PM West 42nd street Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 05:50 AM Crocker Screen Name Redacted 6/17/2021 04:07 PM Oakdale Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 09:13 AM Oakdale Ave S Screen Name Redacted 6/18/2021 12:26 PM Grimes Screen Name Redacted 6/19/2021 07:27 PM Crocker Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 42 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/20/2021 03:54 PM Sidell Trail Screen Name Redacted 6/20/2021 06:32 PM Oakdale Ave S Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 05:06 AM West 42nd Street Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 08:41 AM Lynn Ave Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 12:03 PM Lynn Ave Screen Name Redacted 6/22/2021 08:02 AM Oakdale Ave. Screen Name Redacted 6/22/2021 12:32 PM Lynn Avenue Screen Name Redacted 6/24/2021 12:55 PM 42 st w Screen Name Redacted 6/25/2021 03:03 PM Branson St. Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 07:56 AM Branson St (NW Corner of Branson St & Grimes Ave S) Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 02:25 PM Morningside Rd Screen Name Redacted 6/27/2021 05:03 PM Lynn Screen Name Redacted 6/29/2021 05:49 AM Lynn Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 43 of 44 Screen Name Redacted 6/30/2021 05:52 AM Grimes Screen Name Redacted 7/02/2021 09:04 AM Lynn Avenue Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 10:55 AM Grimes Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 01:32 PM Branson Screen Name Redacted 7/06/2021 09:29 PM Branson Screen Name Redacted 7/10/2021 03:57 PM Grimes Av. S Screen Name Redacted 7/14/2021 06:33 PM Oakdale Ave Screen Name Redacted 8/06/2021 08:04 AM W42nd Street Screen Name Redacted 8/08/2021 08:45 AM Oakdale Avenue Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 12:15 PM Grimes Avenue between 42nd and Morningside. Screen Name Redacted 8/09/2021 01:11 PM Lynn Ave Screen Name Redacted 8/13/2021 08:15 AM Grimes Mandatory Question (65 response(s)) Question type: Single Line Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 44 of 44 APPENDIX J Correspondence from Residents 1 Aaron Ditzler From:Chad Millner Sent:Monday, September 16, 2019 8:35 AM To:'MTA' Cc:Aaron Ditzler Subject:RE: 4321 West 42nd Street Edina, MN 55416 Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Mary, Thanks for the note. When we finalize the information, we will send you a copy for your review. Thanks, Chad Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952‐826‐0318 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 cmillner@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: MTA > Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 10:53 AM To: Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: 4321 West 42nd Street Edina, MN 55416 EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Mr. Millner: Re: Sept. 26th open house about my neighborhood roadway reconstruction I am not able to attend the Sept. 26th open house about roadway reconstruction process being considered that could potentially impact my street in summer 2022. I am interested in being informed and would appreciate if you can forward a link or information about this to me. Thank you. Sincerely, Mary 2 Mary T. Absolon 9 Aaron Ditzler From:Christopher Genco > Sent:Tuesday, April 14, 2020 10:54 AM To:Andrew Scipioni Cc:Liz Moore Subject:Re: Inquiry about Morningside Neighborhood Construction 2023 EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Andrew and Liz, Thank you so much for this information. This was very helpful. My wife and I very much appreciate it. Hope you’re staying healthy and safe! Sincerely, Christopher Genco On Apr 13, 2020, at 2:51 PM, Andrew Scipioni <ascipioni@EdinaMN.gov> wrote: Christopher, All streets within the roadway reconstruction project will have the asphalt pavement replaced and either partial or full replacement of concrete curb and gutter (the latter is typically determined one year prior to construction based on existing condition and proposed utility repairs). You are correct that Monterey Rd is not recommended to have a sidewalk per the City’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan and as such, we will likely not recommend installing a new sidewalk as part of the 2023 project. This is a slight chance that residents along Monterey could express interest in a sidewalk during the upcoming public engagement, but I would say this is unlikely. I hope that helps. Let me know if you have any other questions related to proposed sidewalks or bike facilities. <image001.gif> Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner 952-826-0440 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ascipioni@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Liz Moore <LMoore@EdinaMN.gov> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 2:22 PM To: Cc: Andrew Scipioni <ascipioni@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: FW: Inquiry about Morningside Neighborhood Construction 2023 Hi Christopher, 10 I have copied Andrew Scipioni, Transportation Planner. He can answer your below question about sidewalks. Thank you, <image001.gif> Liz Moore, Engineering Admin Coordinator 952-826-0449 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 LMoore@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Find updates on the City’s response to COVID-19 and resources to help at EdinaMN.gov/coronavirus. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Christopher Genco <c Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 2:20 PM To: Liz Moore <LMoore@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: Inquiry about Morningside Neighborhood Construction 2023 EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Liz, Thank you for the quick response. I have been reading the materials on bettertogetheredina.org. One clarification I was wondering if you could clarify this for me. From the Comprehensive Plan for the City of Edina, it looks as if the Lynn Avenue road would have a new sidewalk, but that Monterey Ave does not. I found a similar picture on page 63 of the proposed Pedestrian and Bicyclist Master Plan. Regarding the documents in the September open house (document dated 09/26/2019), does that means that Monterey Rd. will not have a sidewalk, boulevard, curb and gutter done and instead is just curb and gutter? <image002.png> <image003.png> Thank you for your time in clarifying these points. Sincerely, Christopher M. Genco Jr. On Apr 13, 2020, at 12:21 PM, Liz Moore <LMoore@EdinaMN.gov> wrote: Good Afternoon Christopher, Roadway reconstruction in the Morningside Neighborhood has not been postponed. There will not be an estimate of assessment cost until Winter 2022. If you would like additional information on street projects in Edina, please visit https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/streets. 11 Thank you, <image001.gif> Liz Moore, Engineering Admin Coordinator 952-826-0449 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 LMoore@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Find updates on the City’s response to COVID-19 and resources to help at EdinaMN.gov/coronavirus. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Christopher Genco Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 11:15 AM To: Edina Mail <mail@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Inquiry about Morningside Neighborhood Construction 2023 EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good morning Edina Engineering Department, I am a prospective home buyer looking at homes in Edina. I went to the city of Edina’s construction services page and noticed that one of the homes my wife and I are interested in (section C of the Morningside neighborhood) is listed to be up for roadway reconstruction in 2023. Is the information still accurate considering the current conditions, and whether assessment estimates have been made for homes in the Morningside neighborhood? Thank you for your time and I hope you’re healthy and safe. Sincerely, Christopher M. Genco Jr. 15 Aaron Ditzler From:Jesse LaDousa Sent:Tuesday, June 23, 2020 7:39 AM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: Branson & Grimes Street Reconstruction Question EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thanks for the quick response. Jesse LaDousa ‐ mobile > On Jun 22, 2020, at 5:56 PM, Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: > > Jesse, > > Thanks for your question. Unfortunately, it's unknown at this time. > > It depends on potential improvements to the water main and water services. If the water services will be replaced, construction will likely disturb the sidewalk, requiring replacement. We'll have a better understanding of the utilities and sidewalks during summer of 2021. > > Thank you. > > Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer > 952‐826‐0443 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 > 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 > ADitzler@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. > > Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. > > ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ > From: Jesse LaDousa > Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 1:05 PM > To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov>; Liz Moore <LMoore@EdinaMN.gov> > Subject: Branson & Grimes Street Reconstruction Question > > EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > > Good Afternoon ‐ > 16 > I own the property at 4200 Branson St (corner of Branson & Grimes). It appears based on the last open house presentation that both our streets are slated for reconstruction in 2022. I have several sidewalk squares that are in bad need of replacement and I was planning to have them done this summer. I am wondering if the sidewalks will be included in the 2022 reconstruction project? > > Thank you! > > > Jesse LaDousa > ( ‐ Mobile > > > 19 Aaron Ditzler From:Liz Moore Sent:Friday, August 28, 2020 11:27 AM To:' Cc:Lynette Biunno Subject:RE: Branson Street Repair Good Morning Jessica, Branson Street, between Oakdale Avenue and Grimes Avenue, is scheduled for reconstruction in the summer of 2022. Additional information can be found at: https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/2021‐2022‐street‐reconstruction‐ projects Thank you, Liz Moore, Engineering Admin Coordinator 952‐826‐0449 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 LMoore@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Jessica Lin Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 10:14 AM To: Edina Mail <mail@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: Branson Street Repair EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi, Wanted to follow up on this. Thanks > On Aug 15, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Jessica Lin <wrote: > > Hi there, > > Hope you’ve been well! I have lived in Branson Street for 10 years and it’s been a wonderful place to live, but unfortunately since we’ve been here we have never seen the street fixed or rehauled. It now has more cracks, patches, and potholes than actual street. It truly is super worn and you can feel the difference turning onto the street. Does the city have any plans to put down some asphalt over here? Please help keep our street beautiful and functional! > 20 > Thank you, > Jessica 22 Aaron Ditzler From:Chad Millner Sent:Friday, January 22, 2021 6:53 AM To:'Jay Kosters' Subject:RE: Contact for Julia Kosters Attorney-In-Fact Thanks for the information. Please continue to visit this site as we use it as our primary location of information for street reconstruction. https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/ https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/2021‐2022‐street‐reconstruction‐projects Thanks, Chad Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952-826-0318 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Jay Kosters Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2021 4:31 PM To: Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Contact for Julia Kosters Attorney‐In‐Fact EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Chad, Thank you for returning calls today. My request to be added to Edina’s list of property and any other City of Edina notifications etc. on behalf of my mother, Julia Kosters, is a priority to me. Her property address is 4304 42nd Street West with ID 07‐028‐24‐13‐0119. Please forward my contact info to appropriate departments. As I mentioned on the phone she is living autonomously so far and I will support that as long as possible but I want to be appropriately available along the way. So, if you could have Edina’s database include the following information so I can be copied I would be grateful. If you need POA documents I will get them to whomever needs them. Kind regards, Jay A. Kosters 5813 Tingdale Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55436 34 This email, including attachments, is confidential, per the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please take notice that your retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this email is prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you received the message in error and delete it. From: Stacey Huebner Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 12:12 PM To: Chad Millner <cmillner@edinamn.gov> Cc: Andrew Brown ; Scott H. Neal <sneal@edinamn.gov>; James Hovland Ross Bintner <RBintner@edinamn.gov> Subject: Re: Morningside Barr Engineering Project Chad, My mom's property is located at 4101 Kipling Ave. I live out‐of‐state and am doing my best to keep up‐to‐date and informed on this project. Both my mom and I have serious concerns regarding the huge scope of this project and the impacts on her property and access to her home while the work takes place. Sincerely, Stacey Huebner On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 2:37 PM Chad Millner <cmillner@edinamn.gov> wrote: Andy, Thanks for the introduction. Stacey ‐ We've been meeting with residents to better understand concerns and values as we begin design of the project. We would be happy to meet with you and your mother. I have an idea on what property it is but if you can confirm we could take this conversation off‐line. Ross Bintner and I would be happy to discuss. He is copied here. Thanks, Chad Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952‐826‐0318 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Andrew Brown < 35 Sent: Monday, May 3, 2021 12:56 PM To: Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov>; Stacey Huebner < Cc: Scott H. Neal <sneal@EdinaMN.gov>; James Hovland < Subject: Morningside Barr Engineering Project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Stacey, I know your Mom is very concerned about the flood mitigation project that looks to be going on right next to her house. I would imagine Barr engineering will be in and around her property given the recent passage of funds by the council. I’ve attached Edina’s city manager (Scott Neal), City Engineer (Chad Milner) and the Mayor (James Hovland)’s email to this note. I would definitely reach out to them regarding you and your Mom’s concerns regarding access to her garage, loss of any of the beautiful landscaping she has back there and that spectacular pine tree she has. I know you and your family have put a tremendous amount of heart, soul and finances into your family home over the last 45 years. I hope to see you and the family back in town once Covid recedes. Stay safe. Yours truly Andy Brown Sent from my iPhone 36 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, June 1, 2021 10:50 AM To:' Subject:RE: Pink markings 4222 Grimes Ron, The markings are control points for the topographic survey related to the 2022 Roadway Reconstruction Project. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Zuleyka Marquez <ZMarquez@EdinaMN.gov> Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2021 10:15 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: FW: Pink markings 4222 Grimes Can you confirm if this is part of the recon 2022 project and let the resident know? Thanks. Zuleyka Marquez, PE, Graduate Engineer 952-826-0322 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ZMarquez@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: RON BERG < Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 2021 9:18 AM To: Zuleyka Marquez <ZMarquez@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Pink markings 4222 Grimes EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Zule, Here are photos. Any help 37 38 you can provide thanks. Ron Sent from my iPhone 40 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, June 15, 2021 3:06 PM To:'Greg Daggett' Subject:RE: Question: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Greg, Two things: 1. A sidewalk on the west side of Crocker is not proposed. However, this could change if there is enough interest via a petition. https://www.edinamn.gov/formcenter/contact‐usshare‐a‐concern‐33/petition‐to‐the‐city‐council‐262 2. Point taken on the resident survey statement you submitted to BTE. Unfortunately there’s not much we can do to change it this year. We can modify for future projects. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Greg Daggett Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 11:53 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Question: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Aaron, I live at 4238 Crocker Ave. Will the west side (my side) of Crocker get sidewalks with this project? Thanks. Greg 41 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Wednesday, June 16, 2021 5:00 PM To:'John Quinlan' Subject:RE: Morningside Road Construction John, The flood risk reduction scope of work will be paid for using the storm drain utility fund, NOT special assessments. We’ll prepare a formal estimated assessment range later this summer. Based on the number of properties and 2021 costs my “unofficial and too early” estimated range would be $8,000 to $16,000. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: John Quinlan <j om> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 4:18 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Morningside Road Construction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron Hope all is well. I wanted to reach out with a few questions regarding the roadwork that is going to start next year. 1. In regards to the flood work, is the cost of that mitigation being covered by the city, or by special assessment? If special assessment, is it fair to assume the homeowners in the actual flood area are going to be billed for that and not those homes that are at no risk? 2. For the roadwork project. We are looking at budgeting that in and were curious if there is a ballpark for that this is going to cost each homeowner. Obviously nothing confirmed, but just a range would be helpful. Appreciate the help! John 4202 Branson St 44 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, June 22, 2021 10:06 AM To:'Mary Absolon' Subject:RE: Inquiry: Mary Absolon 4321 West 42nd Street Mary, The construction would begin in April or May 2022, and the final assessment invoice would be mailed to you in September or October 2023. Payment options include: ‐ Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid finance charges ‐ Pay minimum 25% of amount without interest and the balance rolls to your property taxes spread over 15 years with interest (typically 3‐4%) ‐ Roll entire amount to property taxes over 15 years spread over 15 years with interest. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952‐826‐0443 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Mary Absolon < Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2021 7:45 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: Inquiry: Mary Absolon 4321 West 42nd Street EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you Aaron. When is it anticipated that this project would start and then be assessed? Thank you. Mary Absolon > On Jun 21, 2021, at 10:53 AM, Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: 45 > > Mary, > > Each project area has unique assessment amount. We'll prepare a formal estimated assessment range later this summer. > > Based on the number of properties and 2021 costs my "unofficial and too early" estimated range would be $8,000 to $16,000 per single family home. > > Thank you. > > Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer > 952‐826‐0443 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 > 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 > ADitzler@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. > > Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. > > ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ > From: Mary Absolon > Sent: Monday, June 21, 2021 7:19 AM > To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> > Subject: Inquiry: Mary Absolon 4321 West 42nd Street > > EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > > Hi Aaron: > > I am trying to better understand the Morningside project and my property. > > Where is information about anticipated assessment for my property and what will this assessment pay for? > > Thank you. > > Mary Absolon > > > > > > 49 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Monday, July 19, 2021 12:10 PM To:'Ryan Sullivan' Subject:RE: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Ryan, I’m happy to answer your questions. 1. Each project area has unique assessment amount. We’ll prepare a formal estimated assessment range later this summer. Based on the number of properties and 2021 costs my “unofficial and too early” estimated range would be $8,000 to $16,000 per single family home. For reference, many Minnesota cities have taxes pay for road reconstruction as well. It’s up to each city to decide how to fund these projects. 2. The City Council selected the $10M option. These stormwater improvements are not assessed to property owners. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Ryan Sullivan Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2021 3:17 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Aaron, Hope you enjoyed your weekend. I'm guessing you wish your email address wasn't posted online about now. A couple of new issues have arisen and I'd love your insight: 1. The idea of a 'Special Assessment' is new to me. Here in Maplewood, NJ, our taxes pay for all road work/utilities needed. That said, how do I find out what the planned 2022 road work is going to cost me personally? Have those costs already been assessed? As I'm currently in the process of purchasing a house in Morningside, it would certainly be helpful to know what charges are coming. 2. Has it been determined which Flood Mitigation plan will be used? I believe there were $5M, $10M & $15M option. Thanks again for your help. 50 ‐Ryan On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 3:42 PM Ryan Sullivan <wrote: Thanks again for your help, Aaron. May all your future internet needs be fast, cheap and reliable! On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 3:38 PM Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: Ryan, The cost of installation is on the private utility firm. My understanding is that they plan to begin submitting permits in fall 2021. We’ve share our reconstruction plans with them for 2022. If they are ready, they could install with the reconstruction project. If they aren’t ready, they will install by trenchless horizontal directional drill method with minimal disruption to the street pavement, turf boulevards, or other infrastructure in the right of way. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Ryan Sullivan Sent: Friday, July 16, 2021 10:03 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Re: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 51 Thank you very much for your rapid response to my inquiry. In looking at coverage maps, it appears Edina is, surprisingly, quite far behind neighboring Linden Hills and St. Louis Park when it comes to providing its residents with fast, reliable and affordable fiber internet. I'm hoping you can share if there are any public forums that I can use to participate in the discussion of advocating for fiber installation while roads are under construction? Would the cost of laying fiber be placed on the City of Edina or do the providers (CenturyLink/Quantum) cover those costs? Many thanks for your help and guidance. ‐Ryan On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:47 AM Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: Ryan, Good question. Discussions regarding fiber optic installation in the City are ongoing. Plans and permit applications to install fiber optic with Morningside project have not yet occurred. If they are approved before spring 2022, the work can be coordinated with the street project. If they are not approved before spring 2022, fiber optic conduit can be installed in the future by trenchless horizontal directional drill method with minimal disruption to the street pavement, turf boulevards, or other infrastructure in the right of way. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov 52 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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Ryan Sullivan Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2021 4:47 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Mr. Ditzler, I hope this finds you well. My family and I are excited to be brand new residents to Morningside (and new to Minneasota) at the end of August. In doing neighborhood research, I understand the roads in Morningside will be replaced in 2022 as well as plumbing efforts to mitigate flooding in the area. I am wondering if you know if there will be fiber internet laid under the roads while they have them open? As a video professional that works from home, I use gobs of upload/download bandwidth and really need the reliability and speed of fiber. I've spoken with local vendors (CenturyLink/Quantum and US Internet) and neither provide service to the neighborhood. I would appreciate any insight you can provide. Many thanks. ‐Ryan ‐‐ 53 Ryan Sullivan Maplewood, NJ 07040 P.2 M ‐‐ 3 Aaron Ditzler From:Jonathan G Sent:Monday, August 9, 2021 4:20 PM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: Homeowner responsibilities during street reconstruction Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron, Thanks for your prompt reply and clarifications. I will give you a call, but just to be clear from the start, I absolutely do not want a sidewalk on the steep hill in front of my house. The City Council voted explicitly to NOT extend the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes; a very wise decision indeed. Would you extend it to the corner taking out 5 huge maples in the process? Not extend it to the corner and end it on my driveway where pedestrians would then cross 75 feet from the corner and blind to oncoming cars speeding over the top of the hill? I'm baffled by your suggestion. That idea may look good on a map, but the ground truth will quickly correct that. Jonathan On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 3:58 PM Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: Jonathan, Give me a call to discuss the City extending the sidewalk in front of your home. Answers to your questions are below. The City will do its best to replace landscaping impacted by construction at no additional cost to you. If there is something unique that can’t be replaced and it’s within 10 +/‐ of the existing curb, we recommend you relocate it prior to construction. Property owners have no responsibility to do anything with utilities with this project. If construction impacts utilities, the City will reconnect at no additional cost to you. We do encourage residents to inspect their private utilities to see if they need to be replaced. This is not required. Thank you. 4 m m m m Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Jonathan G Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 2:27 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Homeowner responsibilities during street reconstruction EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Ditzler, I am having trouble understanding some specifics about the street reconstruction taking place next year on Grimes Avenue. The site indicates that homeowners are responsible for protecting/transplanting landscaping. How close to the curb do we need to be concerned? There is no sidewalk in front of my house. Are we required to reconnect water and sewer to the new utilities? How do we coordinate this? The lines to my house connect under the front steps, and run under ornamental plantings and a patterned cobblestone walkway. Will these need to be removed and replaced? How do I or my contractor coordinate with the city. Sincerely, Jonathan Gross 4208 Grimes Ave S Edina, MN 55416 (If no answer, please leave a message so I know it's not spam) From:Randall Larson To:Aaron Ditzler; Jonathan G Subject:Re: Continuation of the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes Avenue near 42nd Street West Date:Thursday, September 16, 2021 11:06:03 AM Attachments:image002.png EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you Aaron. We really appreciate that. So do our giant beautiful maple trees! Randall Larson | Chief Creative Officer From: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Date: Thursday, September 16, 2021 at 11:01 AM To: Jonathan G Cc: Randall Larson < Subject: RE: Continuation of the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes Avenue near 42nd Street West Jonathan, When we write the Engineering Study and present to the City Council in December, we will not include a recommendation for extending the Grimes Ave sidewalk. For reference, the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) will review and comment on the draft Engineering Study in November. The ETC prepares their own recommendations, and the ETC may agree or disagree with Engineering’s recommendations. The ETC has no authority to approve a sidewalk extension, but in December the City Council typically likes to review the ETC recommendations. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-03927450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Jonathan G Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 10:07 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Randy Larson Subject: Continuation of the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes Avenue near 42nd Street West EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Ditzler, I wonder if you would clarify an aspect of the Morningside Neighborhood Reconstruction Project for 2022 relative to a telephone conversation we had a few weeks ago? Point 5 on the list of work typically included (https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningside-d-e?tool=qanda#tool_tab) is: · Concrete sidewalk installation where gaps in the network exist, and in our conversation you mentioned that a new sidewalk was to be constructed closing the gap in continuity of the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes from the top of the hill to the corner of 42nd Street. However, the PedestrianFacilities Master Plan dated January 2020 shows that segment remaining empty. Is the information that I have out of date? Are there plans to build a sidewalk on the lots of the three houses between the top of the hill and the corner? We object to the construction of a sidewalk across these three lots. There are a number of practical reasons that we would object to the construction of a new sidewalk at this location, but before we sign a petition objecting to the construction, we need to know if this is actually in the plans for the project. Sincerely, Jonathan Gross 4208 Grimes Avenue South. From:Jonathan G To:Aaron Ditzler Cc:Randy Larson Subject:Re: Continuation of the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes Avenue near 42nd Street West Date:Thursday, September 16, 2021 11:05:18 AM Attachments:image002.png EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thanks, Aaron! On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 11:01 AM Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: Jonathan, When we write the Engineering Study and present to the City Council in December, we will not includea recommendation for extending the Grimes Ave sidewalk. For reference, the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) will review and comment on the draftEngineering Study in November. The ETC prepares their own recommendations, and the ETC mayagree or disagree with Engineering’s recommendations. The ETC has no authority to approve asidewalk extension, but in December the City Council typically likes to review the ETCrecommendations. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Jonathan G > Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 10:07 AMTo: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov>Cc: Randy LarsonSubject: Continuation of the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes Avenue near 42nd Street West EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mr. Ditzler, I wonder if you would clarify an aspect of the Morningside Neighborhood Reconstruction Project for2022 relative to a telephone conversation we had a few weeks ago? Point 5 on the list of work typicallyincluded (https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningside-d-e?tool=qanda#tool_tab) is: · Concrete sidewalk installation where gaps in the network exist, and in our conversation you mentioned that a new sidewalk was to be constructed closing the gap in continuity of the sidewalk on the west side of Grimes from the top of the hill to the corner of 42nd Street. However, the Pedestrian Facilities Master Plan dated January 2020 shows that segment remaining empty. Is the information that I have out of date? Are there plans to build a sidewalk on the lots of the threehouses between the top of the hill and the corner? We object to the construction of a sidewalk across these three lots. There are a number of practicalreasons that we would object to the construction of a new sidewalk at this location, but before we sign apetition objecting to the construction, we need to know if this is actually in the plans for the project. Sincerely, Jonathan Gross 4208 Grimes Avenue South. 1 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Tuesday, September 21, 2021 9:21 AM To:Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson Cc:Charles Gerk Subject:RE: A new question has been added to Morningside Flood Infrastructure Project Jessica, Please respond as follows: Yes, poor subgrade soils under the pavement are removed during construction and replaced with crushed rock. The City’s field staff will review the soils during construction to determine the appropriate depth of crushed rock to ensure a 50‐year roadway life. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson <jwilson@edinamn.gov> Sent: Friday, September 17, 2021 3:12 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov>; Charles Gerk <cgerk@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: FW: A new question has been added to Morningside Flood Infrastructure Project Aaron and Charlie, Could you help me answer this question below? Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, CFM, Water Resources Coordinator 952-826-0445 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 jwilson@edinamn.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Better Together Edina <notifications@engagementhq.com> Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 3:09 PM To: MJ Lamon <MLamon@EdinaMN.gov>; Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson <jwilson@edinamn.gov> Subject: A new question has been added to Morningside Flood Infrastructure Project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi there, 2 Just a quick heads up to let you know that a new question has been asked at Morningside Flood Infrastructure Project by ATH. The question that was asked is: Will the subgrade material below the kipling and Lynn road be removed and replaced with better fill material prior to compaction and repaving of the roads? The current subgrade material is obviously not compacted well and mostly likely filled with organics leading to deformation of a lot of the roads. Please DO NOT reply to this email. If you want to provide an answer to this question, sign into your site and respond to the question from within the Q & A tool. Regards Bang The Table Team 3 Aaron Ditzler From:Rick Hardy < Sent:Tuesday, October 19, 2021 9:15 AM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: Morningside D&E roadway reconstruction project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron, Thank you for the response and confirmations. I’m sorry about getting your name wrong on the initial e‐mail….I had one too many multi‐tasking things going on I guess! Best, Rick > On Oct 19, 2021, at 8:07 AM, Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: > > Rick, > > Yes, your property at 4245 Sidell Trail will be assessed 0.5 REUs. > > We'll put the intersection on the "existing drainage issue" list for review and modification during the design this winter. > > Thank you. > > > Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer > 952‐826‐0443 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 > 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 > ADitzler@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. > > Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. > > ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ > From: Rick Hardy > Sent: Monday, October 18, 2021 4:31 PM > To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> > Subject: Morningside D&E roadway reconstruction project > > EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. > > 4 > Hello Adam, > > My name is Rick Hardy, and my wife, Sarah and I are the owners/residents at 4245 Sidell Trail, formerly 4408 Morningside Road. I was unaware until recently that our section of Monringside Rd. and the surrounding area would be reconstructed in 2022. As the planning for this is likely already underway, I’d like to bring two things to your attention, and hope they can be confirmed before the project begins: > > ‐ Since we are at a corner (Northeast corner of Morningside Rd. & Sidell Trl.), my understanding is that our assessment is calculated as 50% of 1 REU for this project. In our case, our “front” street is Sidell Trail, which based on the map is not part of the project area (makes sense since Sidell Trail was recently built). Our “side” street is now Morningside Road, and this is the result of our address moving to the current 4245 Sidell Trl. from the old 4408 Morningside Rd. when Sidell Trail was completed (see attached confirmation from the City). This change is not reflected accurately in the project area map on the website. Can you please confirm then that the assessment we will receive for this project will be only for 50% of 1 REU? > > ‐ When Sidell Trail was constructed, the drainage at the intersection with Morningside Road was not properly done. Large puddles form after every rain, and there is very hazardous freeze/refreeze in the crosswalk just off our corner of the intersection all winter long. No amount of shoveling / ice breaking / sand / salt by us can fix this issue to keep the crosswalk safe ‐ and the crosswalk is not even our responsibility! We have taken to a makeshift sign just to warn people. When the road was built we had numerous exchanges with both City Homes (the developers) and the City of Edina Engineering Department and Residential Redevelopment Coordinator. Nothing was ever done to fix the issue, and so it’s still a problem. My hope is that as Morningside Road is reconstructed, we can provide appropriate drainage where it intersects with Sidell Trail ‐ can you please confirm that this can and will be done? > > Thanks very much for your attention and assistance with these items. We appreciate the opportunity to weigh in on the project, and have a person that is “listening.” > > Best, > Rick Hardy > Cell: > 5 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Monday, November 1, 2021 4:12 PM To:'Gordon Smith' Subject:RE: Questions about Morningside D & E project Gordon, Now is a fine time. You're welcome to discuss at the public hearing on December 13 as well. We plan to narrow West 42nd Street from its current width (30‐32' wide) to 27' wide. This street width change, with continued parking on both sides should provide some traffic calming. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952‐826‐0443 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Gordon Smith < Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 11:25 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Questions about Morningside D & E project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Aaron, I had a couple of questions regarding the design of the project and the new roadways. These specifically relate to any efforts to calm traffic on 42nd St (it seems with the high number of stop signs in SLP just to the north, many people view 42nd St as a speedway to cut through the neighborhood, nevermind the kids crossing to the bus stop!). My primary question to you is: when and where is the best venue to voice those concerns to the city staff and engineers for the project? Thanks in advance, Gordon Smith 4500 W. 42nd St. 6 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Friday, November 12, 2021 11:39 AM To:Chad Millner Cc:Evan Acosta; Charles Gerk; Edinah Machani Subject:RE: 4311 Grimes Ave - 2022 Street Recon - ADA Access We’ve got it on the list to resolve. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 11:32 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov>; Charles Gerk <cgerk@EdinaMN.gov>; Evan Acosta <EAcosta@EdinaMN.gov>; Edinah Machani <EMachani@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: 4311 Grimes Ave ‐ 2022 Street Recon ‐ ADA Access I just had a conversation with the owner at 4311 Grimes. She has a son with mobility challenges. She has to transport him to a program and needs vehicle access to the back of the house to get him into the car. I told her we would reach out prior to construction to determine if the access is across the neighbors half of the apron or a temp access across her yard. She needs access most of the time. Her phone number is I did not add this to the project spreadsheet. Thanks, Chad Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952-826-0318 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. 1 Aaron Ditzler From:Engelsma, Jamie <com> Sent:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 5:24 PM To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: Morningside D & E Roadway project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you for the info. And follow up!! Sent from my iPhone On Nov 30, 2021, at 5:05 PM, Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: Jamie, Your property was assessed a full 1.0 residential equivalent unit (REU) for the 2014 roadway reconstruction project. Therefore, your property will be assessed 0 REU for the 2022 project, yielding a $0 assessment. Thank you. <image001.gif> Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Engelsma, Jamie Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 4:00 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Morningside D & E Roadway project EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron – Good afternoon. I am writing in regards to the Morningside D & E Roadway project. I live at 4114 Morningside Road. I see that our home has been identified as part of the proposed assessment for the project. As I look at the map of the homes that are identified for the proposed assessment, it appears to me that every house that is identified for assessment has an address, front door or a driveway on the reconstructed streets, except for ours. 2 Looking at the proposed work for the project, a lot of it doesn’t pertain to us. 1. Complete reconstruction of the asphalt pavement. We do not have an address, front door or driveway on the impacted street. 2. Spot replacement, or full replacement of the concrete curb and gutter. Curb and gutter does not need to be replaced at our Grimes facing portion of the street. 3. Replacement of Fire hydrants and watermain gate valves. Our nearest fire hydrant is on Morningside. I am not sure where this is fed from, Morningside or Grimes, or if this is part of the proposed project. If residential water lines are being worked on, ours is on Morningside road. 4. Improvements to sanitary and storm sewer. Our nearest catch basins are on Morningside road, which do not appear to currently be in the yellow portion of the reconstructed area. 5. Concrete sidewalk installation where gaps in the network exist. We have full sidewalks in good shape. No work is needed. Very little of this project impacts us except for potentially benefits from the fire hydrant upgrade, which as I mentioned, I am not sure if this is part of the project. Below is a screen grab from one of the preliminary project documents. I have circled our home. I think this document more correctly excludes our home from included in the scope of work, and the assessment. <image003.png> I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss some of the details of this project with you or someone else from the engineering department. Kindly Jamie Engelsma, 4114 Morningside Road IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is privileged and confidential within the meaning of applicable law. Accordingly dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message or any of this contents by any person other than the Intended Recipient may constitute a breach of civil or criminal law and is strictly prohibited. If you are not the Intended Recipient, please contact the sender as soon as possible. All information or opinions expressed in this message and/or any attachments are those of the author, and are not necessarily those of our organization. All reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this E‐mail. As our organization accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this E‐mail or attachments, we recommend that you subject these to IMPORTANT NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the person(s) to whom it is addressed. It may contain information which is privileged and confidential within the meaning of applicable law. Accordingly dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of this message or any of this contents by any person other than the Intended Recipient may constitute a breach of civil or criminal law and is strictly prohibited. If you are not the Intended Recipient, please contact the sender as soon as possible. All information or opinions expressed in this message and/or any attachments are those of the author, and are not necessarily those of our organization. All reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this E‐mail. As our organization accepts no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this E‐mail or attachments, we recommend that you APPENDIX K Flood Risk Reduction Strategy 0 CITY OF EDINA FLOOD RISK REDUCTION STRATEGY April 7, 2020 City of Edina, Engineering Department www.EdinaMN.gov 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Problem statement ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Project initiation ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Pathways to structural flood risk .............................................................................................................. 8 Groundwater levels are increasing: summary of monitoring data ....................................................... 9 Flood risk factors ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Drivers of increasing flood risk ............................................................................................................... 10 Getting to scale: a challenging problem made even more challenging, climate change impact analysis ................................................................................................................................................ 12 Climate Action Plan: in progress item ................................................................................................. 12 Formulating a Strategy ................................................................................................................................ 13 Comprehensively Reduce Flood Risk throughout the Community ......................................................... 13 The gap between the current Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan and the Strategy 14 City Sectors of Work ................................................................................................................................... 15 Infrastructure .......................................................................................................................................... 15 Go Big, Go Bigger: infrastructure analysis .......................................................................................... 16 Morningside Roadway Reconstruction Engineering Study: in progress item ..................................... 17 Regulation ............................................................................................................................................... 19 Keep your water to yourself: private infrastructure analysis ............................................................. 21 From ‘ill-drained’ to impervious: impervious surface analysis ........................................................... 22 Impervious limit: in progress item ...................................................................................................... 23 Outreach and Engagement ..................................................................................................................... 23 Outreach products: in progress item .................................................................................................. 24 Emergency Services ................................................................................................................................ 24 Strategy Development ................................................................................................................................ 25 Task Force role and process .................................................................................................................... 25 Brainstorming, prioritizing, and categorizing possible actions ............................................................... 27 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 27 Acknowledgement ...................................................................................................................................... 29 Appendix ..................................................................................................................................................... 30 Appendix A: Resident Task Force Report .................................................................................................. A 2 Appendix B: ‘Getting to scale: a challenging problem made even more challenging, climate change impact analysis’, technical memo ............................................................................................................. B Appendix C: ‘Go Big, Go Bigger: infrastructure analysis’, technical memo .............................................. C Appendix D: ‘Keep your water to yourself: private infrastructure analysis’, technical memo ................. D Appendix E: ‘From ‘ill-drained’ to impervious: impervious surface analysis’, technical memo ............... E Appendix F: Actions for Flood Resilient Homes, fact sheets .................................................................... F Appendix G: Task Force charge ................................................................................................................ G Appendix H: Potential action matrix key, ranked response, and potential action matrix ........................H 3 Executive Summary This flood risk reduction strategy summarizes the framework for understanding risk and how we can connect on the promise to comprehensively reduce the risk of flooding throughout the community. Over a ten-month period, a task force of staff and community members worked to come to a shared understanding of what flooding is, what is valuable, and what matters, where, and to whom. Structural flood risk occurs through a variety of pathways; over the land surface, through groundwater seepage, and via sanitary backflow. Efforts to reduce risk depend on time. The best time to reduce flood vulnerability is before the flood. During a flood, the focus shifts to staying safe from harm, or sustaining or restoring services. After the flood, we focus on recovering and reviewing risk. Over the land surface Groundwater seepage Sanitary backflow Through the process, we come to a new understanding of the factors that define flood risk. Climate, exposure, and vulnerability vary with time, and across the landscape, assets, and people that characterize the community. Short term (weather), mid-term (seasonal), and long term (climate) risks. Rainfall varies over time, and climate change increases the extremes. The degree to which property, homes, buildings, infrastructure and other assets come into contact with flood water. The degree to which exposed assets, both public and private, are unable to resist flooding and are damaged by floods. 4 Conventional flood risk management focuses primarily on reducing exposure to flooding or transferring risk, although sometimes in unknown or unexpected ways. This often means public capital infrastructure projects to modify the flood or regulatory standards applied when properties develop or redevelop. Through this framework we recognize that the public realm is a large opportunity space to reduce risk, but not the only one. Some of the simplest and most cost-effective ways to reduce risk are for people to reduce the vulnerability of their structures and property. This framework calls for public and private actions to reduce community flood risk. Additionally, the framework recognizes climate as a factor. Increasing climate extremes drive exposure and demand adaptation or resilience to mitigate the change. We explored the factors that are driving increasing flood risk. The primary and secondary drivers are climate change and aging infrastructure. Well-drained landscapes and imperviousness also matter, but are more historical drivers of flood risk. Climate change is making storms more intense and increasing the chance of extended wet periods or drought. Climate change has already, and will expose more assets to flooding in the future. This driver is predicted to overwhelm the other drivers in terms of scale. Private and public assets and infrastructure are both exposed and vulnerable. Public infrastructure can define flood exposure for different points in the landscape, and serve as a pathway for private risk. Public infrastructure assets are old and not capable of meeting the current demand. This is a significant driver as infrastructure provides most stormwater service. Development has connected the landscape to the water to make land well- drained. While this a major historic driver, it is a minor driver increasing future flood exposure. Most of the drainage and land development decisions have already been made, and cannot be unmade. There is additional demand for drainage that can reduce vulnerability, but marginally affects flood exposure downstream. Community demand for garages, parking areas, patios, decks, pools, and bigger homes has increased the hard cover of soils. Imperviousness drives runoff in small storms and marginally affects flood exposure in large storms. 5 These efforts to put flooding into focus have resulted in the creation of this framework to connect on the promise to comprehensively reduce the risk of flooding throughout the community. Approaches for managing risk include reducing exposure, reducing vulnerability, transferring and sharing risks, increasing resilience to changing risks, and preparing, responding and recovering from floods. Through the following areas of work, we will work with the community to comprehensively reduce flood risk. INFRASTRUCTURE: We will renew our infrastructure and operate it to reduce risk. We will plan public streets and parks to accept and transmit flood waters to reduce the risk and disruption of related city services. REGULATION: We acknowledge competing demands of land use and addressing drainage, groundwater, and surface water issues. We help people solve issues without harming another. OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT: We make flood information available and give people tools for flood resilience. EMERGENCY SERVICES: We help people prepare for floods, remove people from harm during floods, and recover after floods. Staff would like to thank the Task Force for their contributions. The experience, knowledge, and curiosity they brought to the process added value and influenced the Strategy. Nora Davis (co-chair), Lake Cornelia Neighborhood Kathy Amlaw (co-chair), Lake Edina Neighborhood Greg Lincoln, Morningside Neighborhood Michael Platteter, Morningside Neighborhood Louise Segreto, Indian Hills Neighborhood Roxane Lehmann, Sunny Slope Neighborhood Richard Strong, Concord Neighborhood Richard Manser, Todd Park Neighborhood City of Edina budget goals Strong Foundation: Maintain physical assets and infrastructure. Livable City: Plan for connected and sustainable development. Reliable Service: Maintain service levels that best meet the needs of the community. Better Together: Foster an inclusive and engaged community. 6 Problem statement Flooding can affect people, damage property, threaten health and safety, and disrupt transportation and business. Flooding is common in Edina and climate change is expected to make flooding worse. Flooding has historically been considered a technical problem, requiring a technical solution. Land ownership, space, legislation, and hydrology are interwoven with values about problem ownership, water stewardship, service tradeoffs, and transferring risk. When there is consensus on both values and knowledge, the problem is a technical one. A scientific problem is one in which there is consensus on values, but disagreement on knowledge. A political problem is one in which there is consensus on knowledge, but disagreement on values. When there is disagreement on both knowledge and values, the problem is a social one. Timothy M. Gieseke. Shared Governance for Sustainable Working Landscapes What was once considered purely a technical problem may be more of a mix of a technical, scientific, political, and social one. This type of problem requires a different set of strategies, skill sets, and tools. Project initiation In September 2018 City Council adopted the 2018 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. The implementation section of the plan included development of a Flood Risk Reduction Strategy. A City Manager Task Force of Edina residents was formed to provide a community voice to the process. The City recognizes the contribution of these individuals and appreciates the value they’ve provided. Resident Task Force members; Nora Davis (co-chair), Lake Cornelia Neighborhood Kathy Amlaw (co-chair), Lake Edina Neighborhood Greg Lincoln, Morningside Neighborhood Michael Platteter, Morningside Neighborhood Louise Segreto, Indian Hills Neighborhood Roxane Lehmann, Sunny Slope Neighborhood Richard Strong, Concord Neighborhood Richard Manser, Todd Park Neighborhood 7 The Task Force was charged with supporting and providing recommendations to inform the development of this strategy, specifically to; • Incorporate local challenges, opportunities, knowledge, and community values. • Incorporate voices from throughout the City of Edina. While the Morningside neighborhood has been identified as a focal area for case study, strategies and outcomes ought to be scalable city- wide. • Identify action steps for building community capacity to address flood risk and resiliency in Edina. In July 2019 staff began working with a resident Task Force to develop a Flood Risk Reduction Strategy. The group met over a dozen times, investing hundreds of hours collectively. The strategy doesn’t solve flooding. We’ve learned that it’s too big of a problem to solve outright; however, we’ve charted a path to reduce the risk of flooding. Through this effort, we; • Explored technical questions like, “How much does impervious cover matter?”, “What kind of flood risk does the future hold in the wake of a changing climate?”, “How much benefit can private storage provide?”, and “How much benefit can bigger infrastructure provide?” • Interviewed the operators and maintainers of the system to better understand the level of service the system currently provides and its vulnerabilities. • Gained a better understanding of the factors and drivers that influence flood risk. • Described the various ways in which structural flooding occurs; over the land surface, through groundwater seepage, and sanitary sewer backflow. • Defined the areas within which we already work and identified other actions the City could undertake, connecting these areas of work to Council work plan goals. • Widened our approaches for reducing flood risk. • Heard people share their experience and knowledge about flooding. The Task Force shared their community values around flood risk and informed the framework and strategy. Based on Council and community feedback, the Morningside neighborhood was selected as the focal area for the Flood Risk Reduction Strategy. Further description about how the neighborhood was used to test ideas is provided in the Strategy Development section of this report. Throughout this report, we briefly highlight relevant in-progress items and summaries of the technical analyses – more detailed memorandums describing the technical analyses are provided in the Appendix. 8 Pathways to structural flood risk Too much water from rain or melting snow can overwhelm the system. Pipes run full, intersections flood, lakes and creeks overtop their banks, water flows over the land surface, sidewalks and paths become impassible, yards are inundated, groundwater builds up, water seeps through basement walls and floors, and water can back up into homes through sanitary sewers. 9 Groundwater levels are increasing: summary of monitoring data Groundwater levels are increasing: summary of monitoring data In the winter of 2020 Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District separately convened local water resources and emergency managers to share their groundwater level monitoring data. After a string of exceptionally wet years and a record-breaking precipitation year in 2019, lakes and creeks are high, the ground is saturated and, in many places, groundwater level monitoring records show water table elevations are on the rise. Data from the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District showed one groundwater monitoring well in Edina near Bredesen Park had an increase of about 15 feet since 2010. In areas where the depth to the regional groundwater table is shallow, structures with basements are at an increased risk for flooding from groundwater seepage. Groundwater is difficult to map. It’s dynamic, inconsistent, and the distribution can vary drastically from what we see on the land surface. Flood risk factors Flood Risk: Flood risk is determined by climate, exposure, and vulnerability. Flood Exposure: The degree to which property, homes, buildings, infrastructure, and other assets come into contact with flood water. Flood Vulnerability: The degree to which exposed assets are unable to resist flooding and are damaged by floods. For example, two homes side-by-side might have the same flood exposure, but one home might be less vulnerable to the exposure. Vulnerability can be decreased with the installation of downspouts, proper grading, a basement sump pump, waterproof or reinforced foundations, mature trees with strong root systems, and excellent drainage through well-designed rain gardens, among other things. Flood risk factors and definitions adapted from IPCC, 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 10 Drivers of increasing flood risk Flooding issues within the City of Edina continue to increase in frequency and severity. The following have been identified as primary drivers leading to increased flood risk. Climate change and changing weather patterns: • Climate change is the lead driver of increasing flood risk in Edina. Climatologists indicate that large, intense rainfall events are occurring more frequently, and models predict that large rainfall events will become more intense in the future. Minnesota is already experiencing prolonged wet periods; in fact, the years between 2015 and 2019 were the wettest in Minnesota history and we can expect more wet years in the future. This increase is also impacting neighboring communities, is occurring at the international, national, state, and watershed levels, and is expected to get much worse. • With the update to the Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, the most recent precipitation frequency estimates were incorporated into the City’s flood model which showed increased flood risk throughout the City. It should be noted that this data only brings us to current climate conditions and does not provide protection for additional future risk caused by climate change. • Modeling of storms and flood risk, and visualization of that risk has improved dramatically in recent decades, leading to better community perception of risk. • See ‘Getting to scale: a challenging problem made even more challenging, climate change impact analysis’ and ‘Climate Action Plan: in progress item’ sections of this report. Aging and obsolete infrastructure: • Infrastructure is aging, and much is in poor repair, stretching maintenance and operations staff thin. Current resources dictate a reactive approach instead of a proactive approach. • The current stormwater system was built for a different time and standard. Climate change has already increased the risk and made most of the system obsolete. • Needs far exceed available resources. Flooding issues are extensive and improvements that address the 1%-annual-chance storm are often out of reach at current levels of funding. 11 Demand for well-drained landscapes: • Development has connected the landscape to the water to make land well drained. Demand for well-drained landscapes has led to private and public drain line and gutter expansion. This expansion directly connects the landscape and the water generated there to downstream properties and waterbodies. • While this a major historic driver, it is a minor driver increasing future flood exposure. Most of the drainage and land development decisions have been made, but there are some public and private system retrofits that continue to connect landscape and water bodies, marginally affecting flood exposure. Imperviousness: • Community demand for garages, parking areas, patios, decks, pools, and bigger homes has increased the hard cover of soils. • There is an increasing trend of imperviousness in the City of Edina. Specifically, within the focal area of Morningside, nearly one million square feet of impervious surfaces (homes, structures, driveways, patios, swimming pools, etc.) have been added since 1950. This equates to about 14% of the total size of occupied parcels in the Morningside neighborhood (2019, City of Edina staff). • This is a minor driver increasing future flood exposure. Most of the land development decisions have been made, but small additions to impervious cover marginally affect flood exposure. Soils can’t soak up the amounts of water floods provide. • See ‘Keep your water to yourself: private infrastructure analysis’, ‘From ‘ill-drained’ to impervious: impervious surface analysis’, and ‘Impervious limit: in progress item’ sections of this report. 12 Getting to scale: a challenging problem made even more challenging, climate change impact analysis Getting to scale: a challenging problem made even more challenging, climate change impact analysis Through the Task Force process, staff heard the sentiment, “Stop studying the problem, you have the answer, it’s time to act.” While action is needed now, this report rebuts the sentiment that we have the answers. Our new understanding of risk in the 2018 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan show the system is overloaded. We now can more easily see how ‘solving’ a problem in one area can make a downstream problem worse. ‘Solutions’ need to review downstream risk and be packaged together comprehensively, acknowledging or mitigating the risk transfer. Packaging problems requires a scale of effort that has not been attempted in Edina, and the scales contemplated still do not totally ‘solve’ the problem, instead they may not even be keeping up with climate change. Climate change is changing the target. Solutions of today have to accommodate more water than in the past, and solutions have to withstand the effects of climate change in the future. We need a new approach to planning. It is necessary to shift the approach from trying to reduce flood exposure for some, to reducing the vulnerability to flooding for all. A memorandum describing the analysis in more detail is available in the appendix. Climate Action Plan: in progress item Climate Action Plan: in progress item Development of a Climate Action Plan would further outline and prioritize actions for climate change mitigation and adaptation. City staff is working to scope a process for creating a Climate Action Plan for Edina. The Energy and Environment Commission recently completed a study and report on a timeline and parameters for such a plan, including the City’s leadership role. Undoubtedly, carbon reduction in both the private and public sectors will be an area of opportunity. In order to meet community-wide emission reduction goals, it will take a process that includes the community to understand what actions are important and how to prioritize them. There is a clear overlap between addressing flood risk and mitigating climate change. To that end, it is prudent that the Flood Risk Reduction Strategy inform the larger Climate Action Plan work of the City’s Sustainability Manager and Energy and Environment Commission. 13 Formulating a Strategy Comprehensively Reduce Flood Risk throughout the Community Flooding in Edina is not only common, it’s increasing. The City of Edina’s strategy is to comprehensively reduce risk throughout the community. This means we address flooding through a broad range of actions and that decisions consider the assets and people that characterize the City. Approaches for managing risk include reducing exposure, reducing vulnerability, transferring and sharing risks, increasing resilience to changing risks, and preparing, responding and recovering from floods. Adapted from IPCC, 2012: Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Strategy helps answer the question, “What are we trying to accomplish?” Every community has limited resources and deals with its own unique challenges – strategy acts as a guide to a set of actions and filters out those that do not fit. Tactics help answer the question, “How are we going to accomplish our goal?” Tactics are the actions within the following City sectors of work; infrastructure, regulation, outreach and engagement, and emergency services. Each sector of work supports a City Council budget work plan goal. Flood Risk Reduction Approaches Reduce Exposure Reduce Vulnerability Transfer and Share Risks Increase Resilience to Changing Risks Prepare, Respond, and Recover 14 These areas of work and the current state of practice are spelled out in greater detail in the water resources chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. The gap between the current Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan and the Strategy Past iterations and the current Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan have focused primarily on reducing exposure to flooding or transferring risk, although sometimes in unknown or unexpected ways. This often means capital infrastructure projects to modify the flood or regulatory standards applied when properties develop or redevelop. The current Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan outlines projects that add or upsize pipes or surface flood storage. This narrow approach has some pitfalls. • First, it limits the approaches, and thereby the actions that could be implemented to reduce flood risk. The actions focus on reducing exposure only. Many opportunities exist using 15 approaches to reduce vulnerability, transfer and share risks, increase resiliency to changing risks, and preparing, or responding, and recovering from flooding. • Second, it ignores the risk transferred to downstream people and assets. Many of the capital infrastructure projects don’t consider impacts outside the immediate project area. In a fully developed landscape, many of the downstream storage areas in Edina and in our neighboring communities are already full. • Third, it implies that the public realm is the only opportunity space to reduce risk – some of the simplest and most cost-effective ways to reduce risk are for people to reduce the vulnerability of their structures and property. Some resources to this end have been developed as part of this process (see Outreach Products in the Outreach and Education section of this report). • Fourth, it doesn’t recognize the lead driver; climate change, and sets us on a path in which we cannot catch up to the increasing risk. The strategy and associated actions must be able to scale to the problem. City Sectors of Work The City of Edina works in the following four sectors to reduce community flood risk. Detailed in each sector overview is; a statement of the intended outcome of the work, a list of the City departments and partners who lead the work, a list of City departments and partners who help, are involved, or are part of the process, a description of when and how flood risk is considered, and a summary of gaps identified during detailed discussions with the Task Force. Infrastructure What is the outcome; Building stormwater infrastructure that manages areas of flood flow and storage that, with the landscape, define areas of vulnerability. Reducing the vulnerability of infrastructure so they are durable to extreme events or fail-safe. Reducing exposure and vulnerability of related sanitary sewer infrastructure that can serve as a conduit for flood waters between structures. The service provided by water resource and other infrastructure is defined in the 2018 City of Edina Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. Who does the work; Public Works Department, Engineering Department, property owners, private redevelopment, and contractors. Who is involved; Planning Department, Building Department, and future property owners. When flooding risk is considered; At decision points, in projects, during design, failure analysis, and during infrastructure planning. Gaps; Actual service level falls short of expected service, aging infrastructure, reactive maintenance, reactive emergency response, capital improvements do not have scale to ‘fix it’ or even keep up with climate change trend. Pace of redevelopment: Currently driven by owners of at-risk properties. 16 Enhancing public infrastructure by building new, retrofitting old, and keeping what we have in working condition is a key action to reducing flood exposure. Stormwater systems route water to low areas where it is temporarily stored, and then they work to convey water downstream. The stormwater system is made up of 127 miles of gravity main ranging from 12-84” in diameter, 6800 manholes, 900 outlets, 38 miles of small diameter sump drain, 11 stormwater lift stations, one half mile of stormwater force main, and more than 150 ponds and wetlands (2018 Draft Comprehensive Plan Chapter 7). The City’s stormwater system was designed to convey a certain amount of water and protect against impacts at a certain level. This “level of protection” is based on the capacity of public infrastructure to handle stormwater and on the probability that a storm will occur. When storms are bigger or more intense than the infrastructure is designed to handle, or when it clogs, there are consequences such as disruptions to services, facilities, or damage to property. The city stormwater system is exposed to flooding and also determines the flood exposure of people and assets. Risk is changing primarily because climate is changing and the level of protection for design is a moving target. Designs from the past are undersized for today and there is a growing realization in technical circles that even if designs were revised to reflect today’s climate they would quickly be obsolete due to the changing risk brought by climate change. Go Big, Go Bigger: infrastructure analysis Go Big, Go Bigger: infrastructure analysis To test the possible scale of implementation in the face of projected climate change impacts, a preliminary evaluation and conceptual design of potential flood risk reduction options for the Morningside neighborhood was completed. A cursory evaluation was conducted to assess which option reduced flood exposure for the most homes. This was completed for a range of storm events from the 20%-annual-chance storm event (5- year storm which is 3.6 inches in 24 hours) to the 1%-annual-chance storm event (100-year storm which is 7.5 inches in 24 hours). Infrastructure options that were evaluated included increasing storm sewer pipe sizes, constructing flood walls, creating additional flood storage by excavating (lowering) the ballfield area of Weber Park and then reconstructing the fields, creating additional flood storage by excavating the wooded area north of Weber Pond and excavating and re-grading existing low areas (e.g. low area at Lynn Avenue and Kipling Avenue north of West 42nd Street), excavating backyards in key locations, installing predictive pumping systems for a few key areas (including Weber Pond), and installing underground flood storage. Seven infrastructure options were developed using combinations of some of the mitigation options identified above with planning-level costs estimated between $3.4M and $31.6M. The option with the largest benefit in terms of homes that would no longer be exposed to flooding up to the 1%-annual- chance storm event (Option 7b, the ‘Go Bigger’ option) has an estimated cost of $8.5M and completely removes approximately 24% of the homes potentially impacted under existing conditions. 17 The next best infrastructure option (Option 2b, the ‘Go Big’ option) removes approximately 16% of the homes currently impacted and would cost approximately $4.5M. Baseline; the current replacement value of stormwater infrastructure in the City is about $70M. Over 16 square miles this is approximately; • $6,800/acre • Baseline replacement value of stormwater infrastructure The ‘Go Big’ option contemplated a $4.5M project serving about 630 properties and 185 acres. • $24,300/acre • Cost 3.6 times larger than the baseline The ‘Go Bigger’ option contemplated an $8.5M project serving about 630 properties and 185 acres. • $45,900/acre • Cost 6.7 times larger than the baseline In addition to costs, the projects come with tradeoffs, contemplating major changes in parks, open spaces, existing water bodies, and piping and utility operations changes. The projects also present opportunity for co-planning around park and sustainability improvements as sections of aging infrastructure are renewed. A memorandum describing the analysis in more detail is available in the appendix. Morningside Roadway Reconstruction Engineering Study: in progress item Morningside Roadway Reconstruction Engineering Study: in progress item Infrastructure options remain the foundation of reducing flood exposure, but the scale of climate change will make transformation change a challenge. In April 2020 staff will ask Council to consider a scope of service for preliminary engineering for the street reconstruction project in the Morningside D/E and Morningside C neighborhoods in 2022 and 2023, respectively. Staff will also ask Council to consider the engagement plan to go along with the project concept-level design. This would be the first major street reconstruction project to be designed under the proposed flood risk reduction strategy. The operations and maintenance of public infrastructure is a key component of reducing flood risk. Operations includes inspection and condition assessment, street cleaning, catch basin clog clearing, pipe and outlet clog clearing, sediment control, pump and power system monitoring, and emergency 18 operations. Maintenance includes catch basin repair, pipe repair, outlet repair, sediment removal, weed and woody debris removal, and other actions. Stormwater models that predict flood problems assume that all pipes, catch basins, inlets, and outlets are in good working order and free from obstructions. The reality is that material and debris often enter the system before or during storms and can cause service disruptions. Aging infrastructure also lends to more failures. Staff prioritizes their stormwater operation and maintenance work based on opportunity and requests for service within the constraints of their resources. Opportunities include repairing and renewing stormwater infrastructure in areas where other work is already planned. For example, crews inspect and repair stormwater catch basins in neighborhoods where street improvements are planned, thereby extending the life of the street improvement and providing real value to the public. Requests for service also get prioritized. As storm events occur, staff evaluate the risk and respond as resources allow. Operations and maintenance staff were invited to talk about their work with the Task Force. Some themes related to the challenges and opportunities emerged. Challenges related to operation and maintenance: • Much of the system aside from pump and power systems are managed with reactive, run-to-failure approach and there is significant deferred maintenance in the system leading to small items remaining unaddressed, leading to larger issues. • The program for evaluating maintenance needs meets the minimum regulatory standard. It is not comprehensive. • The system is aging, much of it originating in the 1950s and 1960s. • During events, stormwater systems and sanitary sewer systems are stressed at the same time. When flood events coincide with snow and ice events, staff are further stretched to provide services and must make decisions about priorities, constrained by their resources. • Some stormwater features in the city have been installed to intentionally capture pollutants and debris in order to protect clean water. When not properly maintained, they can interfere with overlapping drainage and flood protection services. • Service levels are not clearly defined. During the peak of events, staff are receiving, prioritizing, responding to, and communicating on requests for service. Residents often don’t know where their issue ranks or what service level they can expect. Opportunities for operation and maintenance: • Proactive maintenance, the benefits of which go beyond flood protection. Proactively cleaning and maintaining stormwater infrastructure can support clean water goals by properly managing accumulated pollutants. • Increased street sweeping to keep stormwater conveyances clear. This also has a clean water benefit. 19 • Promotion of the new metro-wide adopt-a-drain program to augment city street sweeping. Residents are asked to adopt a storm drain in their neighborhood and keep it clear of leaves, trash, and other debris to reduce water pollution. The program also works to provide flood protection. Often, once a system is flooded, the primary objective for maintenance staff is to clear the obstruction. At this point, the opportunity to clear and dispose of clogging debris before its transported to downstream waterbodies is largely lost. • High value infrastructure retrofits. In some cases, maintaining and optimizing existing can be more cost effective than new infrastructure. • Better definition of service levels to inform residents on what they can expect for given issues. • More general communication about the City’s flood response during and after events. • Continued investment in the sanitary sewer system and its resiliency during floods. An increase in resources dedicated to public works staff would be required in order to address issues and capitalize on opportunities in operations and maintenance. Regulation What is the outcome; Homes and buildings have reduced exposure to floods. Those that are exposed to floods take actions to reduce vulnerability. Private improvements such as structures, landscaping, grading and other private systems manage their own risk, and take actions that do not increase exposure of neighboring properties, reducing it if possible. Who does the work; Engineering Department, Building Department, private permit applicants. Who is involved; Public Works Department, Planning Department, future property owners. When flooding risk is considered; At application and permit, during construction, at final inspection and permit close. Gaps; Added impervious marginally increases community risk, long term maintenance of private drainage systems is uncertain, “retail” nature of permitting a variety of single family improvements is time intensive, regulation in limited areas due to limited resources, the first point of contact that interfaces with builders, homeowners, and describes issues in homes with existing exposure is time intensive. Redevelopment provides a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build-in resilience. City staff are actively engaged with the development community through regulatory programs and provide technical support to permitted and affected private parties. In response, new structures or additions can be required to meet minimum elevations for low floors (such as basements) or low openings (such as the top of windows wells). Another response to redevelopment includes requiring durable flow paths to route water away from structures. The City could consider enhancing standards for resilience in redevelopment plans or encourage a deeper risk conversation with the development community to promote resilient decision-making within the permit process. Increased regulation of redevelopment in 20 Edina would reduce risk. A tradeoff would be that a change in regulation could impose additional costs to developers and impact overall market conditions. Future flooding is projected to get worse. The models that predict flood risk use data from the past to estimate precipitation. The City could consider a flood risk standard that incorporates future risk due to climate change to match the lifecycle of the private improvements that rely on them. By planning street flood storage, lowering roads, managing overflow paths, and taking other actions based on a future flood risk level due to climate change, capacity could be built into the system to make them future ready for their expected design lives. Land use is often cited as a key sector for managing flood risk, though fully developed communities such as Edina may not be able to realize the same returns in this sector as a less developed community. Many of the decisions about land use in Edina have already been made – that is to say that neighborhoods emerged in places and at times that might not have otherwise happened if those land use decisions were made today. The regulatory program remains an effective way to reduce the consequences of flooding for the developing property. The City could consider further enhancing the outreach to property owners, builders and developers to promote resilient design. Where they work: As private improvements are made, or properties redevelop, the City provides flood risk information and holds standards that control or mitigate the exposure to flooding through its regulatory program. Existing controls through the regulatory program are working to raise the low elevations or low openings of structures. This raising of structures reduces the exposure to flooding. Where they don’t work: While the regulatory program is good to reduce exposure and vulnerability to the property or improvement that is changing and its immediately adjacent neighbors, it is a poor tool to reduce the flood exposure downstream. 21 Keep your water to yourself: private infrastructure analysis Keep your water to yourself: private infrastructure analysis The impact of comprehensive stormwater storage including underground storage within private property, the right of way, or under streets in the Morningside neighborhood was evaluated. This analysis was conducted as a result of Task Force discussions about the potential impacts of requiring private homeowners to store stormwater running off from their impervious areas on-site similar to requirements for commercial development. The benefits achieved by storing the first 1-inch, 2-inches, and 3-inches of precipitation from storm events of varying size, from the 20%-annual-chance storm event (5-year storm) to the 1%-annual- chance storm event (100-year storm) are summarized in the table below. For the private storage evaluation underground storage vaults were assumed under a portion of each of the 570 residential parcels within the Morningside neighborhood. The analysis showed that storing the first 1-inch of storms of this magnitude had a negligible impact on flood levels. Storing the first 2-inches and 3-inches showed a more significant benefit with regards to reduction in peak flood levels. Depending on the storm event, and depending on the location within in the neighborhood, the results varied anywhere from flood level decreases of a few inches to decreasing nearly a foot and a half. However, this apparent benefit comes at an initial cost of approximately $15,000 per inch of stormwater stored per residential parcel. To store 2-inches of runoff in the entire neighborhood would cost approximately $17 million. In addition, while the flood levels may be lowered, the number of homes that are removed from potential impacts from flood inundation is small. For example, one home may potentially be removed from flood inundation at Weber Pond depending on the storm event. Finally, the management and maintenance of these underground stormwater storage vaults distributed throughout an entire neighborhood is expected to be complicated and unprecedented. This solution would provide a moderate benefit for a very high cost. Additionally, a preliminary look at the compounding effect of climate change suggests that any improvement realized by implementing additional storage would be taken back by climate change (i.e., increased precipitation amounts). Inches of Runoff Stored on Private Property Approximate Cost for All Parcels in Morningside to Store Runoff Flood Level Reduction Benefit (in feet) for Weber Pond Subwatershed (MS_40) 5-yr Storm (3.6" of precipitation) 10-yr Storm (4.3" of precipitation) 50-yr Storm (6.4" of precipitation) 100-yr Storm (7.5" of precipitation) 1 inch $ 8,550,000 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 2 inches $ 17,100,000 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.3 3 inches $ 25,650,000 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.5 A memorandum describing the analysis in more detail is available in the appendix. 22 From ‘ill-drained’ to impervious: impervious surface analysis From ‘ill-drained’ to impervious: impervious surface analysis The Task Force wanted to explore the impact of limiting impervious cover through regulating development and redevelopment. The impact of decreased imperviousness across the Morningside neighborhood was evaluated. The analysis showed an impervious limit would have little impact on flood risk. Although an impervious limit or reduction supports other values such as open space, room for trees, neighborhood character, and limiting heat island effect, the case for flood risk reduction was weak. Additionally, setting impervious limits would require a large financial investment. The impervious area that is directly connected to the storm sewer system in the Morningside neighborhood is estimated to be about 25% of the total land area, in aggregate. The analysis tested the sensitivity to changes in impervious by modifying the stormwater model so that the imperviousness of the entire contributing drainage area was increased, decreased, and even lowered all the way to 0%, which reflects a pre-development condition. This sensitivity test was also completed for a range of storm events, from the 20%-annual-chance storm event (5-year storm) to the 1%-annual-chance storm event (100-year storm). As expected, the imperviousness sensitivity test showed that less impervious area generates less stormwater runoff and more impervious area generates more stormwater runoff. However, the magnitude of the runoff changes generated by adjusting imperviousness were not as impactful as may have been expected. Additionally, the little flood reduction benefit shown in the analysis does not consider future climate change. A memorandum describing the analysis in more detail is available in the appendix. 23 Impervious limit: in progress item Impervious limit: in progress item At their February 12th, 2020 Planning Commission meeting heard an introduction to a zoning ordinance amendment which would limit impervious cover. Current code includes only a building coverage limit. Outreach and Engagement What is the outcome; People understand their vulnerability and exposure to flooding, know what action to take to reduce each in the immediate, short and long term. People have the knowledge and resources to take action. People are motivated to take action to protect themselves. Who does the work; Engineering Department, Communications Department, partner agencies, community groups. Who is involved; The public, and public and private organizations. When flooding risk is considered; In anticipation of spring melt, during flood events, post-hazard recovery, at property transfer, upon FEMA flood hazard map update. Gaps; No coordinated plan and message, limited public and private resources. Knowledge alone doesn’t equal action. Although not at the same scale as a capital item, engaging the public still costs money. Equity should be considered in tactics. When people understand the risks of flooding, they can take actions to reduce the consequences of flooding. Actions could range from simple things, like moving valuables to higher floors, to more complex retrofit improvements like flood proofing and sanitary sewer backflow prevention. Risk awareness could be encouraged by improved distribution of information products like the existing flood risk map available on the City’s website. This local map is industry leading, with few small cities producing and publicly sharing detailed local flooding information. Although the information had been public for a long time, it had been in a format that required some technical knowledge to interpret. With new mapping tools, increasingly detailed digital stormwater system data, and more precise data about topography of the landscape, we’re better able to visually display the risk. 24 Outreach products: in progress item Outreach products: in progress item Through the process, we uncovered some ‘quick-win’ actions to be implemented immediately. • Actions for Flood Resilient Homes Fact Sheets. These fact sheets describe common actions that people can take to reduce their own exposure and vulnerability to flooding. A copy of the fact sheets are provided in the appendix. • “What is my flood risk?” interactive map. This application allows users to visualize the flooding on the land surface for any property in the City of Edina. This information is already available on the interactive water resources map; however, this application is more focused on communicating flood risk specifically. The map is available on the Maps page of the City website. • Sandbagging how-to videos. The City provides sandbags, free of charge. This series of videos will be used to promote the service, inform people on how to request sandbags, demonstrate how to build a sandbag dike, and describe how to dispose of sandbags after a flood. Emergency Services What is the outcome; Parties respond to remove people from harm. Parties respond to prevent damage to property if possible, or provide aid after damage occurs. Limited disturbance and damage. Rapid return to normalcy. Who does the work; Police Department, Fire Department, Public Works Department, Engineering Department, County/State/Federal Emergency Responders, other infrastructure owners, and private contractors. Who is involved; Emergency operations command, emergency responders, the public, property owners, visitors, other infrastructure owners. When flooding risk is considered; In emergency operations plans, disaster planning, training and drills, post-hazard recovery. Gaps; Current response is triggered in major/severe events. The utility group’s first priority is to maintain or reestablish function of infrastructure systems. Call centers can be overwhelmed and need clear triage procedure. There is nearly no service available for property owners during a flood. The process of after-action inquiry, questions and blame that realize long-known service gaps is adversarial and leads to rushed planning. Requests or complaint-based reactions may not provide an equitable distribution of services. 25 The City’s role in emergency situations include responding to life, health and safety calls and supporting or restoring the operation of the utilities. When floods occur the ability to respond effectively quickly degrades as phone lines and other communications channels fill with requests and reports. The ability to sort and serve these requests goes into triage with critical system function and support measures competing with urgent requests from the public. Empowering people to adapt to flood risk, prepare for flood events, and mitigate the impacts of climate change all contribute to a more resilient community. Adaptation and preparedness actions work to mitigate the consequences of flooding. Strategy Development Task Force role and process In order to incorporate community values into the process, a volunteer Task Force of eight Edina residents was formed. Members represent homeowners with a variety of knowledge and experience. Most have experienced flooding on their properties or have engaged with flood issues in the larger community. Members came from all across the City of Edina. Task Force members met 12 times and attended two City Council work sessions between July 2019 and March 2020. The Morningside neighborhood was selected as the focus area of study due to the presence of significant modeling and research in the area. The Morningside neighborhood faces a range of flooding challenges that past efforts have struggled to address. As part of this effort, a 2-dimensional model was developed and field calibrated to better refine the flood model and relate the models of St Louis Park and Minneapolis. The Morningside neighborhood was also used as the case study neighborhood for evaluating impervious limits, private storage, big infrastructure, and future climate change as noted in the various analysis sections of this report. The Task Force’s charge was to “Provide recommendations to inform a Flood Risk Reduction Strategy to be considered for adoption by the City Council and incorporation as a major amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan.” The products of this process including meeting agendas, minutes, and analyses are available for review in the Water Resources Library on the City of Edina website. To better understand the nature of the issue, Task Force members requested and were presented with the following: • Overview of the focal area of Morningside neighborhood, its historical and current flood challenges, and previous efforts to evaluate flood risk reduction options. • A technical exploration of City-owned stormwater infrastructure, maintenance operations, levels of service, and the stormwater utility. • Regulatory options that have been implemented in other comparable communities and associated challenges and trade-offs. 26 • Modeled sensitivity analyses to explore the potential impact of comprehensive impervious limits, private stormwater storage, and enhanced infrastructure including larger pipes and stormwater storage. • Communications strategies that promote preparedness and connect residents with resources during flood events. • Overview of the City’s floodplain management ordinance and participation in the National Flood Insurance Program. • The City’s policy and standards for stormwater management through the permit process, related to development and redevelopment. • A conversation with maintenance staff to understand routine operation and maintenance as well as storm response. Interacting directly with the Task Force has provided staff members with insight into public perception of their role in flood risk reduction. During these conversations, staff began to see certain discrepancies between the following City assumptions; perception of risk, interpretation of the term ‘flooding’, and the role of City services. • How does the City define flood risk? Flood risk has been seen as a combination of the statistical probability of a flood event happening and the potential community-wide losses that occur as a consequence of that event. In the City of Edina, the increasing value of homes located within the floodplain is occurring in tandem with changing weather patterns that increase intensity of storm events, both of which increase the overall risk. The City’s idea of current flood risk is also being shaped by changing community expectations for service. • Defining “flooding” is similarly complicated by social perception. FEMA defines flooding as “A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of 2 or more acres of normally dry land area or of 2 or more properties…” When intense or prolonged rain events occur, the system can become overwhelmed. A wet basement, flooded garage, or standing water may not fit FEMA’s definition, but each impacts the community and was considered “flooding” by Task Force members. • City services play a critical role in the following common flooding issues; creeks outside their banks, curb lines flowing full, storm drains clogging, pipes running full, low points in streets or yards filling up and threatening structures, flow paths eroding, sump pumps flowing, basement foundations leaking, and sanitary sewers backing up. Community service expectations are mismatched with available resources for preventative maintenance and timely emergency response to these issues. Staff heard the following sentiments from the Task Force; • Flooding affects quality of life by disrupting daily activities, risking safety, and damaging structures. • A priority should be to reduce risk to residential structures. • Help property owners protect themselves and prevent damage to structures. • Be ready to help the community recover after floods. 27 • Maintain the function of the existing system to maintain service. • Be a good neighbor. Brainstorming, prioritizing, and categorizing possible actions A series of actions were proposed for a possible menu or toolbox of actions as a result of discussions with the Task Force. Each action was accompanied by a detailed description, justification/motivating factors, tradeoffs and other considerations, cost score, staff-ranked effectiveness score, community enthusiasm ranking, and action category. The brainstorming exercise resulted in more than 40 potential actions. Reviewing and ranking these actions was no small task. Task Force members were asked to rank possible flood risk reduction actions based on community enthusiasm, informed by community held positions and interests related to flooding. Positions are surface statements of where a person or community stands. Interests are the underlying reasons, values or motivations that explain a certain position. Based on perceived community position and interests, the Task Force was asked to rank the action items in terms of community enthusiasm. Enthusiasm is the community’s interest or approval of the action. Considerations for community enthusiasm include tradeoffs, community impacts, land, sustainability, environmental outcomes, and social outcomes. Task Force members shared their hesitation in representing the community with their rankings because they felt that each flood experience was unique and they hadn’t had sufficient information or opportunity to gauge community enthusiasm at this detailed level. A summary of the aggregated Task Force rankings is included in the appendix with this caveat - in the end, the conversations around actions provided the most value for staff in forming the framework and strategy. The process helped to identify quick-win actions that could be implemented immediately, clarified areas of agreement and disagreement between the Task Force and staff, and will be used as a starting point for future Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan program development work. We would expect rankings to be continually refined as more people participate and more information becomes available. The exercise itself outweighs the absolute ranking of the actions. The full set of possible actions as well the Task Force ranking summary is included in the appendix of this report. Conclusion The process has reiterated the need to address flooding with a range of strategies that span technical, scientific, political, and social approaches. Many communities are struggling with managing increasing flood risk. Key takeaways: • The current stormwater model helps to better visualize where the issues are; they are extensive, interwoven, and difficult to solve. The existing stormwater system is overloaded and the strategy to put water somewhere else is limited. • Climate change impacts are significant. 28 • Groundwater levels are increasing. The years between 2015 and 2019 were the wettest in Minnesota history. • The Flood Risk Reduction Strategy widens our approaches, and thereby actions, to reduce flood risk. The current Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan is narrow and can’t keep up with the lead driver; climate change. • There are opportunities to empower people and institutions to adapt, prepare, and mitigate. The Strategy opens the approach of reducing vulnerability. Often, some of the simplest and most cost-effective ways to reduce risk are for people to reduce the vulnerability of their structures and property. • Impervious surfaces matter; however, the opportunity to reduce flood risk by limiting or reducing impervious cover in the City of Edina is limited. • Additional resources are needed to implement actions. • Residents have high expectations for service. • Other promising opportunities exist for operation and maintenance, public infrastructure (though climate change will make transformational change a challenge), and redevelopment standards anchored in resiliency. Lastly, there is an opportunity to knit together the Flood Risk Reduction Strategy with the existing Living Streets Plan and forthcoming Climate Adaptation Plan. Bringing these efforts into focus and examining strategies through an equity lens are necessary to deliver high-value benefits to the community. 29 Acknowledgement Staff would like to thank the Task Force for their contributions. The experience, knowledge, and curiosity they brought to the process added value and influenced the Strategy. Nora Davis (co-chair), Lake Cornelia Neighborhood Kathy Amlaw (co-chair), Lake Edina Neighborhood Greg Lincoln, Morningside Neighborhood Michael Platteter, Morningside Neighborhood Louise Segreto, Indian Hills Neighborhood Roxane Lehmann, Sunny Slope Neighborhood Richard Strong, Concord Neighborhood Richard Manser, Todd Park Neighborhood 30 Appendix Appendix A: Resident Task Force Report Appendix B: ‘Getting to scale: a challenging problem made even more challenging, climate change impact analysis’, technical memo Appendix C: ‘Go Big, Go Bigger: infrastructure analysis’, technical memo Appendix D: ‘Keep your water to yourself: private infrastructure analysis’, technical memo Appendix E: ‘From ‘ill-drained’ to impervious: impervious surface analysis’, technical memo Appendix F: Actions for Flood Resilient Homes, fact sheets Appendix G: Task Force charge Appendix H: Potential action matrix key, ranked response, and potential action matrix A Appendix A: Resident Task Force Report Resident Task Force Report Flood Risk Reduction Task Force - 2020 City Council Report “For decades Edina took land from the water – now the water wants the land back” Task Force Work The Flood Risk Reduction Task Force began meeting in July of 2019. For the past several months the Task Force has grappled with this increasingly complex issue. There are no simple answers. Flooding issues will require a multi-pronged approach across multiple sectors within the community. Many of the actions we are suggesting have environmental benefits – which will assist Edina in achieving Climate Action Plan goals. BACKGROUND Edina History Settlers first arrived in Edina in the 1800’s and by the end of 1854 all the land in Edina had been claimed. Much of the western portion was part of the “Big Woods” – with elm, basswood, maple and oak trees. The terrain was uneven and much of the area was poorly drained and swampy. Over time many of the hills were bulldozed, trees felled, the wetlands filled in – and development began. Two hundred years of development has profoundly affected storm water management, and this is a major factor in our current flooding problems. Scope of problem In preparation for the 2018 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan, Edina staff and consultants reviewed the city for areas of flooding concern... Five areas in the city were chosen for further study – Weber Park, Concord, Halifax, Southdale First Addition Residential & Crosstown 62 & Hwy 100. Another twenty areas were screened, while fifty-four areas await further study. In total – those areas contain - 692 homes/apartment buildings, and 863 structures. Storm water affects Edina in a variety of ways – including overflow from natural bodies of water to runoff from developed areas causing street flooding, damage to basements from seepage and ground water to sanitary sewer system back-ups. This is a situation affecting the health and safety of residents and those who visit, shop, and work in our community. Each news cycle brings yet more warnings about the damage of increasing rainfall and ground water issues – and Edina is not immune. Resident Task Force Report Contributing Factors Increased rainfall due to Climate Change – in 2019 we received 43.17 inches of rain, 12.56 inches above average. Rains will continue to increase, and those rains will come fast, hard and more frequently. Early snow melt compounds the flooding problem, causing additional problems for residents. Ground water levels are rising and are difficult to measure. More residents are operating sump pumps year-round – while other residents are discovering they now need to install a sump pump. More development replaces vegetation and soil with impervious surfaces. Impervious surfaces causes rainwater to runoff rather than infiltrate natural ground surface. Not only does runoff cause surface water to accumulate in land depressions, it can cause rainwater to reach streams faster and in greater quantities; both increasing the risk that flooding will occur sooner and more severely than if rain were to fall on the natural ground surface. Impervious surfaces also increase the “heat island effect” causing yet more rain. The issue is not going away – and it’s imperative that Edina approach this situation proactively. Reduced imperviousness results in less runoff. Any reduction in the amount of runoff translates into increased infiltration and enhanced flood control. Limiting impervious surfaces and increasing the City’s greenspace will help reduce runoff volume, lower summertime temperatures, and improve both water and air quality. Increased greenspace will also make our community more attractive and promote recreational activities that enhance the quality of life for those who live, shop, visit and work in Edina. Our Recommendations Land Use Regulate impervious surfaces to promote green space, trees and filtration. (Impervious surfaces have increased by 80% in Morningside over the past 50 years – exposing that neighborhood to serious flood risk.) As property is redeveloped add below ground water storage and above ground storage. Above ground storage (day-lighting the water) adds environmental benefits in addition to water storage. It also serves as a “water feature” for the development. Restrict removal of mature trees. Encourage tree planting and rain gardens Increase green space/park areas for both temporary water storage and environmental benefits Voluntary buy-out of homes and converting that land to temporary storage/park /green space. Allowing a rebuild at higher elevation does nothing to protect the neighborhood. Resident Task Force Report Infrastructure Be proactive (rather than reactive) in maintenance of current system Improve data collection to assist in planning, protection and outreach efforts Replace aging infrastructure At street reconstruction add larger storm sewer pipes, lower streets for temporary storage Pumping if cost effective and doesn’t create issues for others Education Provide education to residents on a number of platforms to alert them to their flooding risks and how to mitigate those risks. This effort would include information on city services including sandbag delivery, placement and pick-up, along with information on flood insurance. Reach-out to plumbing contractors and other water mitigation businesses to inform them of Edina’s permitting and regulations regarding water issues. Continue the Technical Support Program through Edina’s Engineering Department to help residents reduce their risk Ongoing Develop a comprehensive Emergency Plan to assist residents during and after a flooding emergency. Plan should include volunteers who could assist homeowners with sandbagging and flood clean-up. (Service clubs such as the Edina Rotary clubs, faith communities, etc.) Continue to work with both watershed districts and surrounding communities to address ongoing water issues. Respectfully submitted: Flood Risk Reduction Task Force Members Richard Strong, Louise Segreto, Michael Platteter, Richard Manser, Greg Lincoln, Roxane Lehmann, Nora Davis (Co-chair), Cathy Amlaw (Co-chair) B Appendix B: ‘Getting to scale: a challenging problem made even more challenging, climate change impact analysis’, technical memo Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Technical Memorandum To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Project: Edina Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Support (23271728.00) Precipitation totals have been increasing in the Twin Cities for decades. The total precipitation in 2019 was the highest amount of annual precipitation on record. Barr reviewed climatological data to evaluate changes and long-term trends in precipitation. As shown in Figure 1, the record for the highest annual precipitation recorded at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport was in 2019 and was nearly 8% higher than the next highest year (2016). Figure 1 shows the top 10 wettest years (most annual precipitation) for the Twin Cities using the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport gage. It is worth noting that three of the years on this plot are within the past two decades (2002, 2016, and 2019), and the two highest years, 2016 and 2019, are very recent. The average annual precipitation total for the Twin Cities (at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport) is 30.6 inches. The driest year on record (1910) had a precipitation total of 11.5 inches. The 2019 annual precipitation was over 40% higher than an average year. Figure 1 Top 10 wettest years in the Twin Cities (precipitation at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport) To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 2 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis.docx Figure 2 shows annual precipitation totals for the past 50 years, including 2019. In the past 50 years, there has been an increasing trend in average annual rainfall totals at a rate of about 0.66 inches more precipitation per decade. Figure 2 Annual precipitation for Hennepin County from 1970 to 2019 (Source: MNDNR State Climatology Office) It is worth noting that the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s were three consecutive decades with approximately average precipitation. This was a prolonged period of relatively stable conditions when much of the development in Edina occurred. Prior to this period, the 1930s was a dry decade; in fact, the driest on record. From the 1960s on, there has been a clear trend in the total precipitation, both on an annual basis (as shown in Figure 2) and by decade. Figure 3 shows the average annual precipitation depth per decade from the end of the 19th century to the 2010s. The 2010s are the wettest decade in Minnesota’s history. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 3 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis.docx Figure 3 Average annual precipitation by decade (Source: MNDNR State Climatology Office) In much of Edina, the stormwater infrastructure was designed and developed decades ago (in the 1950s and 1960s) using design storms. At the time, the design storms were estimated based decades-worth of precipitation prior to the design. This means that stormwater infrastructure was likely designed largely based on precipitation experienced in the first half of the 20th century, and since then, precipitation quantities have only increased. The City’s stormwater system was designed to convey a certain amount of water and protect against impacts at a certain level. This “level of protection” is based on the capacity of public infrastructure to handle stormwater and on the likelihood, or probability, that a storm will occur. When storms are bigger or more intense than the infrastructure is designed to handle, or when it clogs, there are consequences such as disruptions in services and facilities, or damage to property. The relationship between the probability of these storm events occurring (defined by climate and infrastructure) and the resultant consequences (defined by vulnerabilities of public or private infrastructure) determines the overall community flood risk. Risk is changing primarily because climate is changing and is increasing the probability, or chance, that large, flood-causing storms will occur. The level of protection for design is a moving target. Designs from the past are undersized for today and there is a growing realization in technical circles that even if designs were revised to reflect today’s probability of storm events they may quickly be obsolete due to the changing risk brought by climate change. The question is, should engineering designs be based on the climate models of today or on some predicted future condition? The trade-off for future-sizing a design so that we are better prepared for climate change would likely mean higher present costs. Figures 4, 5, and 6 show how the extent of flooding has changed in the Weber Pond area of the Morningside neighborhood over time and what it To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 4 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis.docx may look like in the future. The flood inundation extents shown are based on model results of storm events using the City’s stormwater management model (XP-SWMM). Figure 4 Flood inundation for a predicted 1% annual chance flood event in the past (~6.0 inches over a 24-hour period, based on Technical Paper 40) Figure 5 Flood inundation for a predicted 1% annual chance flood event using more recent climate data (~7.5 inches over a 24-hour period, based on Atlas 14) To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 5 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis.docx Figure 6 Flood inundation for a 1% annual chance flood event projected for the future (~10 inches over a 24-hour period) In the following figure (Figure 7), we attempt to visually show the effects of infrastructure projects and the impacts of climate change on the flood volumes stored in Weber Pond. In Figure 7, one blue rectangle represents 10 acre-feet of stormwater storage in Weber Pond. This volume is equivalent to the storage capacity available in Weber Pond before impacts to the adjacent park or homes would begin to occur. 10 acre-feet of water is not inconsequential. It can be thought of as one foot of water over a 10-acre area, or 10 feet of water over a 1-acre area, or more specifically, 3 feet of water over the approximately 3.3-acre footprint of Weber Pond. In the present climate, Weber Pond would actually need to store close to 40 acre-feet of stormwater in the 1%-annual-chance (100-year) design storm event to avoid impacts to the park or adjacent homes; 40 acre-feet is nearly four times the amount that can currently be stored in Weber Pond without impacting infrastructure or amenities. If directly connected imperviousness were reduced by 25% in the contributing watershed, it reduces the flood volume that needs to be stored in Weber Pond to avoid impacts, but the reduction is minor. There are other methods to alter the flood exposure, such as with large infrastructure projects (pipes, pumps, storage, etc.). As shown in Figure 7, Option 2b (from Appendix C) actually transfers risk downstream, reducing flooding in other areas of the Morningside neighborhood and increases the volume that would need to be stored in Weber Pond (requiring additional protection for homes adjacent to Weber Pond, for example, by constructing flood walls), while Option 7b (from Appendix C) shows the greatest benefit in reducing flood volumes. Coincidentally, the amount of stormwater that needs to be stored in Weber Pond with the large infrastructure project Option 7b looks a lot like the amount of water that needed to be stored in the 1%-annual-chance (100-year) design storm event used in the past. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 6 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis.docx Figure 7 Pictograph of effects and impacts on stormwater volumes in Weber Pond due to climate change and infrastructure projects To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 7 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix B - Climate Change Impact Analysis.docx Finally, it is worth noting that in all of the conditions shown in Figure 7, Weber Pond is not able to store the flood volume generated by these large amounts of precipitation (i.e., all conditions exceed “1 Weber Pond Equivalent”). In other words, there will be impacts to infrastructure and amenities adjacent to Weber Pond during a 1%-annual-chance (100-yr) storm event, even with large infrastructure projects, and/or with decreases in imperviousness, due to system capacity constraints and climate change. The stormwater management target continues to change as precipitation amounts continue to get larger and larger. C Appendix C: ‘Go Big, Go Bigger: infrastructure analysis’, technical memo Edina Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Concepts This report will summarize analysis conducted by Annetta Wilson, Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner to define and describe flood risk and consequence for the Morningside Neighborhood in Edina and create a conceptual framework that could be used to create a scope of work that would compare or judge flood risk reduction options. The report is conceptual only and should not be relied on for actual improvement decisions. Context and Scope The Morningside neighborhood has a valley and several low or landlocked areas that are prone to flooding. The neighborhood is fully developed with primarily single family homes built between 1910 and 1960, with some infill happening later and redevelopment currently replacing some structures (Appendix A.) Stormwater characteristics for the neighborhood are described in greater detail in chapter 12 of the Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (2018 Draft, Barr Engineering). This document is the Local Water Plan (LWP) for the city. For this report, flood risk will be described in terms of both the probability and possible consequence of high water on structures. Two rainfall probabilities modeled in development of the LWP are used in this analysis, the 1% and 10% probability rainfalls. Assuming normal soil moisture conditions (AEP neutral conditions), flood probabilities are assumed to be the same as the storm event probabilities creating the flooding. The possible consequences of flooding are categorized and costs are estimated assuming homeowners have taken no special effort to limit the consequence of flooding. Annualized potential costs to homeowners are then estimated to test economic return on possible flood mitigating infrastructure improvements to this area. Infrastructure improvement options were part of a separate effort by Barr Engineering. These options are preliminary, non-exhaustive, and not optimized. A variety of data and analysis was conducted to inform the analysis of flood risk. The following subsections describe the original data sources (assembled data) and methods used to calculate criteria relating to flood risk (derived data). Assembled and Derived Data Geographical data was assembled from City of Edina sources and new data was derived from the relationships in the data to inform the flood risk analysis. The following is a summary of data and methods. The development of methodology to derive adjacent ground elevations based on LIDAR and home shape has applicability outside this study and is described in greater detail in Appendix B. Assembled Data: • Digital Elevation Map (DEM) from 2011-2012 Minnesota DNR LIDAR data with 5cm accuracy • Subwatershed and Sewershed data (City of Edina) • Building Footprints originally from 2002 Markhurd, Updated by City of Edina with 2012 and 2015 based on Hennepin County joint aerial photograph project • Lot surveys from City of Edina Building Department records • Property ID (PID), building year built, livable total and basement square footage, finished basement %, building sales data, and building market values data from the City Assessor • City of Edina Datalink Map, Google Streetview, Google search for Real Estate sale pictures and descriptions of homes, Site visits • 10% and 1% probability inundation polygon and elevation data from 2018 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. • 2017 Flood Loss Estimations Table (Source: National Food Services, FloodTools.com, based on national FEMA flood loss tables) • Potential flood risk mitigation options from Barr Engineering Derived Data: • The following general data was derived from the assembled data to inform the analysis. Minimum, maximum, and average adjacent grade elevations. Adjacent grades were calculated by comparing DEM and building footprint clips using the method described in Appendix B. The following building elevations data were derived • Basement type was determined by looking at the elevation profile and StreetView. If it wasn’t easy to see in StreetView or determine from the profile, the address was Google searched to find Real Estate information and additional pictures of the house. If those were unavailable, the site was visited to see in person, while remaining on city property. See the appendix for more information on how the basement type was used in the elevation calculations. • Building elevations; Elevations were overwritten if a survey was found in Building Department survey data. Data source was recorded in a note field. Detailed information about building elevation calculations can be found in Appendix B. The following attributes were calculated using the derived adjacent grades: • Low floor elevation was calculated by subtracting 8 feet from the maximum adjacent elevation • Low opening elevation was equated to the minimum adjacent ground elevation. • Garage floor elevation was equated to the maximum adjacent ground elevation. • First floor elevation was calculated by adding 1 foot to the maximum adjacent ground elevation. • The Elevation Difference was calculated by subtracting the minimum adjacent ground elevation from the maximum adjacent ground elevation. Property characteristics and property value were calculated to inform the analysis of consequence of flood risk: • Number of Sales was calculated from Excel Pivot Table using data from Assessor’s Office (see appendix) • Value per Square Foot was calculated (Building MV/Square Footage) • Subwatersheds names of subwatersheds that intersect with building footprint Analysis of Structural Flood Probability For this analysis flood probability is categorized based on various ways water can intrude into residential dwelling structures based on the following scheme. The thresholds defined in this scheme allow an in/not in trigger to describe flood risk at varying probability storms and are not based on a literature review of studies on flood effects on varying structures. A cursory review for similar work turned up many interesting concepts, but no direct examples or industry standards that detail flood risk at this granular a scale. The thresholds defined here are based on professional judgement and are obviously not definitive. The categories are used to define probability of damage to each vector of flood risk. Direct flood risk is from waters that overtop the foundation block and saturate and infiltrate through wood framed portions of a home, overtop and flood window wells and collapse windows, or saturate and infiltrate through low opening elevations such as windows and doors. Direct flood risk will be categorized as follows: • Moderate: Peak 1%/10% probability flood elevation is above minimum adjacent grade, but below or equal to average ground elevation. • Major: Peak 1%/10% probability is above average adjacent grade, but below or equal to maximum adjacent grade. • Severe: Peak 1%/10% probability is above maximum adjacent grade. See Appendix B for GIS Methodology. Indirect flood risk is from nearby standing flood waters saturating the ground and causing hydrostatic pressure on foundations that typically result in water leaking from cracks and joints in foundation block or concrete slab floors. In severe cases this hydrostatic pressure is known to collapse block foundations. While these issues can also be attributed to raised groundwater with a variety of causes such as temporary rises due to rainfall or flow paths, anywhere in the watershed, this category focuses only on those areas with nearby standing flood waters. Indirect flood risk will be categorized as follows: • Minor: Peak 1%/10% probability flood elevation in same subwatershed is </= 4’ above basement elevation but > 2’ above basement elevation • Moderate: Peak 1%/10% probability flood elevation in same subwatershed is >4’ above basement elevation Sanitary flood risk is from flood water in nearby homes subject to direct flooding flowing into the sanitary sewer system through flooded floor drains and fixtures making its way into the public sanitary line and overwhelming its capacity causing backup into other homes. Sanitary flood risk will be categorized as follows: • Moderate: Home is within the same sanitary sewershed where between 1 and 3 neighboring homes are subject to Major or Severe Direct Flood Risk and the home is within 250’ of one of the neighboring Direct Risk homes, and has a basement elevation lower than the flooded basement plus 1 foot. • Major: Home is within the same sanitary sewershed where between greater than 3 neighboring homes are subject to Major or Severe Direct Flood Risk and the home is within 250’ of one of the Direct Risk homes, and has a basement elevation lower than the flooded basement plus 5 feet. The flood risk scheme above was compared to derived building low floor elevations to create effective differential flood elevations for each affected single family dwelling. These differential elevations, along with property characteristics were used to estimate the consequence of flooding, described in the next section. Overall, direct flood risk is the highest risk type followed by sanitary flood risk, with indirect flood risk being the lowest risk. Since homes often fit into multiple risk types, they were assigned to the highest risk of their designated risk types. Figure 1: Morningside 10% Annual Probability Flood Risk Figure 2: Morningside 1% Annual Probability Flood Risk Analysis of Flood Consequence This analysis attempts to create a decision framework to generalize costs of flood risk at the neighborhood scale by assigning individual probability that any given home will experience damage by any of the three risk categories described above, using best available data. The cost of flooding is then annualized based on this probability. Using the same method, the base case condition is then compared to neighborhood wide potential flood mitigation options. Methodology The following steps were used to develop flood consequence on a home by home basis for the base case and each potential mitigation option. Only primary structures are considered. 1. Generate flood elevations. For this analysis, flood elevations were generated for 50, 20, 10, 4, 2 and 1% probability events by Barr Engineering for the existing conditions, and seven potential flood mitigation options. 2. Apply elevations to structures. To simplify conditions where a structure was subject to risk from more than one subwatershed (i.e. located on a subwatershed divide), each structure was assigned to a single subwatershed, whichever was judged to be highest risk or most significant. Figure 1: 999.5 1000.0 1000.5 1001.0 1001.5 1002.0 1002.5 1003.0 1003.5 0.0010.0100.1001.000 Peak Flood Elevation (feet)Annual Exceedance Probability Flood Elevation -Mean Flood Elevation - Mean 3. Determine possible damages. A square footage estimate of $40 per square foot was used. This estimate was informed by the referenced FEMA damage tables. The square foot estimate of damage was then factored for each risk category and a probability of damage was assigned to factor the square foot rate consistent with the scheme described above, and depicted in the table below. The probability of damage was based on the trigger elevations set in the section above, and the probability factor was a guess based on experience. Table 1: Probabilities of Damage Occurring, given a mode and a "chance of damage" factored with percent of maximum damage by mode Direct Mode Direct Mode2nd Level Indirect Mode Sanitary Mode Minor 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 Moderate 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.5 Major 0.9 0.0 0.2 0.8 Severe 1.0 0.5 0.2 0.8 The results are very sensitive to these factors, particularly the indirect mode since it can trigger at lower elevations with correspondingly more probable events than the other damage types. The factors are based on feel, and a non-exhaustive review of similar work. 4. Determine elevation damage curves. Basement floor, minimum adjacent grade, average adjacent grade, and maximum adjacent grade were compared to subwatershed elevation data using the trigger elevations on the subject home to develop damage curves for each structure for direct and indirect risk. Figure 2: 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 $0 $10 $20 $30 $40 $50 $60 $70 $80 $90 $100Peak Flood Elevation (feet)Damage, Accounting for Probability of Damage Thousands Direct Damage Indirect Damage Sanitary Damage 5. Relate damages to annual exceedance probability (AEP). Damages in dollars were related to AEP using the specified flood level elevations for the assigned subwatershed. Values for intermediate probabilities were interpolated to create a cost versus probability damage curve for calculating annualized damages. Two methods for combining risk types were tested, a maximum, and a combined probability ‘or’ method. The ‘or’ method was used in the analysis. Figure 3: 6. Calculate total annualized flood risk. The annualized damages were calculated by integrating the potential damages by the AEP. The annualized expected damages take into account AEP for a wide range of precipitation events, probability of damages from an event, and potential damage cost to a home. $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 0.0010.010.11 Mean Damage, Accounting forProbability of DamageAnnual Exceedance Probability Maximum Or 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅_$=�(𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷_$)(𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑)𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴2 𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴1 Figure 4: 7. Calculate total neighborhood risk. The annualized damage cost for each home was then summarized for existing conditions to determine the annualized cost impact to the neighborhood under existing conditions. 8. Repeat steps 1 through 7 for Barr’s proposed flood risk mitigation options. Calculate the total annualized neighborhood damage for each option, because none of the proposed options will eliminate all risk of damage. 9. Compare to option cost. The annual benefit for each improvement was calculated by subtracting the option annualized risk from the existing conditions annualized risk. A 60 year infrastructure lifecycle was assumed, which is a typical conservative lifecycle estimate for stormwater infrastructure. The option implementation cost was then annualized by the improvement lifecycle.. The annualized Benefit Cost Ratio for each solution was calculated dividing the solution cost avoidance by the annualized solution implementation cost. This simple, straight line depreciation approach ignores the cost of money. A future refinement could include a present value analysis. Results Potential Flood Mitigation Options Alt 2b: Increase Storm Sewer Size (up to 60”) and add flood wall at Weber Pond. Alt 3a: Excavate Weber Field Park, area North of Weber Pond, Open Space 5, area West of Monterey Ave, and backyard between 44th St and Branson St. Add flood walls at Weber Pond and along Monterey Ave. Add culvert to Weber Pond to drain north. $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 0.0010.010.11 Mean Damage, Accounting forProbability of DamageAnnual Exceedance Probability Or Alt 4a: Excavate Open Space 5 and do predictive pumping from Open Space 5 and Weber Pond to park north of Calvin School Alt 5a: Add Underground Storage to Weber Park and park west of Monterey Ave Alt 7b: Combination of 3a and 4a Alt 8: Excavate areas North and West of Weber Pond and add flood wall. Alt 9: Alt 8 and add Underground Storage at park west of Monterey Ave, and predictive pumping to Weber Pond. Table 2: Barr Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Cost for Proposed Flood Mitigation Options Option Estimated Project Cost Minimum Estimated Cost (-30%) Maximum Estimated Cost (+50%) Alt 2b $4,469,000.00 $3,129,000.00 $6,704,000.00 Alt 3a $5,069,000.00 $3,549,000.00 $7,604,000.00 Alt 4a $3,444,000.00 $2,411,000.00 $5,166,000.00 Alt 5a $31,681,000.00 $22,177,000.00 $47,522,000.00 Alt 7b $8,507,000.00 $5,955,000.00 $12,761,000.00 Alt 8 $5,179,000.00 $3,626,000.00 $7,769,000.00 Alt 9 $13,786,000.00 $9,651,000.00 $20,679,000.00 Table 3: Number of Homes per Option with Greatest Benefit Option Homes with Greatest Benefit Alt 3a 2 homes Alt 5a 1 home Alt 7b 69 homes Alt 8 13 homes Alt 9 11 homes Table 4: Damage Risk Change from Existing Conditions Option Risk Increase Risk Decrease Alt 2b 15 homes 111 homes Alt 3a 1 home 117 homes Alt 4a 1 home 127 homes Alt 5a 92 homes Alt 7b 1 home 150 homes Alt 8 74 homes Alt 9 136 homes The homes at increased risk are in the areas where the flood elevation increased as a result of increased water flow to the associated subwatershed as a result of increased drain size or predictive pumping. Berms or Flood Walls were included in the options to mitigate direct flood risk, but indirect flood risk may still be a factor. The increased risk is minimal (less than $1000 annualized for the worst case scenario). Table 5: Homes at Risk of Flood Damage by Option Option Homes at Risk Homes no longer at risk Current 160 homes Alt 2b 134 homes 26 homes Alt 3a 150 homes 11 homes Alt 4a 154 homes 6 homes Alt 5a 155 homes 5 homes Alt 7b 123 homes 38 homes Alt 8 155 homes 5 homes Alt 9 126 homes 34 homes Table 6: Simple Annualized Costs and Benefits by Option (assuming 60 year lifecycle and simple depreciation of capital cost and no ongoing maintenance) Table: Condition Annual Damage Annual Benefit Improvement Cost Annual Improvement Cost Benefit - Cost Benefit Cost Ratio Existing $404,202 -- Alt 2b $287,348 $116,854 $4,469,000.00 $74,483.33 $42,370.82 1.57 Alt 3a $271,606 $132,596 $5,069,000.00 $84,483.33 $48,112.68 1.57 Alt 4a $335,313 $68,889 $3,444,000.00 $57,400.00 $11,489.43 1.20 Alt 5a $326,616 $77,586 $31,681,000.00 $528,016.67 -$450,430.65 0.15 Alt 7b $170,765 $233,437 $8,507,000.00 $141,783.33 $91,654.14 1.65 Alt 8 $337,045 $67,157 $5,179,000.00 $86,316.67 -$19,159.21 0.78 Alt 9 $190,566 $213,636 $13,786,000.00 $229,766.67 -$16,130.51 0.93 Overall Alt 7b has the greatest benefit, based on the benefit cost ratio, greatest benefit to homes, and number of homes improved or removed from flood risk. Options 5a, 8, and 9 are cost prohibitive, in which the cost outweighs the benefit. Reducing the assumed lifecycle below 60 years was tested and Option Alt 7b still is cost beneficial at a lifecycle of 40 years minimum. Increasing the improvement costs to the maximum estimated in Table 2 still results in Alt 7b being cost beneficial and having the greatest benefit of the proposed options, but wouldn’t be cost beneficial at a lifecycle below 60 years. Summary of Options: None of the mitigation options will eliminate risk, but most will reduce risk with a few exceptions of increased risk to individual homes. Additional incentives for homeowners to decrease their risk are recommended such as backflow preventers and sump pumps, in addition to infrastructure improvement. Alt 2b: This option has a favorable Benefit Cost Ratio (1.57) and improvement cost ($ 4.5MM), but puts 15 homes at greater risk, mostly in the Weber Park area from the larger storm drains upstream. There are other options that have greater impact. Alt 3a: This option also has a favorable Benefit Cost Ratio (1.57) and reduces risk in 117 homes, but only removes 11 homes from risk. Alt 4a: This option has the lowest improvement cost ($3.4 MM) and decreases risk to 127 homes, but only removes 6 homes from risk. Alt 5a: The annualized cost outweighs the benefit for this option. Alt 7b: This option has the highest Benefit Cost Ratio (1.65), removes the highest number of homes from risk (38 homes), and also reduces risk in the most homes of all options (150 homes). The only significant disadvantages are that it increases risk in one home and has the 3rd highest cost ($8.5 MM). Alt 8: The annualized cost outweighs the benefit Alt 9: The annualized cost outweighs the benefit Home Sales Data Inquiry We tested the hypothesis that homeowners that experience home flood inundation are more likely to sell their homes. To test for a correlation, sales data was obtained from the assessor’s office for the Morningside neighborhood. This data was on all sales from 1/1/1970 through 4/27/2018 and included traditional sales, as well as bank sales, physical change sales (“flipping”), and estate sales. A pivot table was used to determine the number of sales per home and the data was then added to the ArcMap Building Data attribute table to calculate the mean number of sales for each flood condition. Table 7: Morningside Mean Number of Sales per Home: All homes 10% Surface Inundation Annual Risk 1% Surface Inundation Annual Risk Under 1% Surface Inundation Annual Risk 2.92 3.06 2.63 2.97 There is a higher mean number of sales per home in the 10% surface risk category, which may show a correlation, but what this doesn’t take into account is the age of homes built post-1970, which would have less overall tenure. Morningside Mean Home Year Built in or post 1970 All homes 10% Surface Inundation Annual Risk 1% Surface Inundation Annual Risk Under 1% Surface Inundation Annual Risk 2004 1999 1998 2006 Appendix A: Year Built Statistics for Morningside Single Family Homes: The Single Family Homes were selected by attribute and the following statistics were generated: Figure 5: Chart of ArcGIS statistics showing the majority of Morningside homes were built between 1910 and 1960. Appendix B GIS Methodology: Home Elevation Methodology The adjacent grade elevations were calculated in Arc Map, using the DEM (digital elevation map) and Building Footprint feature class. The DEM was clipped to the building footprints, converted into a polygon feature class, and then spatially joined back to the Building Footprint feature class to add minimum, average, and maximum elevations for each footprint. Since the DEM data needs to be in integers to be converted to a polygon feature class (ArcGIS limitation), the elevation data was converted from meters to feet and multiplied by 10, and converted to integers using the Map Algebra Tool before converting to a polygon feature class. Once converted, the data was divided by 10 to get elevation data to the nearest tenth. Figure 6: GIS Model of Adjacent Grade Elevation calculation process Figure 7: Example footprint with elevation data from DEM clip and derived data below. The first floor and basement elevation data were obtained from the home lot surveys when possible. If the survey contained a top-of- foundation or TOB (top of block) elevation, 1 foot was added to that number to account for the sub-floor and floor. If basement elevation data wasn’t available, 9 feet was subtracted from the First Floor Elevation. If the lot survey was missing or didn’t contain elevation data, the first floor elevation was calculated by adding 1 foot to the maximum footprint elevation from the DEM and the basement elevation was determined by subtraction 8 feet from that elevation (or 9 feet total from the first floor elevation). The critical structures at risk of surface inundation were also viewed using Street View to confirm the first floor elevations. First Floor Elevation: Plan versus Calculated Differences To test the confidence level of the First Floor Elevation calculation methodology above, the homes with known First Floor Elevations were selected (238 homes) and the calculated values subtracted from the plan values to create a difference data. The data was then exported to Excel to be statistically analyzed and summarized. Figure 8: Histogram of Plan versus Calculated First Floor Elevation difference The 95% Confidence Level is 0.2’ with the Mean being 0.17’ and a Standard Deviation of 1.72. 47.7% of home calculated FFE’s were within ½’ of the plan FFE and 76.4% of home calculated FFE’s were within 1’ of the plan FFE. This is close enough to use for our analysis and to use for future city-wide models. The difference outlier homes were further analyzed: The biggest difference home (14.8’ plan above calculated FFE) was built after the LIDAR data was collected. The landscape was significantly raised to elevate the home out of the flood plain. The other homes with negative differences were mostly split-level walkout basement homes with FFE’s below the maximum elevation. The Basement Elevation calculations were also compared against the plan lFE’s in a total of 97 homes. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 -8.5-7.5-6.5-5.5-4.5-3.5-2.5-1.5-0.50.51.52.53.54.55.56.57.58.59.510.511.512.513.514.5MoreFrequency Plan - Calculated Difference First Floor Elevation: Plan versus Calculated Difference Figure 9: Histogram of Plan versus Calculated Basement Elevation difference: The 95% Confidence Level is 0.66’ with the Mean being 0.46’ and a Standard Deviation of 3.28 . 26.8% of home calculated FFE’s were within ½’ of the plan FFE and 43.3% of home calculated FFE’s were within 1’ of the plan FFE. The outlier homes correspond with the outliers in the FFE analysis. Flood Risk GIS Methodology: In ArcMap, the 1% and 10% inundation shape polygons were overlaid on an elevation relief map (from the DEM) and carefully inspected to remove false “artifacts” from the Barr model. Others were edited or removed when new build landscaping elevation was done to increase the home elevation and reduce the flood risk. Elevation contour lines from the plot surveys were used to reshape the polygons. After editing the polygons, the structures were matched with their subwatersheds by selecting the structures that intersected each subwatershed polygon. The subwatershed 1% and 10% inundation elevations were added for each watershed. Since most structures overlapped 2 or more subwatersheds, the higher inundation elevation numbers were added, unless there was surface inundation risk by lower elevation inundation. To determine surface flood risk, the structures overlapping the 1% and 10% inundation polygons were selected. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -8.5-7.5-6.5-5.5-4.5-3.5-2.5-1.5-0.50.51.52.53.54.55.56.57.58.59.510.511.512.513.514.5Frequency Plan - Calculated Difference Basement Elevation: Plan versus Calculated Difference Direct Flood Risk GIS Methodology: The data was selected using the commands below for each 1% and 10% risk: Moderate Flood Risk: Type = ‘Single Family’ AND SurfaceFlood10%/1% = 'Yes' AND ( FloodElevation10%/1% > Minimum Adjacent Elevation) AND ( FloodElevation10%/1% </= Average Elevation) Major Flood Risk: Type = ‘Single Family’ AND SurfaceFlood10%/1% = 'Yes' AND ( FloodElevation10%/1% > Average_Elevation ) AND ( FloodElevation10%/1% </=Maximum_Elevation) Severe Flood Risk: Type = ‘Single Family’ AND SurfaceFlood10%/1% = 'Yes' AND FloodElevation10%/1% > Maximum_Elevation Indirect Flood Risk GIS Methodology: The data was selected using the commands below for each 1% and 10% risk: Minor: Type = ‘Single Family’AND FloodElevation10%/1% <=( BasementElevation + 4) AND ( FloodElevation10%/1% > BasementElevation) Moderate: Type = ‘Single Family’AND FloodElevation10%/1% >( BasementElevation + 4) Sanitary Flood Risk Methodology Moderate: • Select by Attributes: DirectFloodRisk 10%/1% = ‘Major’ OR DirectFloodRisk 10%/1% = ‘Severe’ • SanitaryRiskElevation10%/1% = BasementEvelation + 1. Sort the homes from lowest to highest sanitary risk elevation • Create a 250’ buffer around the selected homes, using the buffer tool • Select by location the buildings intersecting the each buffer, starting with the buffer from the target home with the lowest sanitary elevation and work upwards, since there will be overlap. • Then select by attributes from that selection Type = ‘Single Family’ AND Sewershed = [the one from the target home] • Remove any other target homes with higher sanitary risk elevations from the selection, then copy the SanitaryRiskElevation for the target home to the rest of the homes in the buffer • Then Select by Attributes from current selection: SanitaryRiskElevation10%/1% > BasementElevation. The selected homes will be your Moderate Risk homes Major: Major is done similar to Moderate, with the following differences: • Review Moderate flood risk buffers for clusters of over 3 homes with Major or Severe Direct Flood risk that are on the same sanitary main. Select the buffers of these homes and export selected to create a new feature class • Then Select by Attributes: DirectFloodRisk 10%/1% = ‘Major’ OR DirectFloodRisk 10%/1% = ‘Severe’ • SanitaryRiskElevation10%/1% = BasementElevation +5. Sort the homes from lowest to highest sanitary risk elevation •Repeat the rest of the steps from the Moderate Sanitary Risk Methodology Potential Mitigation Option Mapping The Barr Engineering team helped created an Excel Macro-enabled spreadsheet to calculate and summarize the annualized risk to each home, based on current conditions and each potential mitigation option. The annualized risk data for each home and condition was then imported to ArcMap and merged with the home data feature class. The risk change was calculated for each option by home by subtracting the risk for the option from the current condition risk. The homes removed from risk classifications were calculated by applying a selection criterion for the current risk not equal to zero and the improvement option equaling zero. These selections were exported as layers for creating the maps below. 3 sets of maps were made with this data: -A single Greatest Impact map showing the at-risk homes categorized by the option that would yield the greatest improvement to existing conditions. The greatest improvement option for each home was calculated by selecting the option with the highest risk changes (positive). The homes that had multiple options with the same improvement were left out. -A series of maps depicting the homes at risk for current and each improvement condition. The maps for the improvement conditions also included a category for the homes removed from risk for the specified condition. A color gradient was used to show the risk level to each home in $3000 increments (not noted on the maps to keep confidential). -A series of maps showing the risk change from existing conditions for the improvement options. Some of the improvement options had a few homes with increased risk, which were depicted in red, while the improvement risk decrease amounts (in $3000 increments as above) were shown on a green gradient. A category showing the homes removed from risk was also shown for each option. Resources References for concept used in creating expected annual damage and damage-exceedance probability and cost curves; https://www.nap.edu/read/21720/chapter/5 http://www.naic.org/documents/cipr_study_1704_flood_risk.pdf https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1623/hysj.52.5.1016 https://www.fema.gov/media-library- data/a10327c71a76f7c88d7cf403dcf60f4f/Actuarial_Methods_and_Assumptions_2013-09-04_508.pdf Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Greatest Impact Flood Mitigation Options Greatest Impact Alt3a (2 homes)Alt5a (1 home)Alt7b (69 homes) Alt8 (13 homes)Alt9 (11 homes) No Impact Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Existing Conditions (160 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 2 3 4 5 - highest risk No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Option Alt 2b (134 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 2 3 4 5 - highest risk homes removed from risk (26 homes) No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Option Alt 3a (150 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 2 3 4 5 - highest risk homes removed from risk (11 homes) No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Option Alt 4a (154 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 2 3 4 5 - highest risk homes removed from risk (6 homes) No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Option Alt 5a (155 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 2 3 4 5 - highest risk homes removed from risk (5 homes) No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Option Alt 7b (123 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 2 3 4 5 - highest risk homes removed from risk (38 homes) No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Option Alt 8 (155 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 23 4 5 - highest risk homes removed from risk (5 homes) No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey 45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Homes at Risk of Inundation Option Alt 9 (126 homes at risk) 1 - lowest risk 2 3 4 5 - highest risk homes removed from risk (34 homes) No risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Flood Risk Change by Mitigation Option Option Alt 2b 1 - small risk increase no change 1 - small risk decrease23 45 - large risk decrease removed from risk Proposed Berm around Weber Pond may mitigate increased flood risk to surrounding homes Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Flood Risk Change by Mitigation Option Option Alt 3a 1 - small risk increase no change 1 - small risk decrease 2345 - large risk decrease removed from risk Proposed Flood Wall may mitigate increased risk to home Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Flood Risk Change by Mitigation Option Option Alt 4a 1 - small risk increase no change 1 - small risk decrease23 45 - large risk decrease removed from risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Flood Risk Change by Mitigation Option Option Alt 5a no change 1 - small risk decrease 2345 - large risk decrease removed from risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Flood Risk Change by Mitigation Option Option Alt 7b 1 - small risk increase no change 1 - small risk decrease 2345 - large risk decrease removed from risk Proposed Flood Wall may mitigate increased risk to home Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Flood Risk Change by Mitigation Option Option Alt 8 no change 1 - small risk decrease 2345 - large risk decrease removed from risk Weber Field Park Open Space 5 Kojetin Park Open Space 6 France44th Grimes42nd 40th LynnScottMorningsideAldenKipling SunnysideCrockerBransonMonterey45th EtonCurveOakdaleNatchezSidellInglewoodLittel LynnOakdale ² City of Edina Engineering Dept Semptember 2018 Morningside Flood Risk Change by Mitigation Option Option Alt 9 no change 1 - small risk decrease 2345 - large risk decrease removed from risk Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Memorandum To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Project: 23271649.00 1.0 Purpose of Project and Project Background This technical memorandum summarizes Barr Engineering Co.’s (Barr’s) preliminary evaluation and conceptual design of potential flood risk reduction options for the Morningside neighborhood within the city of Edina. This work included a high-level evaluation of potential flood risk reduction options and development of associated planning-level opinion of probable construction costs. In parallel to Barr’s work, city of Edina staff (City) have been working on an approach for summarizing impacted structures and estimating potential flood damages and we understand that this damage information (dollars) will be used in conjunction with the estimated project cost data developed by Barr to help City staff further evaluate the costs and benefits of flood risk reduction opportunities in the study area. 2.0 Description of Existing Conditions The Morningside/Weber Park area is described in the City’s 2018 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (CWRMP, reference (1)): The Morningside/Weber Park area is in the far northeastern corner of Edina, bordering St. Louis Park to the north and Minneapolis to the east. The area is characterized by numerous backyard depressions and several large low-lying areas, including Weber Park. There are two large stormwater detention basins in the area, one located just north of West 42nd Street between Lynn Avenue and Kipling Avenue, and the other located just north of West 42nd Street and west of France Avenue South (in Weber Park). The area is drained by a piped outlet that conveys stormwater to Lake Bde Maka Ska (formerly named Lake Calhoun) in Minneapolis. The storm sewer and detention basins in this area were originally designed for the 2-percent-annual-chance (50-year) storm event using TP-40 rainfall frequency estimates. Portions of this area have experienced flood problems historically. Model results indicate that approximately 65 principle structures and Avail Academy – Edina Campus (formerly Calvin Christian School) may be directly impacted by the 1-percent-annual-chance (100-year) flood elevations within this area. In the west part of this area, the flood elevation is approximately 872.1 feet (subwatershed MS_26). In the southwest part of this area, the flood elevation is approximately 871.7 feet (subwatershed MS_15). In the southeast part of this area, the flood elevation is approximately 870.1 feet To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Page: 2 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Technical Summary Memo\Morningside FRRS Exec Summary Memo_11192018.docx (subwatershed MS_52). In subwatersheds MS_40 and MS_39a and MS_39b, the flood elevation is 870.0 feet. In the smaller depressions without outlets to storm sewer such as subwatersheds MS_58, MS_20, MS_22, MS_57, MS_17, and MS_24, the peak flood elevations are 872.9 feet, 877.3 feet, 872.4 feet, 902.5 feet, 902.5 feet, and 872.1 feet respectively. Flood elevations in subwatersheds MS_20 and MS_22 are controlled by the 10-day snowmelt event, while flood elevations in the remaining subwatersheds are controlled by the 24- hour duration event. Flood inundation mapping for the 1-percent-annual-chance (100-year) and the 10-percent-annual-chance (10-year) storm events can be found on Figure 12.3 of the CWRMP and on the City’s Interactive Web Map. 3.0 Potential Flood Risk Reduction Options Several potential flood risk reduction options were evaluated using the City’s XP-SWMM model. Five storm recurrence intervals (i.e., 5-year, 10-year, 25-year, 50-year, and 100-year 24-hour storm events) were simulated for each flood risk reduction option to help understand the amount of improvement each option can achieve depending on the severity of the rainfall event. Barr conducted a cursory evaluation of potentially impacted structures for each potential flood risk reduction option to assess which options provided the greatest level of flood risk reduction (in terms of a reduction in the number of impacted structures). The seven options that provided the greatest level of flood risk reduction are described below and additional details are also shown on the figures included in Attachment A. • Option 2b: Increase the size of the main trunk storm sewer along West 42nd Street and Crocker Avenue (up to 60”), including some of the lateral storm sewer (e.g., along Grimes Avenue, 24” to 48”), and construct a flood wall on the east and south sides of Weber Pond, between the pond and the adjacent residential properties, tying into West 42nd Street on the south side of Weber Pond (Figure A-1). • Option 3a: Provide additional flood storage by excavating (i.e., lowering) the ballfield area of Weber Park and reconstructing the fields, excavating the wooded area north of Weber Pond, excavating and re-grading the low area between Lynn Avenue and Kipling Avenue north of West 42nd Street, lowering the open area between Susan Lindgren Elementary School and Monterey Avenue (Yale Gardens Park), and excavating some of the backyards between 44th Street and Branson Street. Additionally, construct a flood wall on the east and south sides of Weber Pond, between the pond and the adjacent residential properties (also included in Option 2b), and construct an earthen berm along the west side of Monterey Avenue between West 41st Street and West 42nd Street. This option would also include installation of a culvert to connect Weber Pond to the newly excavated storage in the wooded area north of West 41st Street (Figure A-2). • Option 4a: Provide additional flood storage by excavating and re-grading the low area between Lynn Avenue and Kipling Avenue north of West 42nd Street, and installing predictive pumping To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Page: 3 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Technical Summary Memo\Morningside FRRS Exec Summary Memo_11192018.docx systems from the aforementioned low area and Weber Pond to the park (Minikahda Vista Park) north of Avail Academy – Edina Campus to free up flood storage capacity prior to significant rainfall events (Figure A-3). The predictive pumping rates were chosen to draw down these two water bodies from their normal levels to about 6-inches of water depth over a 24 hour period (recognizing that predicting storms more than 24 hours in advance is challenging). For modeling purposes, the pumping rates were assumed to be the same regardless of predicted precipitation amounts in order to maximize available flood storage. • Option 5a: Provide additional flood storage by installing underground storage in Weber Park and the open area between Susan Lindgren Elementary School and Monterey Avenue (Yale Gardens Park). Water would be diverted from the storm sewer to the underground storage by installing three diversion weirs in the existing storm sewer manholes (Figure A-4). Pumps would be used to draw down water levels in the underground storage after precipitation events (one pump in each underground storage unit). • Option 7b: A combination of Options 2b, 3a, and 4a (Figure A-5), which includes: o Increasing the size of the trunk storm sewer along West 42nd Street and Crocker Avenue (up to 60”) and some of the lateral storm sewer (e.g., along Grimes Avenue, 24” to 48”) o Excavating additional flood storage in the low area between Lynn Avenue and Kipling Avenue o Installing predictive pumping systems o Excavating (lowering) the open area between Susan Lindgren Elementary School and Monterey Avenue (Yale Gardens Park) o Constructing an earthen berm west of Monterey Avenue o Constructing a flood wall east and south of Weber Pond • Option 8: A more simple variant of Option 3a (Figure A-6), which includes: o Excavating (i.e., lowering) the ballfields in Weber Park and excavating (to a greater extent, and deeper, than in Option 3a) the wooded area north of Weber Pond o Constructing a flood wall east and south of Weber Pond o Modifying (lowering) the inverts of the storm sewer pipe from Weber Pond to Minneapolis so that the normal water level of Weber Pond can be lowered by less than 2 feet. • Option 9: A combination of Option 2b, parts of 5a, and 8 (Figure A-7), which includes: o Increasing the size of the trunk storm sewer along West 42nd Street and Crocker Avenue (up to 60”) and some of the lateral storm sewer (e.g., along Grimes Avenue, 24” to 48”) o Constructing a flood wall on the east and south sides of Weber Pond To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Page: 4 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Technical Summary Memo\Morningside FRRS Exec Summary Memo_11192018.docx o Excavating (i.e., lowering) the ballfields at Weber Park and excavating (to a greater extent) the wooded area north of Weber Pond. o Modifying (lowering) the inverts of the storm sewer from Weber Pond to Minneapolis so that the normal water level of Weber Pond can be lowered by less than 2 feet. o Installing underground storage in Yale Gardens Park, the required diversion weir in the nearby manhole structure, and the low-flow pump to drain the stored water. 4.0 Results Barr provided tables of peak flood elevations to the City for a subsequent analysis of flood consequences and damages (reference (2)). The tables summarized flood elevations, by subwatershed, under existing conditions and under each of the seven flood risk reduction options for each of the five modeled recurrence intervals. Barr and City staff then developed a method to estimate flood damages based on the peak flood elevations and approximate home elevations. The goal of the analysis was to estimate flood risk and associated impacts at a neighborhood-scale for varying storm events. The flood damage estimates reflect “loss potential” in dollars, based on estimated flood loss potential tables published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (reference (3)) and assumptions or judgments about the probability of damage given a flood level relative to the assumed (LiDAR-based) home elevations. The methodology for quantifying flood risk accounts for probability of flood events, probability of damage, and the magnitude of damages for existing conditions and for each of the seven flood risk reduction options. This approach for quantifying flood risk considers damage due to potential direct flooding of homes at the surface, indirect flooding of homes via groundwater, and flooding of homes via sanitary sewer backups. The results are detailed in the City’s documentation (reference (4)) and are summarized below to provide a comparison of relative flood risk reduction in terms of the number of impacted principle structures. Please note that in the City’s documentation and the summary provided below, principle structures are referred to as “homes”. Additionally, homes that are referred to as “removed from risk” in the summary below are homes that are no longer at risk of damage by the three damage modes considered for storm events that have a 1%, or greater, chance of occurring each year; however, no home is ever removed from all flood risk. Homes described as “increased risk” would expect higher peak flood levels for some or all of the storm events modeled, and subsequently, higher expected damages in dollars. Conversely, homes described as “decreased risk” would expect lower peak flood levels for some or all of the storm events modeled, and subsequently lower expected damages in dollars. • Option 2b: 26 homes were completely removed from risk, the risk was decreased for 111 homes throughout the area, and the risk was increased for 15 homes. These 15 homes are primarily around Weber Pond where water would accumulate due to the additional conveyance of storm sewer upstream. 6 of those homes where the risk increased would be protected by the flood wall, increasing the total number of homes removed from risk to 32. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Page: 5 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Technical Summary Memo\Morningside FRRS Exec Summary Memo_11192018.docx • Option 3a: 11 homes were completely removed from risk, the risk was decreased for 117 homes throughout the area, and the risk was increased for one home, which is near Yale Gardens Park where additional storage and the earthen berm would allow water to be stored to a higher elevation. However, the berm would separate this home from the stored water and it would be protected, increasing the total number of homes removed from risk to 12. • Option 4a: 6 homes were completely removed from risk, the risk was decreased for 127 homes throughout the area, and the risk was increased for 1 home. This 1 house is east of Weber Pond. Refinement of the predictive pumping scheme may help in further protecting this home. • Option 5a: 5 homes were completely removed from risk, the risk was decreased for 92 homes throughout the area, and the risk was not increased for any homes. • Option 7b: 38 homes were completely removed from risk, the risk was decreased for 150 homes throughout the area, and the risk was increased for 1 home. This 1 house is near Yale Gardens Park where additional storage and the earthen berm would store water higher. However, the berm would separate this home from the stored water and it would be protected, increasing the total number of homes removed from risk to 39. • Option 8: 5 homes were completely removed from risk, the risk was decreased for 74 homes throughout the area, and the risk was not increased for any homes. • Option 9: 34 homes were completely removed from risk, the risk was decreased for 136 homes throughout the area, and the risk was not increased for any homes. 5.0 Planning-Level Opinion of Probable Construction Cost The Engineer’s planning-level opinions of probable construction cost have been developed for each of the flood risk reduction options discussed in Section 3.0 and are included as Attachment B. The planning- level opinions of probable construction cost are intended to provide assistance in evaluating and comparing flood risk reduction options and should not be assumed as absolute values for given options. These opinions of probable cost generally correspond to standards established by the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE). This cost estimate is characterized by limited project definition, wide-scale use of parametric models to calculate estimated costs (i.e., making extensive use of order-of- magnitude costs from similar projects or proposals), and uncertainty. At this stage of planning, the range of uncertainty of total project cost is high. Due to the early stage of the project, it is standard practice to place a broad accuracy range around the point cost estimate. The estimated accuracy range for the opinions of probable cost developed as part of this analysis is -30% to +50%. All estimated construction costs are presented in 2018 U.S. dollars and include costs for engineering and project administration. Quantities are estimated with calculations based on site development assumptions as described for each potential flood risk reduction option. Dimensions, areas and volumes were assumed based on LiDAR elevation data and current understanding of proposed grading. For each potential flood risk reduction To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Page: 6 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Technical Summary Memo\Morningside FRRS Exec Summary Memo_11192018.docx option considered, planning-level opinion of costs do not include land acquisition or coordination with residents or other subcontractors. The opinion of probable cost provided in this report is made on the basis of Barr Engineering’s experience and qualifications and represents our best judgment as experienced and qualified professionals familiar with the project. It is acknowledged that additional investigations and additional site specific information that become available in the next stage of study or design may result in changes to the assumed configuration, cost and functioning of project features. In addition, because we have no control over the eventual cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, or over the contractor’s methods of determining prices, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Barr cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids, or actual costs will not vary from the planning-level opinion of probable costs presented. 6.0 References 1. City of Edina. 2018 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. Edina, MN : s.n., July 2018. 2. Barr Engineering Co. Annualized Damage Method - Barr to Edina Round 2 - with Macro.xlsm. [Excel File] September 14, 2018. 3. FEMA. Estimated Flood Loss Potential Tables. Flood Loss Estimations 2017. [Online] [Original data source: National Flood Services, FloodTools.com] [Cited: September 1, 2018.] https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1499290622913- 0bcd74f47bf20aa94998a5a920837710/Flood_Loss_Estimations_2017.pdf. 4. City of Edina. Edina Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Concepts. Edina, MN : s.n., September 2018. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Page: 7 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Technical Summary Memo\Morningside FRRS Exec Summary Memo_11192018.docx Attachment A Map Figures of the Flood Improvement Options 970 foot flood wall (top elev=871 ft) 456717 45673 France Ave SW 44th St W 42nd St Grimes Ave W 39th St Ewing Ave SMorningside Rd W 40th St Alden Dr Scott Ter Lynn Ave Kipling Ave Wood Da le Ave S Branson St Crocker Ave Monterey Ave Sunnyside Rd Lynn Ave SVallacher Ave Joppa Ave SKipling Ave SNatchez Ave SW 41st St Inglewood Ave SDar t A ve W 40th La Eaton Pl Ottawa Ave SW 45th StOakdale Ave C u r v e A v e Inglewood AveW 42 1/2 St Colgate A v e Glendale Ter Little St Monterey Ave SNatchez Ave Waveland Ter Glenhurst Ave SSunnyside Ave Ewing Ave SOttawa Ave SLynn Ave W 41st St Ottawa Ave SW 40th St W 45th St Oakdale Ave Figure A-1 PROPOSED FLOOD RISK REDUCTION OPTION - OPTION 2BMorningside Neighborhood City of Edina Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-06 12:23 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\Morningside FRRS 23271649\Maps\Figure X Option 2b.mxd User: sms Option 2B Proposed Storm Sewer Size Increase (up to 60") Option 2B Flood Wall !>Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Existing Storm Sewer Subwatersheds Parcels 0 240 480Feet !;N Note: Vertical datum for all listed elevations is NGVD29 Imagery: USDA NRCS NAIP, 2017 Excavate 4.3 ac-ft580 foot berm (top elev = 874 ft) Excavate 16.3 ac-ft970 foot flood wall (top elev = 870 ft) Excavate 8.0 ac-ft Excavate 13.6 ac-ft Excavate 2.3 ac-ft 456717 45673 France Ave SW 44th St W 42nd St Grimes Ave W 39th St Ewing Ave SMorningside Rd W 40th St Alden Dr Scott Ter Lynn Ave Kipling Ave Wood Da le Ave S Branson St Crocker Ave Sunnyside Rd Lynn Ave SVallacher Ave Joppa Ave SKipling Ave SNatchez Ave SW 41st St Inglewood Ave SDar t A ve W 40th La Eaton Pl Ottawa Ave SW 45th StOakdale Ave Cu r v e A v e W 42 1/2 St Colgate A v e Glendale Ter Little St Monterey Ave SNatchez Ave Waveland Ter Glenhurst Ave SSunnyside Ave Ewing Ave SOttawa Ave SLynn Ave W 41st St Ottawa Ave SW 40th St W 45th St Oa k da le A ve Figure A-2 PROPOSED FLOOD RISK REDUCTION OPTION - OPTION 3AMorningside Neighborhood City of Edina Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-06 12:22 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\Morningside FRRS 23271649\Maps\Figure X Option 3a.mxd User: sms Option 3A Berm / Flood Wall Option 3A Excavation Option 3A Culvert !>Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Existing Storm Sewer Subwatersheds Parcels 0 240 480Feet !;N Imagery: USDA NRCS NAIP, 2017 Note: Vertical datum for all listed elevations is NGVD29 456717 45673 France Ave SW 44th St W 42nd St Grimes Ave W 39th St Ewing Ave SMorningside Rd W 40th St Alden Dr Scott Ter Lynn Ave Kipling Ave Wood Da le Ave S Branson St Crocker Ave Monterey Ave Sunnyside Rd Lynn Ave SVallacher Ave Joppa Ave SKipling Ave SNatchez Ave SW 41st St Inglewood Ave SDar t A ve W 40th La Eaton Pl Ottawa Ave SW 45th StOakdale Ave C u r v e A v e Inglewood AveW 42 1/2 St Colgate A v e Glendale Ter Little St Monterey Ave SNatchez Ave Waveland Ter Glenhurst Ave SSunnyside Ave Ewing Ave SOttawa Ave SLynn Ave W 41st St Ottawa Ave SW 40th St W 45th St Oakdale Ave Figure A-3 PROPOSED FLOOD RISK REDUCTION OPTION - OPTION 4AMorningside Neighborhood City of Edina Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-06 12:26 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\Morningside FRRS 23271649\Maps\Figure X Option 4a.mxd User: sms Option 4A Predictive Pumping Option 4A Excavation !>Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Existing Storm Sewer Subwatersheds Parcels 0 240 480Feet !;N Imagery: USDA NRCS NAIP, 2017 Note: Vertical datum for all listed elevations is NGVD29 Excavate 9.4 ac-ft Predictive Pumping at 4.2 cfs for 24 hrs Predictive Pumping at 9.3 cfs for 24 hrs 456717 45673 France Ave SW 44th St W 42nd St Grimes Ave W 39th St Ewing Ave SMorningside Rd W 40th St Alden Dr Scott Ter Lynn Ave Kipling Ave Wood Da le Ave S Branson St Crocker Ave Monterey Ave Sunnyside Rd Lynn Ave SVallacher Ave Joppa Ave SKipling Ave SNatchez Ave SW 41st St Inglewood Ave SDar t A ve W 40th La Eaton Pl Ottawa Ave SW 45th StOakdale Ave C u r v e A v e Inglewood AveW 42 1/2 St Colgate A v e Glendale Ter Little St Monterey Ave SNatchez Ave Waveland Ter Glenhurst Ave SSunnyside Ave Ewing Ave SOttawa Ave SLynn Ave W 41st St Ottawa Ave SW 40th St W 45th St Oakdale Ave Figure A-4 PROPOSED FLOOD RISK REDUCTION OPTION - OPTION 5AMorningside Neighborhood City of Edina Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-06 15:53 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\Morningside FRRS 23271649\Maps\Figure X Option 5a.mxd User: sms Option 5A Underground Storage Option 5A Weir !>Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Existing Storm Sewer Subwatersheds Parcels 0 240 480Feet !;N Note: Vertical datum for all listed elevations is NGVD29 Imagery: USDA NRCS NAIP, 2017 Underground Storage 5.7 ac-ft Underground Storage 47.6 ac-ft 970 foot flood wall (top elev = 871 ft) Excavate 4.3 ac-ft580 foot berm (top elev = 874 ft) 456717 45673 France Ave SW 44th St W 42nd St Grimes Ave W 39th St Ewing Ave SMorningside Rd W 40th St Alden Dr Scott Ter Lynn Ave Kipling Ave Wood Da le Ave S Branson St Crocker Ave Monterey Ave Sunnyside Rd Lynn Ave SVallacher Ave Joppa Ave SKipling Ave SNatchez Ave SW 41st St Inglewood Ave SDar t A ve W 40th La Eaton Pl Ottawa Ave SW 45th StOakdale Ave Cu r v e A v e Inglewood Ave W 42 1/2 St Colgate A v e Glendale Ter Little St Monterey Ave SNatchez Ave Waveland Ter Glenhurst Ave SSunnyside Ave Ewing Ave SOttawa Ave SLynn Ave W 41st St Ottawa Ave SW 40th St W 45th St Oakdale Ave Figure A-5 PROPOSED FLOOD RISK REDUCTION OPTION - OPTION 7BMorningside Neighborhood City of Edina Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-06 12:35 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\Morningside FRRS 23271649\Maps\Figure X Option 7b.mxd User: sms Option 3A Berm / Flood Wall Option 4A Predictive Pumping Option 4A Excavation Option 3A Excavation !>Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Existing Storm Sewer Subwatersheds Parcels 0 240 480Feet !;N Imagery: USDA NRCS NAIP, 2017 Note: Vertical datum for all listed elevations is NGVD29 Excavate 2.3 ac-ft Excavate 9.4 ac-ft Predictive Pumping at 9.3 cfs for 24 hrs Predictive Pumping at 4.2 cfs for 24 hrs 456717 45673 France Ave SW 44th St W 42nd St Grimes Ave W 39th St Ewing Ave SMorningside Rd W 40th St Alden Dr Scott Ter Lynn Ave Kipling Ave Wood Da le Ave S Branson St Crocker Ave Monterey Ave Sunnyside Rd Lynn Ave SVallacher Ave Joppa Ave SKipling Ave SNatchez Ave SW 41st St Inglewood Ave SDar t A ve W 40th La Eaton Pl Ottawa Ave SW 45th StOakdale Ave Cu r v e A v e Inglewood AveW 42 1/2 St Colgate A v e Glendale Ter Little St Monterey Ave SNatchez Ave Waveland Ter Glenhurst Ave SSunnyside Ave Ewing Ave SOttawa Ave SLynn Ave W 41st St Ottawa Ave SW 40th St W 45th St Oakdale Ave Figure A-6 PPROPOSED FLOOD RISK REDUCTION OPTION - OPTION 8Morningside Neighborhood City of Edina Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-06 12:49 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\Morningside FRRS 23271649\Maps\Figure X Option 8.mxd User: sms Option 8 Proposed Storm Sewer Invert Changes Option 8 Berm Option 8 Excavation Option 8 Culvert !>Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Existing Storm Sewer Subwatersheds Parcels 0 240 480Feet !;N Note: Vertical datum for all listed elevations is NGVD29 Imagery: USDA NRCS NAIP, 2017 Excavate 16.3 ac-ftLower NWL by 1.93 ft 970 foot flood wall (top elev = 870 ft) Excavate 23.3 ac-ft 456717 45673 France Ave SW 44th St W 42nd St Grimes Ave W 39th St Ewing Ave SMorningside Rd W 40th St Alden Dr Scott Ter Lynn Ave Kipling Ave Wood Da le Ave S Branson St Crocker Ave Monterey Ave Sunnyside Rd Lynn Ave SVallacher Ave Joppa Ave SKipling Ave SNatchez Ave SW 41st St Inglewood Ave SDar t A ve W 40th La Eaton Pl Ottawa Ave SW 45th StOakdale Ave C u r v e A v e Inglewood AveW 42 1/2 St Colgate A v e Glendale Ter Little St Monterey Ave SNatchez Ave Waveland Ter Glenhurst Ave SSunnyside Ave Ewing Ave SOttawa Ave SLynn Ave W 41st St Ottawa Ave SW 40th St W 45th St Oakdale Ave Figure A-7 PROPOSED FLOOD RISK REDUCTION OPTION - OPTION 9Morningside Neighborhood City of Edina Barr Footer: ArcGIS 10.6, 2018-07-06 15:56 File: I:\Client\Edina\Projects\Morningside FRRS 23271649\Maps\Figure X Option 9.mxd User: sms Option 8 Proposed Storm Sewer Invert Changes Option 5A Underground Storage Option 5A Weir Option 8 Berm Option 8 Excavation Option 8 Culvert !>Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Existing Storm Sewer Subwatersheds Parcels 0 240 480Feet !;N Note: Vertical datum for all listed elevations is NGVD29 Imagery: USDA NRCS NAIP, 2017 UndergroundStorage 5.7 ac-ft Excavate 16.3 ac-ftLower NWL by 1.93 ft 970 foot flood wall (top elev = 870 ft) Excavate 23.3 ac-ft To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Cory Anderson, Sarah Stratton, and Janna Kieffer Subject: Morningside Neighborhood Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Conceptual Study Date: November 19, 2018 Page: 15 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Technical Summary Memo\Morningside FRRS Exec Summary Memo_11192018.docx Attachment B Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Project Cost for Flood Improvement Options PREPARED BY: BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY SHEET: 1 OF 7 BY:KJN2 DATE:7/6/2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY CHECKED BY: KAL DATE: 7/6/2018 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST APPROVED BY:DATE: PROJECT:Morningside FRRS Study ISSUED:DATE: LOCATION:City of Edina ISSUED:DATE: PROJECT #:23/27-1649.00 ISSUED:DATE: OPINION OF COST - SUMMARY ISSUED:DATE: Engineer's Opinion of Probable Project Cost Morningside Flood Mitigation Feasibility Project Option 2B Cat.ESTIMATED No.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST ITEM COST NOTES A Mobilization/Demobilization (10%)LS 1 $240,000.00 $240,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 B Temporary Erosion Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 C Flotation Silt Curtain LF 900 $11.00 $9,900.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 D Remove and Dispose of Existing Storm Sewer LF 4,580 $20.00 $91,600.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 E Remove and Dispose of Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Each 22 $750.00 $16,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 F 24" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (12 - 13' depth)LF 278 $110.00 $30,580.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 G 36" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 13' depth)LF 710 $170.00 $120,700.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 H 48" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (15' depth)LF 368 $270.00 $99,360.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 I 60" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 10' depth)LF 840 $225.00 $189,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 J 60" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (10 - 16' depth)LF 2,630 $340.00 $894,200.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 K Construct Drainage Structure SD-48 LF 14 $372.00 $5,208.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 L Construct Drainage Structure SD-60 LF 56 $608.00 $34,048.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 M Construct Drainage Structure SD-72 LF 14 $804.00 $11,256.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 N Construct Drainage Structure SD-84 LF 224 $1,450.00 $324,800.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 O Casting Assembly Each 22 $750.00 $16,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 P Tie-In Existing Storm Sewer Main to Manhole Each 6 $1,000.00 $6,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Q Connect CB Leads to Constructed Storm Sewer Each 38 $700.00 $26,600.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 R Excavation CY 1,110 $4.00 $4,440.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 S Offsite Disposal of Excavated Material CY 890 $16.00 $14,240.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 T Site Grading SY 2,230 $2.00 $4,460.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 U Reinforced Structural Concrete Flood Wall CY 450 $1,000.00 $450,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 V Clearing and Grubbing AC 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 W Tree 2", B&B Each 20 $500.00 $10,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 X Turf Establishment (w/ Disc Anchored Mulch)AC 1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $2,638,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (30%)$791,000.00 1,5,8 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $3,429,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION (30%)$1,029,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,8 RESIDENTIAL/CONSTRUCTION PERMANENT EASEMENT $11,000.00 1,2,3,5,8 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $4,469,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 -30%$3,129,000.00 5,8 50%$6,704,000.00 5,8 Notes 6 Estimate costs are to design, construct, and permit each alternative. The estimated costs do not include maintenance, monitoring or additional tasks following construction. 8 Estimate costs are reported to nearest thousand dollars. ESTIMATED ACCURACY RANGE 1 Limited Design Work Completed 2 Quantities Based on Design Work Completed. 3 Unit Prices Based on Information Available at This Time. 4 Minimal Soil and Field Investigations Completed. Costs do not included remediation of contaminated soils (if found). 5 This feasibility-level (Class 4, 10-15% design completion per ASTM E 2516-06) cost estimate is based on feasibility-level designs, alignments, quantities and unit prices. Costs will change with further design. Time value-of-money escalation costs are not included. A construction schedule is not available at this time. Contingency is an allowance for the net sum of costs that will be in the Final Total Project Cost at the time of the completion of design, but are not included at this level of project definition. The estimated accuracy range for the Total Project Cost as the project is defined is -30% to +50%. The accuracy range is based on professional judgement considering the level of design completed, the complexity of the project and the uncertainties in the project as scoped. The contingency and the accuracy range are not intended to include costs for future scope changes that are not part of the project as currently scoped or costs for risk contingency. Operation and Maintenance costs are not included. 7 Furnish and Install pipe cost per lineal foot includes all trenching, bedding, backfilling, compaction, and disposal of excess materials \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Cost Estimates\Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost_20180704.xlsx 1 PREPARED BY: BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY SHEET: 2 OF 7 BY:KJN2 DATE:7/6/2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY CHECKED BY: KAL DATE: 7/6/2018 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST APPROVED BY:DATE: PROJECT:Morningside FRRS Study ISSUED:DATE: LOCATION:City of Edina ISSUED:DATE: PROJECT #:23/27-1649.00 ISSUED:DATE: OPINION OF COST - SUMMARY ISSUED:DATE: Engineer's Opinion of Probable Project Cost Morningside Flood Mitigation Feasibility Project Option 3A Cat.ESTIMATED No.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST ITEM COST NOTES A Mobilization/Demobilization (10%)LS 1 $270,000.00 $270,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 B Temporary Erosion Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 C Dewatering LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 D Flotation Silt Curtain LF 1,000 $11.00 $11,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 E Remove Existing Sports Infrastructure LS 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 F Excavation CY 72,903 $4.00 $291,613.33 1,2,3,4,5,6 G Off Site Disposal of Excavated Material CY 72,290 $16.00 $1,156,634.07 1,2,3,4,5,6 H Site Grading SY 125,540 $2.00 $251,080.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 I Place On-Site Soil for Berm Construction CY 1,504 $5.00 $7,518.52 1,2,3,4,5,6 J 36" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (5' - 8' depth)LF 50 $110.00 $5,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 K 36" RC Pipe Sewer Flared End Section (Furnish and Install)Each 2 $1,540.00 $3,080.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 L MnDOT Class IV RipRap with Filter Fabric TON 53 $100.00 $5,275.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 M Reinforced Structural Concrete Flood Wall CY 450 $1,000.00 $450,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 N Clearing and Grubbing AC 9 $6,000.00 $54,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 O Upland Native Vegetation AC 5 $5,000.00 $25,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 P Tree 2", B&B Each 150 $500.00 $75,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Q Turf Establishment (w/ Disc Anchored Mulch)AC 17 $3,000.00 $52,314.05 1,2,3,4,5,6 R Sod SY 4,840 $6.00 $29,040.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 S Erosion Control Blanket SY 29,476 $2.00 $58,951.20 1,2,3,4,5,6 T Wetland Restoration AC 2.5 $10,000.00 $25,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 U Reconstruction of Baseball Field LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 V Reconstruction of Ice Rink LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $2,966,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (30%)$890,000.00 1,5,8 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $3,856,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION (30%)$1,157,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,8 RESIDENTIAL/CONSTRUCTION PERMANENT EASEMENT $56,000.00 1,2,3,5,8 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $5,069,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 -30%$3,549,000.00 5,8 50%$7,604,000.00 5,8 Notes 6 Estimate costs are to design, construct, and permit each alternative. The estimated costs do not include maintenance, monitoring or additional tasks following construction. 7 Furnish and Install pipe cost per lineal foot includes all trenching, bedding, backfilling, compaction, and disposal of excess materials 8 Estimate costs are reported to nearest thousand dollars. ESTIMATED ACCURACY RANGE 1 Limited Design Work Completed 2 Quantities Based on Design Work Completed. 3 Unit Prices Based on Information Available at This Time. 4 Minimal Soil and Field Investigations Completed. Costs do not included remediation of contaminated soils (if found). 5 This feasibility-level (Class 4, 10-15% design completion per ASTM E 2516-06) cost estimate is based on feasibility-level designs, alignments, quantities and unit prices. Costs will change with further design. Time value-of-money escalation costs are not included. A construction schedule is not available at this time. Contingency is an allowance for the net sum of costs that will be in the Final Total Project Cost at the time of the completion of design, but are not included at this level of project definition. The estimated accuracy range for the Total Project Cost as the project is defined is -30% to +50%. The accuracy range is based on professional judgement considering the level of design completed, the complexity of the project and the uncertainties in the project as scoped. The contingency and the accuracy range are not intended to include costs for future scope changes that are not part of the project as currently scoped or costs for risk contingency. Operation and Maintenance costs are not included. \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Cost Estimates\Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost_20180704.xlsx 2 PREPARED BY: BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY SHEET: 3 OF 7 BY:KJN2 DATE:7/6/2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY CHECKED BY: KAL DATE: 7/6/2018 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST APPROVED BY:DATE: PROJECT:Morningside FRRS Study ISSUED:DATE: LOCATION:City of Edina ISSUED:DATE: PROJECT #:23/27-1649.00 ISSUED:DATE: OPINION OF COST - SUMMARY ISSUED:DATE: Engineer's Opinion of Probable Project Cost Morningside Flood Mitigation Feasibility Project Option 4A Cat.ESTIMATED No.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST ITEM COST NOTES A Mobilization/Demobilization (10%)LS 1 $186,000.00 $186,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 B Temporary Erosion Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 C Excavation CY 15,165 $4.00 $60,661.33 1,2,3,4,5,6 D Off Site Disposal of Excavated Material CY 15,165 $16.00 $242,645.33 1,2,3,4,5,6 E Site Grading SY 14,520 $2.00 $29,040.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 F Opti CMAC Predictive Pumping Control System (Furnish and Install)Each 2 $85,000.00 $170,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 G 2,000 GPM Pumping Station (Includes Building Structure, Electric Supply, Control Panel)LS 1 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 H 4,000 GPM Pumping Station (Includes Building Structure, Electric Supply, Control Panel)LS 1 $700,000.00 $700,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 I Pumping Station Outlet Piping (Furnish and Install)LF 1,116 $40.00 $44,640.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 J Pumping Station Inlet Suction Piping (Furnish and Install)LF 24 $40.00 $960.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 K Tie-In Storm Sewer to Existing Manhole Each 2 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 L Clearing and Grubbing AC 3.2 $6,000.00 $19,239.67 1,2,3,4,5,6 M Upland Native Vegetation AC 0.7 $5,000.00 $3,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 N Tree 2", B&B Each 50 $500.00 $25,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 O Turf Establishment (w/ Disc Anchored Mulch)AC 0.5 $3,000.00 $1,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 P Erosion Control Blanket SY 1,452 $2.00 $2,904.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Q Wetland Restoration AC 2 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $2,038,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (30%)$611,000.00 1,5,8 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $2,649,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION (30%)$795,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,8 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $3,444,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 -30%$2,411,000.00 5,8 50%$5,166,000.00 5,8 Notes 6 Estimate costs are to design, construct, and permit each alternative. The estimated costs do not include maintenance, monitoring or additional tasks following construction. 7 Furnish and Install pipe cost per lineal foot includes all trenching, bedding, backfilling, compaction, and disposal of excess materials 8 Estimate costs are reported to nearest thousand dollars. ESTIMATED ACCURACY RANGE 1 Limited Design Work Completed 2 Quantities Based on Design Work Completed. 3 Unit Prices Based on Information Available at This Time. 4 Minimal Soil and Field Investigations Completed. Costs do not included remediation of contaminated soils (if found). 5 This feasibility-level (Class 4, 10-15% design completion per ASTM E 2516-06) cost estimate is based on feasibility-level designs, alignments, quantities and unit prices. Costs will change with further design. Time value-of-money escalation costs are not included. A construction schedule is not available at this time. Contingency is an allowance for the net sum of costs that will be in the Final Total Project Cost at the time of the completion of design, but are not included at this level of project definition. The estimated accuracy range for the Total Project Cost as the project is defined is -30% to +50%. The accuracy range is based on professional judgement considering the level of design completed, the complexity of the project and the uncertainties in the project as scoped. The contingency and the accuracy range are not intended to include costs for future scope changes that are not part of the project as currently scoped or costs for risk contingency. Operation and Maintenance costs are not included. \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Cost Estimates\Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost_20180704.xlsx 3 PREPARED BY: BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY SHEET: 4 OF 7 BY:KJN2 DATE:7/6/2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY CHECKED BY: KAL DATE: 7/6/2018 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST APPROVED BY:DATE: PROJECT:Morningside FRRS Study ISSUED:DATE: LOCATION:City of Edina ISSUED:DATE: PROJECT #:23/27-1649.00 ISSUED:DATE: OPINION OF COST - SUMMARY ISSUED:DATE: Engineer's Opinion of Probable Project Cost Morningside Flood Mitigation Feasibility Project Option 5A Cat.ESTIMATED No.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST ITEM COST NOTES A Mobilization/Demobilization LS 1 $576,000.00 $576,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 B Temporary Erosion Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 C Remove Existing Sports Infrastructure LS 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 D Excavation CY 785,587 $4.00 $3,142,346.67 1,2,3,4,5,6 E Excavate and Haul offsite CY 112,933 $16.00 $1,806,933.33 1,2,3,4,5,6 F Site Grading SY 43,560 $2.00 $87,120.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 G Salvage and Replace Existing Topsoil CY 7,260 $9.00 $65,340.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 H StormTrap Subsurface Storage CF 2,866,250 $6.00 $17,197,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 I 500 GPM Pump (Subsurface Storage Drawdown)Each 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 J 3,500 GPM Pump (Subsurface Storage Drawndown)Each 1 $300,000.00 $300,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 K 36" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (10' - 15' depth)LF 300 $215.00 $64,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 L 42" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (10' - 15' depth)LF 50 $270.00 $13,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 M Construct Drainage Structure SD-72 w/ Weir (Diversion Structure)Each 3 $15,000.00 $45,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 N Tie-In Existing Storm Sewer to Manhole Each 5 $1,000.00 $5,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 O Clearing and Grubbing AC 1 $6,000.00 $6,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 P Tree 2", B&B Each 25 $500.00 $12,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Q Turf Establishment (w/ Disc Anchored Mulch)AC 9.0 $3,000.00 $27,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 R Reconstruction of Baseball Field LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 S Reconstruction of Ice Rink LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $23,524,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (30%)$7,057,000.00 1,5,8 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $30,581,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION $1,100,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,8 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $31,681,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 -30%$22,177,000.00 5,8 50%$47,522,000.00 5,8 Notes 6 Estimate costs are to design, construct, and permit each alternative. The estimated costs do not include maintenance, monitoring or additional tasks following construction. 7 Furnish and Install pipe cost per lineal foot includes all trenching, bedding, backfilling, compaction, and disposal of excess materials 8 Estimate costs are reported to nearest thousand dollars. ESTIMATED ACCURACY RANGE 1 Limited Design Work Completed 2 Quantities Based on Design Work Completed. 3 Unit Prices Based on Information Available at This Time. 4 Minimal Soil and Field Investigations Completed. Costs do not included remediation of contaminated soils (if found). 5 This feasibility-level (Class 4, 10-15% design completion per ASTM E 2516-06) cost estimate is based on feasibility-level designs, alignments, quantities and unit prices. Costs will change with further design. Time value-of-money escalation costs are not included. A construction schedule is not available at this time. Contingency is an allowance for the net sum of costs that will be in the Final Total Project Cost at the time of the completion of design, but are not included at this level of project definition. The estimated accuracy range for the Total Project Cost as the project is defined is -30% to +50%. The accuracy range is based on professional judgement considering the level of design completed, the complexity of the project and the uncertainties in the project as scoped. The contingency and the accuracy range are not intended to include costs for future scope changes that are not part of the project as currently scoped or costs for risk contingency. Operation and Maintenance costs are not included. \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Cost Estimates\Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost_20180704.xlsx 4 PREPARED BY: BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY SHEET: 5 OF 7 BY:KJN2 DATE:7/6/2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY CHECKED BY: KAL DATE: 7/6/2018 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST APPROVED BY:DATE: PROJECT:Morningside FRRS Study ISSUED:DATE: LOCATION:City of Edina ISSUED:DATE: PROJECT #:23/27-1649.00 ISSUED:DATE: OPINION OF COST - SUMMARY ISSUED:DATE: Engineer's Opinion of Probable Project Cost Morningside Flood Mitigation Feasibility Project Option 7B Cat.ESTIMATED No.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST ITEM COST NOTES A Mobilization/Demobilization (10%)LS 1 $455,000.00 $455,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 B Temporary Erosion Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 C Excavation CY 26,923 $4.00 $107,693.33 1,2,3,4,5,6 D Off Site Disposal of Excavated Material CY 25,200 $16.00 $403,194.07 1,2,3,4,5,6 E Site Grading SY 40,712 $2.00 $81,424.44 1,2,3,4,5,6 Place On-Site Soil for Berm Construction CY 1,504 $5.00 $7,518.52 1,2,3,4,5,6 F Reinforced Structural Concrete Flood Wall CY 450 $1,000.00 $450,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 G Flotation Silt Curtain LF 900 $11.00 $9,900.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 H Remove and Dispose of Existing Storm Sewer LF 4,580 $20.00 $91,600.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 I Remove and Dispose of Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Each 22 $750.00 $16,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 J 24" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (12 - 13' depth)LF 278 $110.00 $30,580.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 K 36" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 13' depth)LF 710 $170.00 $120,700.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 L 48" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (15' depth)LF 368 $270.00 $99,360.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 M 60" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 10' depth)LF 840 $225.00 $189,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 N 60" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (10 - 16' depth)LF 2,630 $340.00 $894,200.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 O Construct Drainage Structure SD-48 LF 14 $372.00 $5,208.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 P Construct Drainage Structure SD-60 LF 56 $608.00 $34,048.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Q Construct Drainage Structure SD-72 LF 14 $804.00 $11,256.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 R Construct Drainage Structure SD-84 LF 224 $1,450.00 $324,800.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 S Casting Assembly Each 22 $750.00 $16,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 T Tie-In Storm Sewer Main to Manhole Each 9 $1,000.00 $9,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 U Connect CB Leads to Constructed Storm Sewer Each 38 $700.00 $26,600.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 V Opti CMAC Predictive Pumping Control System (Furnish and Install)Each 2 $85,000.00 $170,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 W 2,000 GPM Pumping Station (Includes Building Structure, Electric Supply, Control Panel)LS 1 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 X 4,000 GPM Pumping Station (Includes Building Structure, Electric Supply, Control Panel)LS 1 $700,000.00 $700,000.00 Y Pumping Station Outlet Piping (Furnish and Install)LF 1,116 $40.00 $44,640.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 Z Pumping Station Inlet Suction Piping (Furnish and Install)LF 24 $40.00 $960.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 AA Clearing and Grubbing AC 6 $6,000.00 $33,994.49 1,2,3,4,5,6 BB Upland Native Vegetation AC 0.7 $5,000.00 $3,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CC Wetland Restoration AC 2.0 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 DD Tree 2", B&B Each 150 $500.00 $75,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 EE Turf Establishment (w/ Disc Anchored Mulch)AC 4.7 $3,000.00 $14,134.85 1,2,3,4,5,6 FF Sod SY 4,840 $3.00 $14,520.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 GG Erosion Control Blanket SY 5,324 $2.00 $10,648.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $5,001,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (30%)$1,500,000.00 1,5,8 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $6,501,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION (30%)$1,950,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,8 RESIDENTIAL/CONSTRUCTION PERMANENT EASEMENT $56,000.00 1,2,3,5,8 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $8,507,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 -30%$5,955,000.00 5,8 50%$12,761,000.00 5,8 Notes 6 Estimate costs are to design, construct, and permit each alternative. The estimated costs do not include maintenance, monitoring or additional tasks following construction. 7 Furnish and Install pipe cost per lineal foot includes all trenching, bedding, backfilling, compaction, and disposal of excess materials 8 Estimate costs are reported to nearest thousand dollars. ESTIMATED ACCURACY RANGE 1 Limited Design Work Completed 2 Quantities Based on Design Work Completed. 3 Unit Prices Based on Information Available at This Time. 4 Minimal Soil and Field Investigations Completed. Costs do not included remediation of contaminated soils (if found). 5 This feasibility-level (Class 4, 10-15% design completion per ASTM E 2516-06) cost estimate is based on feasibility-level designs, alignments, quantities and unit prices. Costs will change with further design. Time value-of-money escalation costs are not included. A construction schedule is not available at this time. Contingency is an allowance for the net sum of costs that will be in the Final Total Project Cost at the time of the completion of design, but are not included at this level of project definition. The estimated accuracy range for the Total Project Cost as the project is defined is -30% to +50%. The accuracy range is based on professional judgement considering the level of design completed, the complexity of the project and the uncertainties in the project as scoped. The contingency and the accuracy range are not intended to include costs for future scope changes that are not part of the project as currently scoped or costs for risk contingency. Operation and Maintenance costs are not included. \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Cost Estimates\Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost_20180704.xlsx 5 PREPARED BY: BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY SHEET: 6 OF 7 BY:KJN2 DATE:7/6/2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY CHECKED BY: KAL DATE: 7/6/2018 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST APPROVED BY:DATE: PROJECT:Morningside FRRS Study ISSUED:DATE: LOCATION:City of Edina ISSUED:DATE: PROJECT #:23/27-1649.00 ISSUED:DATE: OPINION OF COST - SUMMARY ISSUED:DATE: Engineer's Opinion of Probable Project Cost Morningside Flood Mitigation Feasibility Project Option 8 Cat.ESTIMATED No.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST ITEM COST NOTES A Mobilization/Demobilization (10%)LS 1 $278,000.00 $278,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 B Temporary Erosion Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 C Dewatering LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 D Flotation Silt Curtain LF 1,000 $11.00 $11,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 E Remove Existing Sports Infrastructure LS 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 F Excavation CY 64,998 $4.00 $259,992.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 G Off Site Disposal of Excavated Material CY 64,778 $16.00 $1,036,448.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 H Site Grading SY 87,070 $2.00 $174,140.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 I Reinforced Structural Concrete Flood Wall CY 450 $1,000.00 $450,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 J Remove and Dispose of Existing Storm Sewer LF 1,190 $20.00 $23,800.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 K Remove and Dispose of Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Each 4 $750.00 $3,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 L 30" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 16' depth)LF 910 $160.00 $145,600.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 M 42" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 16' depth)LF 280 $250.00 $70,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 N Construct Drainage Structure SD-60 LF 16 $608.00 $9,728.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 O Construct Drainage Structure SD-72 LF 42 $804.00 $33,768.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 P Casting Assembly Each 4 $750.00 $3,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Q Tie-In Storm Sewer Main to Manhole Each 3 $1,000.00 $3,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 R Connect CB Leads to Constructed Storm Sewer Each 2 $700.00 $1,400.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 S 6' x 8' Box Culvert (Furnish and Install)LF 100 $1,000.00 $100,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 T 6' x 8' Box Culvert End Section (Furnish and Install)Each 4 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 U MnDOT Class IV RipRap with Filter Fabric TON 248 $100.00 $24,800.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 V Clearing and Grubbing AC 5 $6,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 W Upland Native Vegetation AC 4.5 $5,000.00 $22,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 X Tree 2", B&B Each 100 $500.00 $50,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Y Turf Establishment (w/ Disc Anchored Mulch)AC 13.0 $3,000.00 $38,969.01 1,2,3,4,5,6 Z Erosion Control Blanket SY 24,200 $2.00 $48,400.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 AA Reconstruction of Baseball Field LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 BB Reconstruction of Ice Rink LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CC Wetland Restoration AC 0.5 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $3,058,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (30%)$917,000.00 1,5,8 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $3,975,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION (30%)$1,193,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,8 RESIDENTIAL/CONSTRUCTION PERMANENT EASEMENT $11,000.00 1,2,3,5,8 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $5,179,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 -30%$3,626,000.00 5,8 50%$7,769,000.00 5,8 Notes 6 Estimate costs are to design, construct, and permit each alternative. The estimated costs do not include maintenance, monitoring or additional tasks following construction. 7 Furnish and Install pipe cost per lineal foot includes all trenching, bedding, backfilling, compaction, and disposal of excess materials 8 Estimate costs are reported to nearest thousand dollars. ESTIMATED ACCURACY RANGE 1 Limited Design Work Completed 2 Quantities Based on Design Work Completed. 3 Unit Prices Based on Information Available at This Time. 4 Minimal Soil and Field Investigations Completed. Costs do not included remediation of contaminated soils (if found). 5 This feasibility-level (Class 4, 10-15% design completion per ASTM E 2516-06) cost estimate is based on feasibility-level designs, alignments, quantities and unit prices. Costs will change with further design. Time value-of-money escalation costs are not included. A construction schedule is not available at this time. Contingency is an allowance for the net sum of costs that will be in the Final Total Project Cost at the time of the completion of design, but are not included at this level of project definition. The estimated accuracy range for the Total Project Cost as the project is defined is -30% to +50%. The accuracy range is based on professional judgement considering the level of design completed, the complexity of the project and the uncertainties in the project as scoped. The contingency and the accuracy range are not intended to include costs for future scope changes that are not part of the project as currently scoped or costs for risk contingency. Operation and Maintenance costs are not included. \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Cost Estimates\Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost_20180704.xlsx 6 PREPARED BY: BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY SHEET: 7 OF 7 BY:KJN2 DATE:7/6/2018 FEASIBILITY STUDY CHECKED BY: KAL DATE: 7/6/2018 ENGINEER'S OPINION OF PROBABLE PROJECT COST APPROVED BY:DATE: PROJECT:Morningside FRRS Study ISSUED:DATE: LOCATION:City of Edina ISSUED:DATE: PROJECT #:23/27-1649.00 ISSUED:DATE: OPINION OF COST - SUMMARY ISSUED:DATE: Engineer's Opinion of Probable Project Cost Morningside Flood Mitigation Feasibility Project Option 9 Cat.ESTIMATED No.ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST ITEM COST NOTES A Mobilization/Demobilization (10%)LS 1 $741,000.00 $741,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 B Temporary Erosion Control LS 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 C Dewatering LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 D Flotation Silt Curtain LF 1,000 $11.00 $11,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 E Remove Existing Sports Infrastructure LS 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 F Excavation CY 113,398 $4.00 $453,592.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 G Off Site Disposal of Excavated Material CY 101,885 $16.00 $1,630,154.67 1,2,3,4,5,6 H Site Grading SY 96,750 $2.00 $193,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 I Salvage and Replace Existing Topsoil CY 7,260 $9.00 $65,340.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 J Reinforced Structural Concrete Flood Wall CY 450 $1,000.00 $450,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 K 6' x 8' Box Culvert (Furnish and Install)LF 100 $1,000.00 $100,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 L 6' x 8' Box Culvert End Section (Furnish and Install)Each 4 $10,000.00 $40,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 M MnDOT Class IV RipRap with Filter Fabric TON 248 $100.00 $24,800.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 N Remove and Dispose of Existing Storm Sewer LF 5,770 $20.00 $115,400.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 O Remove and Dispose of Existing Manhole/Catch Basin Each 26 $750.00 $19,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 P 24" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (12 - 13' depth)LF 278 $110.00 $30,580.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 Q 30" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 16' depth)LF 910 $160.00 $145,600.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 R 36" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 13' depth)LF 710 $170.00 $120,700.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 S 42" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 16' depth)LF 280 $250.00 $70,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 T 48" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (15' depth)LF 368 $270.00 $99,360.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 U 60" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (8 - 10' depth)LF 840 $225.00 $189,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 V 60" RC Pipe Sewer (Furnish and Install) (10 - 16' depth)LF 2,630 $340.00 $894,200.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 W Construct Drainage Structure SD-48 LF 14 $372.00 $5,208.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 X Construct Drainage Structure SD-60 LF 72 $608.00 $43,776.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 Y Construct Drainage Structure SD-72 LF 70 $804.00 $56,280.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 A Construct Drainage Structure SD-84 LF 224 $1,450.00 $324,800.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 AA Casting Assembly Each 26 $750.00 $19,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 BB Tie-In Storm Sewer Main to Manhole Each 9 $1,000.00 $9,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CC Connect CB Leads to Constructed Storm Sewer Each 40 $700.00 $28,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 DD 72" Diameter Weir Manhole (Diversion Structure)Each 1 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 EE StormTrap Subsurface Storage CF 304,920 $6.00 $1,829,520.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 FF 500 GPM Pump (Subsurface Storage Drawdown)Each 1 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 GG Clearing and Grubbing AC 5 $6,000.00 $30,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 HH Upland Native Vegetation AC 5 $5,000.00 $22,500.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 II Tree 2", B&B Each 100 $500.00 $50,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 JJ Turf Establishment (w/ Disc Anchored Mulch)AC 15.0 $3,000.00 $44,969.01 1,2,3,4,5,6 KK Erosion Control Blanket SY 24,200 $2.00 $48,400.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 LL Reconstruction of Baseball Field LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 MM Reconstruction of Ice Rink LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 NN Wetland Restoration AC 0.5 $10,000.00 $5,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL $8,151,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (30%)$2,445,000.00 1,5,8 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $10,596,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PERMITTING, AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION (30%)$3,179,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,8 RESIDENTIAL/CONSTRUCTION PERMANENT EASEMENT $11,000.00 1,2,3,5,8 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $13,786,000.00 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 -30%$9,651,000.00 5,8 50%$20,679,000.00 5,8 Notes 6 Estimate costs are to design, construct, and permit each alternative. The estimated costs do not include maintenance, monitoring or additional tasks following construction. 7 Furnish and Install pipe cost per lineal foot includes all trenching, bedding, backfilling, compaction, and disposal of excess materials 8 Estimate costs are reported to nearest thousand dollars. ESTIMATED ACCURACY RANGE 1 Limited Design Work Completed 2 Quantities Based on Design Work Completed. 3 Unit Prices Based on Information Available at This Time. 4 Minimal Soil and Field Investigations Completed. Costs do not included remediation of contaminated soils (if found). 5 This feasibility-level (Class 4, 10-15% design completion per ASTM E 2516-06) cost estimate is based on feasibility-level designs, alignments, quantities and unit prices. Costs will change with further design. Time value-of-money escalation costs are not included. A construction schedule is not available at this time. Contingency is an allowance for the net sum of costs that will be in the Final Total Project Cost at the time of the completion of design, but are not included at this level of project definition. The estimated accuracy range for the Total Project Cost as the project is defined is -30% to +50%. The accuracy range is based on professional judgement considering the level of design completed, the complexity of the project and the uncertainties in the project as scoped. The contingency and the accuracy range are not intended to include costs for future scope changes that are not part of the project as currently scoped or costs for risk contingency. Operation and Maintenance costs are not included. \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271649 Morningside FRRS Study\WorkFiles\Cost Estimates\Engineers Opinion of Probable Cost_20180704.xlsx 7 D Appendix D: ‘Keep your water to yourself: private infrastructure analysis’, technical memo Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Technical Memorandum To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Project: Edina Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Support (23271728.00) Executive Summary Barr was asked to review model-predicted flood impacts in the focal geography of the Morningside neighborhood to evaluate the sensitivity of those impacts to the magnitude of stormwater storage within the watershed. In particular, the focus was on underground storage methods within private property, the right-of-way, or under streets. This evaluation was conducted as a result of Task Force discussions about the potential benefits of requiring private homeowners to store stormwater on-site similar to requirements for commercial development. Barr reviewed the benefits achieved by storing the first 1-inch, 2-inches, and 3-inches of precipitation from storm events of varying size, from the 20%-annual-chance storm event (5-year storm; 3.59 inches) to the 1%-annual-chance storm event (100-year storm; 7.49 inches). For the private storage evaluation (underground storage vaults under a portion of each of the 570 residential parcels), storage was assumed for every parcel within the Morningside neighborhood. Barr found that storing the first 1-inch of storms of this magnitude had a negligible impact on flood levels. Storing the first 2-inches and 3-inches showed a more significant benefit with regards to reduction in peak flood levels. Depending on the storm event, and depending on the location within in the neighborhood, the results varied anywhere from flood level decreases of a few inches to decreasing nearly a foot and a half. However, this apparent benefit comes at an initial cost of approximately $15,000 per inch of stormwater stored, per residential parcel. To store 2-inches of runoff in the entire neighborhood (~570 residential parcels) would cost approximately $17 million. In addition, while the flood levels may be lowered, the number of homes that are removed from potential impacts from flood inundation is small. For example, one home may potentially be removed from flood inundation at Weber Pond depending on the storm event. Finally, the management and maintenance of these underground stormwater storage vaults distributed throughout an entire neighborhood is expected to be complicated and unprecedented. This is all to say, this solution would provide a moderate benefit for a very high cost. Additionally, a preliminary look at the compounding effect of climate change suggests that improvements realized by implementing additional private storage may eventually be negated by climate change (i.e., increased precipitation amounts, see Appendix B on Climate Change Impacts Analysis). To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 2 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Private Infrastructure Analysis Details A common example of private stormwater management infrastructure (infrastructure on a privately owned parcel), is a rainwater garden (Figure 1). Rainwater gardens are typically designed to store the first one inch of runoff generated from a storm, aimed at both reducing the volume of runoff and improving water quality downstream. Figure 1 Photo of a rainwater garden. Other examples of private infrastructure for stormwater storage can include tree trenches, cisterns, permeable pavement, and underground storage vaults. Figure 2 shows an example of an underground stormwater storage vault. To simplify our analysis, we assumed that all parcels in the Morningside neighborhood are approximately 60 feet wide (along the road), and also assumed that every parcel would have underground storage (below grade) that is 3 feet deep. Then we determined how wide the underground storage vault would need to be to contain 1 inch of runoff, 2 inches of runoff, or 4 inches of runoff. We found that underground storage vaults on every parcel in the Morningside neighborhood would need to be 5 feet wide to store 1 inch of runoff, 10 feet wide to store 2 inches of runoff, and 20 feet wide to store 4 inches of runoff. Figure 3 provides a graphic that shows the extent of underground storage needed for sample parcels in Morningside. Figure 2 Example of an underground storage vault (37th Avenue Greenway, Minneapolis). To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 3 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 3 Private stormwater storage sizing examples for storing varying amounts of runoff. Barr also analyzed using stormwater storage under streets and/or in the public right-of-way. Figure 4 provides a graphic that shows the approximate extent of underground storage available for a typical road within the Morningside neighborhood. Assuming two 15-foot wide (and 3 feet deep) underground storage vaults can be installed under all of the roads or right-of-way in the Morningside neighborhood, 3-inches of runoff could be stored in those vaults. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 4 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 4 Stormwater storage sizing (width) available for typical roads or right-of-way in the Morningside neighborhood. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 5 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 5 shows the subwatersheds in the Morningside neighborhood. Graphs are included below that show the results and range of benefits of residential/private stormwater storage for Weber Pond (subwatershed MS_40, Figure 6), for the area along Branson between Oakdale Avenue and Grimes Avenue (subwatershed MS_48, Figure 7), and for the area along Crocker Avenue between West 42nd Street and Morningside Road (subwatershed MS_2, Figure 8). Figure 5 Map showing subwatershed divides in and around the Morningside neighborhood To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 6 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx In Figure 6, the horizontal, maroon-dashed lines represent approximate low elevations based on structure footprints for the four lowest homes around Weber Pond. They may or may not represent actual low entry elevations of these homes. However, they give a good representation of the home elevations and how close they are to the flood levels. Figure 6 Peak water surface levels resulting from varying amounts of runoff stored using private infrastructure for varying storm events in the Weber Pond subwatershed (MS_40). At first glance, the reductions shown in Figure 6 appear smaller than would be expected. There are multiple other factors affecting the flood volume stored in Weber Pond. First, Weber Pond ultimately receives water from Edina and also from St. Louis Park and Minneapolis. While private infrastructure is overall beneficial, reducing the runoff to Weber Pond from Edina may allow more water from St. Louis Park and Minneapolis to fill the pond back up during an event. Second, at the peak flood elevations shown in Figure 6, stormwater flows out of Weber Pond both into Weber Park and over France Avenue to the east to Minneapolis. When ponds rise high enough to overflow banks, additional water does not tend to have a significant impact on the water level since water can start following natural overflow paths. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 7 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 7 Peak water surface levels resulting from varying amounts of runoff stored using private infrastructure for varying storm events in subwatershed MS_48. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 8 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 8 Peak water surface levels resulting from varying amounts of runoff stored using private infrastructure for varying storm events in subwatershed MS_2. Barr commonly estimates that the cost per cubic foot of underground stormwater storage is approximately $10 to $20. For one inch of runoff, for one 0.25-acre parcel, storage volume equals 900 cubic feet. This equates to a little under $15,000 (+/- $5,000) per parcel per inch of runoff stored. Figure 9 shows the approximate cost per parcel of underground storage using varying widths of underground storage units and varying amounts of runoff stored. To put the cost of private underground storage into perspective, Figure 10 shows a portion of the Morningside neighborhood (~180 parcels) and provides a breakdown of an approximate cost to capture two inches of runoff from every parcel. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 9 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx Figure 9 Approximate cost per parcel of underground storage using varying widths of underground storage units and varying amounts of runoff stored. Figure 10 Cost breakdown for using private stormwater storage for a portion of the Morningside neighborhood. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 10 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx In total, there are approximately 570 residential parcels in the Morningside neighborhood watershed drainage area, as shown in Figure 11. Figure 11 Parcels in the Morningside neighborhood watershed/drainage area. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix D - Private Infrastructure Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 11 \\barr.com\projects\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix D - Private Infrastructure.docx The results of Barr’s private storage analysis are summarized in Table 1 below. Recall that storing 1-inch of runoff from every parcel in Morningside had a marginal benefit in general on peak flood levels. Table 1 below shows that to store 2-inches of runoff in the entire neighborhood would cost approximately $17 million. While storing 2-inches of runoff does reduce flood levels, the number of homes that are removed from potential impacts from flood inundation is small. For example, as shown in Figure 6, depending on the storm event, this level of effort may potentially remove only one home from flood inundation at Weber Pond. Table 1 Summary of costs and benefits of private stormwater storage for the whole Morningside neighborhood. Inches of Runoff Stored Cost for All Parcels to Store the Runoff Flood Level Reduction Benefit (in feet) for Weber Pond Subwatershed (MS_40) 5-yr Storm (3.59" of precip) 10-yr Storm (4.29" of precip) 50-yr Storm (6.39" of precip) 100-yr Storm (7.49" of precip) 1 inch $ 8,550,000 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0 2 inches $ 17,100,000 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.3 3 inches $ 25,650,000 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.5 E Appendix E: ‘From ‘ill-drained’ to impervious: impervious surface analysis’, technical memo Barr Engineering Co. 4300 MarketPointe Drive, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55435 952.832.2600 www.barr.com Technical Memorandum To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Project: Edina Flood Risk Reduction Strategy Support (23271728.00) Executive Summary Barr was asked to review model-predicted flood impacts in the focal geography of the Morningside neighborhood, and to review the sensitivity of those impacts to the magnitude of imperviousness (the hard surfaces that prohibit water infiltration). For reference, the impervious area that is directly connected to the storm sewer system in the Morningside neighborhood is estimated to be about 25% of the total land area, in aggregate (Figure 1). The directly connected imperviousness is the portion of the watershed that is impervious and routes flow directly to an outlet (catch basin, pond, depression, outlet, etc.). Some prominent examples of this type of imperviousness in a low-density residential neighborhood tend to be streets, parking lots, driveways, water bodies (i.e., Weber Pond), portions of roofs with gutters and downspouts directed to impervious surfaces such as a driveway, etc. Figure 1 Imperviousness raster data set from the University of Minnesota. The Morningside neighborhood is in the northeast corner. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix E - Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 2 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis.docx Barr tested the sensitivity by modifying the stormwater model so that the imperviousness of the entire contributing drainage area was increased, decreased, and even lowered all the way to 0%, which reflects a pre-development condition. This sensitivity test was also completed for a range of storm events, from the 20%-annual-chance storm event (5-year storm) to the 1%-annual-chance storm event (100-year storm). As expected, the imperviousness sensitivity test showed that less impervious area generates less stormwater runoff and more impervious area generates more stormwater runoff. However, the magnitude of the runoff changes generated by adjusting imperviousness were not as impactful as may have been expected. For reference, in the Weber Pond subwatershed, the 1%-annual-chance storm event (100-year storm) flood level would need to be reduced by just over 4 feet in order to remove the 5 lowest homes from potential structural impacts from flood inundation. Based on Barr’s imperviousness analysis, reducing or increasing impervious area by half (50%) tends to cause the peak water level to decrease or increase by up to approximately half a foot. This effect is more significant for small storm events, and less so for larger storm events. While affecting the flood level by half a foot may seem like a big gain, this change removed one impacted home at most from the flood inundation area around Weber Pond. Again, to achieve even this low level of impact, the entire contributing area (all of the Morningside neighborhood) would be required to reduce imperviousness by half (i.e., road widths are cut in half, driveway widths are cut in half, roof area cut in half and/or downspouts Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Details The sensitivity analysis focused on design storm events (NOAA Atlas 14, MSE3 temporal distribution) rather than an observed historical event(s). Modeled design storm events included the 5-year (3.59 inches), 10-year (4.29 inches), 50-year (6.39 inches), and 100-year events (7.49 inches), all 24-hour durations (i.e., for a 100-year storm event, 7.49 inches fall over a 24-hour period of time). Imperviousness parameter values were adjusted relative to “base case” values from the stormwater model. In general, the “base case” imperviousness parameter values were adjusted to +50%, +25%, -25%, -50%, and finally a “low” case to attempt to significantly reduce runoff. The range of values for each of the sensitivity cases is listed in Table 1. Most of the Morningside neighborhood is “low density residential”; for simplicity, only the values for this land use type is presented in Table 1. All other land use types, with varying imperviousness were similarly adjusted upward and downward for this sensitivity analysis. Table 1 Imperviousness parameter values for the sensitivity analysis Parameter Low Case -50% -25% 0% (Base) +25% +50% Directly Connected Percent Impervious1 0% 2 ~13% ~19% ~25% ~31% ~38% 1) Only the value for “low density residential” is shown here, as this covers most of the model area. All land use types were similarly modified for each of the sensitivity cases (-50%, -25%, etc.) Subwatersheds in the Morningside neighborhood are shown in Figure 2. To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix E - Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 3 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis.docx Figure 2 Map showing subwatershed divides in and around the Morningside neighborhood The directly connected impervious percentage tends to have an impact up to ±0.5 feet for the ±50% change in the base value. Example graphs are included that show the results for Weber Pond (MS_40, Figure 3), for the low area between Lynn Avenue and Kipling Avenue, north of West 42nd Street (MS_26, Figure 4), and for a landlocked subwatershed (MS_22) between Lynn Avenue and Crocker Avenue, south of West 42nd Street (Figure 5). To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix E - Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 4 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis.docx In these figures, the horizontal, maroon-dashed lines represent approximate low elevations based on structure footprints for the five lowest homes around Weber Pond. They may or may not represent actual low entry elevations of these homes. However, they give a good representation of the home elevations and how close they are to the flood levels. Figure 3 Sensitivity analysis results showing peak flood levels in Weber Pond (subwatershed MS_40) for a range of imperviousness and a range of storm events. 865.0 865.5 866.0 866.5 867.0 867.5 868.0 868.5 869.0 869.5 870.0 -200%-175%-150%-125%-100%-75%-50%-25%0%25%50%75%Peak Water Surface Elevation (feet)% Change in Percent Impervious Comparing the Events for the Percent Impervious parameter, at MS_40 20% Annual Chance (5 year) 10% Annual Chance (10 year) 2% Annual Chance (50 year) 1% Annual Chance (100 year) Low Houses Zero Percent Impervious (undeveloped)CurrentCondition To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix E - Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 5 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis.docx Figure 4 Sensitivity analysis results showing peak flood levels in MS_26 for a range of imperviousness and a range of storm events. 868.0 869.0 870.0 871.0 872.0 873.0 874.0 -200%-175%-150%-125%-100%-75%-50%-25%0%25%50%75%Peak Water Surface Elevation (feet)% Change in Percent Impervious Comparing the Events for the Percent Impervious parameter, at MS_26 20% Annual Chance (5 year) 10% Annual Chance (10 year) 2% Annual Chance (50 year) 1% Annual Chance (100 year) Low Houses Zero Percent Impervious (undeveloped)CurrentCondition To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix E - Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 6 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis.docx Figure 5 Sensitivity analysis results showing peak flood levels in MS_22 (a landlocked subwatershed) for a range of imperviousness and a range of storm events. 869.5 870.0 870.5 871.0 871.5 872.0 872.5 873.0 873.5 -200%-175%-150%-125%-100%-75%-50%-25%0%25%50%75%Peak Water Surface Elevation (feet)% Change in Percent Impervious Comparing the Events for the Percent Impervious parameter, at MS_22 20% Annual Chance (5 year) 10% Annual Chance (10 year) 2% Annual Chance (50 year) 1% Annual Chance (100 year) Low Houses Zero Percent Impervious (undeveloped)CurrentCondition To: Jessica Wilson and Ross Bintner, City of Edina From: Sarah Stratton and Cory Anderson, Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Appendix E - Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis Date: March 30, 2020 Page: 7 P:\Mpls\23 MN\27\23271728 Flood Risk Reduction Strategy\WorkFiles\General Support\FRRS Appendices\FRRS Appendix E - Imperviousness Sensitivity Analysis.docx As mentioned previously, some prominent examples of directly connected imperviousness in a low- density residential neighborhood tend to be streets, parking lots, driveways, water bodies (i.e., Weber Pond), portions of roofs with gutters and downspouts directed to impervious surfaces such as a driveway, etc. To achieve a 50% decrease in this parameter, these portions of the watershed would need to decrease in area by 50%. In essence, this means driveway and street widths would be cut in half, half of the directly connected roof area would be rerouted to pervious surfaces, half of the parking spaces converted to pervious surfaces and/or routed to BMPs to offset the runoff, etc. Such changes over the entire watershed would be significant and require a coordinated effort from all parcels. This would produce a beneficial change in the peak flood level, but would generally be limited to a benefit of about half a foot or less in this neighborhood. For some homes adjacent to Weber Pond, for example, where the 100-year peak flood level is multiple feet above the suspected low entry elevations, the impacts to peak flood levels shown in Figure 3 due to changes in directly connected imperviousness do not change whether these homes are wet or dry during a large, intense storm event. The results of the sensitivity analysis change depending on the storm event that is being modeled (e.g., 5- year versus 10-year). Trends and overall magnitudes do not change substantially from what is shown in the few example figures above. Other cases of interest (different storms, different subwatersheds, etc.) can be viewed in a companion Excel spreadsheet generated for the Morningside XP-SWMM Modeling technical memorandum (Barr, March 2020). Finally, it is also important to remember that the results of the sensitivity analysis depend on the input storm itself. As described, this analysis used the NOAA Atlas 14, 24-hour design storm with a MSE3 temporal distribution. This storm is both significant in total precipitation depth and very intense in the middle part of the storm. Storms with high intensity near the beginning or near the end of the event may produce different results, as will storms with more moderate, consistent intensity. However, given that flood management within the City is currently informed by Atlas 14 storms with the MSE3 temporal distribution, this storm was used for the sensitivity analysis. F Appendix F: Actions for Flood Resilient Homes, fact sheets Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Actions and Programs Overview Surface water flooding Sanitary backflow Groundwater seepage Where does the flood water in my home come from? Flood waters come from different sources. No matter the source, all can cause extensive damage to your home. Depending on the situation, different actions will work better than others to reduce damage to your property from the excess water. Gathering more information about how the water is entering your home, such as through a home drainage assessment, will help you choose the appropriate solution. Typical scenarios can include: Sanitary backflow flooding can be caused by a blockage in the City’s sewer system. This normally occurs when the sewer pipes are flooded with stormwater. When this happens, wastewater can flow backwards—into your home. Severe storms or prolonged periods of wet weather can cause water levels in creeks, ponds, lakes, and rivers to rise and overflow their banks. If your home is near these water bodies or in a low-lying area, it can be at risk of flooding. Surface water can also cause what’s known as “flash flooding.” Because it occurs with little notice, flash flooding can catch people off guard. This normally occurs when existing drainage systems are overwhelmed by extremely heavy rain. Instead of soaking into the ground or draining through stormwater sewers, the water flows over the land surface, collecting in low-lying areas. Urban areas can be particularly vulnerable to flash flooding due to a greater amount of impervious surface. Groundwater can also be a source of flooding. This tends to occur after long periods of heavy rain or snowmelt, when more water infiltrates the ground and causes the groundwater to rise above the home’s foundation level. There’s no doubt about it. No matter where you live in the Twin Cities area, it’s been tough to stay dry. In fact, the years between 2015 and 2019 were the wettest in Minnesota history. And, with our changing climate, we can expect more wet years, more powerful storms—and more flooding. The City of Edina’s strategy is to comprehensively reduce the risk of flooding throughout the community. This is accomplished through infrastructure, regulation, emergency services, and outreach and engagement. A series of factsheets were developed to describe actions people can take to reduce their own exposure and vulnerability to flooding. These factsheets, on topics ranging from sump pumps to sandbags, are now available on our website to help you determine what action is right for you. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Actions can reduce exposure or vulnerabilityHome retrofitting and flood prevention devices The table below provides a quick overview of some common actions you can take to create more flood resilient buildings and landscapes. The factsheets that follow provide in-depth information on how, when, and where to use these actions and additional resources for residents. Building action Yard action Action City permit requiredDNR permit requiredWatershed permit requiredGroundwater floodingSurface water floodingSanitary backflowRelative Cost Before floodDuring floodAfter floodReduces exposureReduces vulnerabilitySump pump x x x Low x x Sanitary backflow prevention x x Medium x x Dry floodproofing x x x Med-High x x Sandbags x Low x x Wet floodproofing x x x High x x x Basement and low-level area pumping x x x Low x Rain gardens and landscape changes x1 x2 x Medium x x Shoreline restoration x3 x x High x x Backyard element siting x4 x x Low x x Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Actions and Programs Overview Reduces vulnerability Reduces exposure The extent to which property, homes, buildings, infrastructure, and other assets come into contact with flood water The extent to which an exposed asset is able to resist flood-related damage 1Rain gardens may require a City permit if grading over 10 cubic yards. 2Rain gardens may require a permit from the watershed district. To learn more about your watershed visit: http://www.ninemilecreek.org or http://www.minnehahacreek.org. 3DNR permit may be required; visit https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rys/index.html for more info. 4Setbacks and structure count may apply; contact the City Planning Department for more info. Image source: mprnews.org Take action! The following factsheets describe actions that can protect your home from damage related to flooding. Not all actions will benefit your home; a proper home drainage assessment can help you understand which measures will be best for your situation. Many measures will require assistance from professional contractors and may require City permits. Please refer to each factsheet for additional information. Flood insurance The City of Edina participates in the National Flood Insurance Program which enables anyone residing in Edina to purchase a National Flood Insurance Program flood insurance policy. Your homeowner’s or renter’s insurance agent may also be able to help you purchase flood insurance. A list of participating providers can be found here: https://www. floodsmart.gov/find. Home drainage self-evaluation Improper drainage can cause water damage during even minor rain or snowmelt events. Whether you’re an owner or a renter, the Home Drainage Basics factsheet can help you assess problem areas where you live. Adopt-A-Drain By committing to keep drains clear of trash, leaves, grass, snow, and ice you can help prevent flooding—not to mention keeping Minnesota’s lakes, streams, and rivers free of pollutants. For greater impact, consider working with a friend or your neighbors to adopt multiple drains. More information on the Adopt-A-Drain program can be found by visiting: https://www.adopt-a-drain.org/. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Programs and Evaluation Described below are a few ways to take action in the fight against flooding. Consider flood insurance and a home drainage assessment to protect your home; consider adopting a drain to protect the environment and your community. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Flood Insurance According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), flooding is the most common natural disaster in the United States and the consequences can be costly. Even 1 inch of water can cause $25,000 damage to your home. While homeowner’s insurance policies do not typically cover flood damage, the good news is that you can purchase separate protection. Because the City of Edina participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), all of its residents are eligible to purchase flood insurance. Who needs flood insurance? Under federal law, if your home is within, or touches, a high-risk flood area and you have a mortgage on the property, you will be required to purchase flood insurance. Homes considered to be at high risk are those located within the 100-year floodplain— areas where there is a 1% annual risk of water rising above the base flood elevation. If you live near an area of past flooding, you should consider purchasing flood insurance. Even if you don’t live in or near a high- risk area, flood insurance can be a wise investment. In fact, more than 20 percent of flood insurance claims come from properties outside of high-risk flood zones. And, compared to the cost of paying back a disaster loan, flood insurance is a bargain. The Minnesota Commerce Department calculates that the average payment on a $50,000 disaster loan is $240 per month ($2,880 per year) for 30 years, while a $100,000 flood insurance premium is about $33 per month ($400 per year). Flood insurance is not limited to homeowners; it is also available to renters and owners of non-residential buildings. How do I find out about my risk of flooding? To learn about your specific risk of flooding, go to the City of Edina’s interactive flood risk map, or visit FEMA’s Flood Map Service Area. How do I buy insurance? You can start by contacting the agent who provides your auto, homeowner’s, or renter’s insurance. They may be able to help you purchase flood insurance. If your insurance agent does not sell flood insurance, you can contact the NFIP Help Center at 800-427-4661. What does flood insurance cover? You can purchase separate coverage for your home and its contents; both are recommended for the best protection. Make sure your policy contains a comprehensive list of items covered. Almost all walled and roofed buildings above ground can be covered. Coverage available for basements typically includes foundation elements (including posts or other support systems), utility connections, and necessary mechanical equipment (e.g., furnace, hot water heater, clothes washer and dryer, food freezer, air conditioner, electrical junction). Items typically found in finished basements—paneling, carpeting, furniture—are not covered. You must normally wait 30 days after you’ve paid your premium before your policy will be effective. Other considerations Losses from sewer backup are not covered by flood insurance unless the backup occurs as a result of surface water flooding. You may want to consider purchasing a rider on your homeowner’s policy to protect you from sewer backups not related to flooding. COST: $150-$12,0001 Costs are variable based on whether the location of the structure being insured is above or below the base flood elevation, whether the policy holder is a homeowner or renter, and many other factors. Due to the numerous variables, the best way to learn what your costs would be is to contact multiple providers and utilize the resources at the bottom of this page. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1According to the Minnesota Department of Commerce, the average cost for a flood insurance policy is $500 per year. In low-to-moderate risk areas insurance can cost just over $100 per year. A renter’s policy can range from $150–$900 according to the Policygenius website: https://www.policygenius.com/renters-insurance/what-renters-need-to-know-about-flood-insurance/ Other resources: FEMA National Flood Insurance Program: www.floodsmart.gov Minnesota Department of Commerce Flood Insurance Basics: https://mn.gov/commerce/consumers/your-home/protect/other/floods/basics.jsp Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Flood Insurance FAQs: https://files.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/waters/floodplain_management_fact_sheet_8.pdf Before flood action During flood action After flood action Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Home Drainage Basics The graphic below shows common home drainage issues and solutions. Basic measures such as repositioning downspouts, grading away from your foundation, and seasonal home maintenance routines can help keep your home dry during heavy rainfall events. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. http://www.ashireporter.org/HomeInspection/Articles/Keeping-Basements-Dry/1048 Turf to native conversion helps infiltrate stormwater and prevents flooding. The conversion can also be a money and water saver; native plants often require less water than turf lawns. Clearing storm sewer drains helps them perform effectively. Drains frequently become clogged with stormwater debris or blocked by snow and ice. This can cause water to accumulate and overflow onto roads and lawns. Gutter installation is the key to directing water from your roof away from your home’s foundation. Too much water falling too close to your home can cause soil erosion, foundation problems, and water in the basement. To be effective, gutters must be cleaned in spring and fall. Installing shields can prevent flooding through low-level windows. To protect window wells, create a gravel reservoir that allows water to slowly dissipate into the ground and install a cover. Rain gardens, soil amendments, rock trenches, and sub-surface systems can all assist with stormwater infiltration on your property. See Rain Garden Factsheet for details. Proper downspout alignment helps to drain water away from the home. Make sure the downspout extension is at least 4–6 feet long and properly positioned to avoid water backup. Grading away from your home provides water with a path away from your home’s foundation. Inset images courtesy of: http://www.ashireporter.org/HomeInspection/Articles/Keeping-Basements-Dry/1048 Sump pump discharge pipe locations should follow the guidance provided on the Sump Pump Factsheet. Follow similar guidance for downspouts to ensure water drains away from the home. NOTE: When stockpiling snow during the winter, plan ahead for the spring melt. Make sure water can effectively drain away from your property rather than pooling. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Sump Pumps What is a sump pump? A sump pump is a small pump installed in the lowest part of your basement. Its purpose is to collect subsurface water from the ground near your home’s foundation and pump it out to your yard to keep your basement dry. Who needs a sump pump? According to the American Society of Home Inspectors, 60% of homes in the United States have wet basements. If yours is one of them—or if one of the conditions below applies—you should consider installing a sump pump. • Your basement has flooded • You live in a low-lying area (see the interactive flood risk map) • You have a finished basement where you store valuables (including appliances such as a washer/dryer) • You live in an area that receives significant amounts of rain or experiences rapid snowmelt How does a sump pump work? The sump pump usually stands in a “sump pit,” which is a hole about 2 feet deep and 18 inches wide. Water from the soil around your home’s foundation flows into the sump pit through drains. Once that water reaches a certain level in the pit a pressure sensor or float activator (similar to the one in your toilet) turns the pump on. The activated pump moves the water out of the pit through a pipe that should empty onto the ground at least 20 feet away from your home. In the City of Edina a utility connection permit is required to drain sump water to the storm sewer. Reduces vulnerability Reduces exposure COST: $400 (median MN)1 Sump tank Sump pump 3/4” Clear gravel Foundation drain tile pipe Interior drainage system 2” Discharge pipe Check valve FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION BASEMENT FLOOR For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1According to improvenet.com (2020) for cost of replacement sump pump installation. May be substantially higher for new pumps, depending on type of pump/flooring and location. Groundwater Before flood action During flood action After flood action For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Sump pump standards can be found at: https://www.edinamn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/397/Sump-Pump-Discharge-Connection-Policy-PDF. Information on utility connection permits can be found at: https://epermits2.logis.org/home.aspx?city=ed. Sump drain detail: https://www.edinamn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/848/310---Sump-Drain-PDF Sump drain connection detail: https://www.edinamn.gov/DocumentCenter/View/849/311---Sump-Drain-Service-Connection-PDF Installing sump pump requires a permit: https://www.edinamn.gov/209/Building-Permits-Resources. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Sump Pumps Connecting your sump pump to City of Edina storm sewers: • The pipe exiting the house should have an air gap and drain to an area that slopes away from your home’s foundation. Direct the drainage away from your home toward green areas that infiltrate water or toward public drainage paths. • Sump drain lines can connect your sump pump directly to the storm sewer. This is best done by a licensed professional and requires a permit from the City of Edina. AIR GAP DIFFERENT TYPES OF AIR GAPS The air gap is outside your home, at the point where the sump pump’s internal discharge line exits your basement and connects to the external discharge line. The air gap provides an outlet for the footing drain flows to escape in the event of an issue in the external discharge, the curb collection system or the stormwater system. Different air gap configurations have been used in footing drain disconnections. Each type of air gap serves its purpose as a temporary footing drain water release. City of Ann Arbor A2gov.org/sumppumps Atrium Air Gap If the pump is running frequently 8 to 24 hours after a rain event, and water is splashing out of the air gap, the homeowner should contact a plumber to investigate the external discharge line. Keep your air gap free of dirt, grass clippings and debris. Do not allow air gap to become buried below ground or below landscaping. WHEN TO SEEK HELP Candy Cane Air Gap Pipe in Pipe Air Gap AIR GAP DIFFERENT TYPES OF AIR GAPS The air gap is outside your home, at the point where the sump pump’s internal discharge line exits your basement and connects to the external discharge line. The air gap provides an outlet for the footing drain flows to escape in the event of an issue in the external discharge, the curb collection system or the stormwater system. Different air gap configurations have been used in footing drain disconnections. Each type of air gap serves its purpose as a temporary footing drain water release. City of Ann Arbor A2gov.org/sumppumps Atrium Air Gap If the pump is running frequently 8 to 24 hours after a rain event, and water is splashing out of the air gap, the homeowner should contact a plumber to investigate the external discharge line. Keep your air gap free of dirt, grass clippings and debris. Do not allow air gap to become buried below ground or below landscaping. WHEN TO SEEK HELP Candy Cane Air Gap Pipe in Pipe Air Gap AIR GAP DIFFERENT TYPES OF AIR GAPS The air gap is outside your home, at the point where the sump pump’s internal discharge line exits your basement and connects to the external discharge line. The air gap provides an outlet for the footing drain flows to escape in the event of an issue in the external discharge, the curb collection system or the stormwater system. Different air gap configurations have been used in footing drain disconnections. Each type of air gap serves its purpose as a temporary footing drain water release. City of Ann Arbor A2gov.org/sumppumps Atrium Air Gap If the pump is running frequently 8 to 24 hours after a rain event, and water is splashing out of the air gap, the homeowner should contact a plumber to investigate the external discharge line. Keep your air gap free of dirt, grass clippings and debris. Do not allow air gap to become buried below ground or below landscaping. WHEN TO SEEK HELP Candy Cane Air Gap Pipe in Pipe Air Gap Other considerations • Drain tile around your home is an essential part of your sump pump system. The purpose of the tile is to collect water around the basement foundation and channel it to the sump pit. • Gutters can significantly affect the water that gets into your basement. Make sure your gutters are well maintained and large enough to handle heavy rains. Downspouts should be directed away from the home. Similarly, make sure that the land next to your home is properly graded—directing water away from the foundation. • Sump pumps should be checked regularly, particularly in early spring and when heavy rains are forecast. To test your pump, pour a bucket of water into the pit to make sure it starts automatically and that the water pumps out quickly. • Pump maintenance should include removing the pump from the pit and cleaning the grate on the bottom. You should also make sure that if you are using a discharge pipe, the air gap is clear. The air gap is located outside your home, where the sump pump’s internal discharge line exits the basement and connects to the external discharge line. Its purpose is to provide an outlet for flows in the event there is a problem with the discharge line or the stormwater system. If the air gap is obstructed, water can backflow, flooding the basement and causing the pump to burn out. • A standard 15-amp, 110-volt, three-pronged grounded electrical outlet can handle a sump pump. The outlet should be an isolated line, with no other connections between the breaker and the outlet. Because the pump is located near water you may want to plug it into a working ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI). However, keep in mind that lightning has been known to trigger GFCIs and could shut off power to your pump during a heavy rainstorm. Make certain to check on the pump during the storm so you can reset the GFCI if necessary. • Consider replacing your sump pump every 10 years. Make sure your sump pump is ready for whatever water comes its way … Sump pumps often come with water-level or flood alarms to alert you if the pump fails. Some can even call your cell phone or notify your alarm company. To minimize the risk of flooding, test your sump pump periodically to make sure it is in good operating condition. Your user’s manual should specify when and how to test your pump. You can also consider investing in a backup pump to operate if the primary pump fails or becomes overwhelmed with water from a large storm. Similarly, because sump pumps operate on electricity, they are vulnerable to power outages. Pumps with backup battery power are available, or a generator can be used. Air gap types (left to Right): Atrium, candy cane, pipe in pipe. Images source: City of Ann Arbor https://www.a2gov.org/departments/ engineering/Documents/AirGapInfoSheet_2018.pdf For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1According to HomeAdvisor (2020). Costs to install a backflow preventer (including device) depend on the size and type of system. Note that many insurance companies offer discounts to homeowners who install sanitary backflow prevention devices. What is a sanitary backflow prevention device/ backflow valve? A sanitary backflow prevention device is a valve attached to your plumbing system. It is designed to prevent overflow waste water from the City’s sewer system from backing up into your home. Who needs a sanitary backflow prevention device? Because sanitary backflow prevention devices can prevent the significant damage caused by sewer backup, the City of Edina recommends them for all homes. If you have a newer home a valve may have been installed during construction. Backflow valves are usually located in the floor; if you have a sump pump the valve is likely to be close by. Note that many insurance companies offer discounts to homeowners who install sanitary backflow prevention devices. The City recommends that backflow prevention devices be installed by a licensed plumber. A permit is required for this installation. How do sanitary backflow prevention devices work? A backflow valve has a flap with small floaters on both sides that allow the flap to open and close. Under normal conditions, the flap is open—allowing water from your home to flow into the main sewer system. However, if a large storm or snowmelt overwhelms the sewer system, causing water or sewage to backflow toward the house, the floaters will close the flap, effectively shutting your home off from the street sewer system (see detail above). Once the street sewer system has a chance to drain and return to normal functioning, the flap opens again to discharge waste water. Due to the potential for clogging, annual inspection of the device is needed. Reduces vulnerability Reduces exposure COST: $135-$1,0001 Backflow preventer location Sewer lateral Sewer main BASEMENT Water level House sanitary sewer line Sanitary backflow prevention device detail (Image Credit: Mainline Backflow Products) Sanitary backflow prevention devices overview Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Sanitary Backflow Prevention Devices Before flood action During flood action After flood action For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Sanitary Backflow Prevention Devices Make sure you’re ready for sewer backups … Backflow prevention devices can function automatically or be operated manually. To protect your home, the valve must be closed during overload periods—which will vary with the size of the storm, but typically last from 2 to 6 hours. Be aware that during the time the valve is closed you will not be able to use your plumbing. Other considerations • You should have your backflow prevention device cleaned and checked annually, preferably by the licensed plumber who installed it. • To avoid backflow in your home plumbing system, keep your plumbing free of materials such as diapers, sanitary napkins, and cigarette butts. • Backwater from a public sewer system is hazardous to your health. If sewer water enters your home, you should hire a licensed and trained professional cleaning service. (Top) Image of sewer backup in bathroom, courtesy of https:// blueskyplumbingfl.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/sewer- backup-in-bathroom.jpg (Right) Sanitary backflow prevention device install; image courtesy of https://www.flickr.com/photos/69302634@ N02/16327005228/in/photostream/ Sanitary backflow preventer installation For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1The cost of dry floodproofing varies depending on the building size, depth of required protection, types of material used, and number of openings. Examples of general cost estimates can be found in FEMA publications: Homeowner’s Guide to Retrofitting: Six Ways to Protect Your House from Flooding and Engineering Principles and Practices of Retrofitting Floodprone Residential Structures. What is dry floodproofing? Dry floodproofing describes a range of strategies to seal the exterior of a building from flood waters. Who should use dry floodproofing? Dry floodproofing is only viable for buildings that are structurally sound in areas with low-velocity, relatively shallow flooding (below 3 feet). It is most appropriate for slab-on-grade buildings with concrete or solid masonry walls. Due to risk of structural failure from excessive flood forces, dry floodproofing is not advised for homes with basements or homes comprising weaker construction materials (e.g., wood frame with siding). Note that dry floodproofing residential structures will not reduce flood insurance premiums. What are dry floodproofing methods? • Temporary installation of waterproof membranes: Heavy plastic sheeting or a waterproof membrane along a wall’s exterior can be effective in preventing water from entering the home. • Use of sealants: Waterproof sealants can be applied to building walls, structural joints, and openings for utility lines. Cement and asphalt-based coatings are effective, but can drastically change the appearance of the home and may be susceptible to puncturing. Clear coatings (e.g. epoxies or polyurethanes) can be applied to exterior walls without changing appearance but tend to be less effective. (continued on next page) Reduces exposure Reduces vulnerability COST: VARIES1 Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Dry Floodproofing (Above) “A way to seal an existing brick-faced wall is to add an additional layer of brick with a seal in between. Please note that weep holes (drainage) and wick drains are moved up to prevent moisture from getting inside the walls.” Images and descriptions provided by FEMA P-312, Homeowner’s Guide to Retrofitting 3rd Edition (2014) (Left) Example of exterior application of asphalt membrane (courtesy of https://staydrywaterproofing.com/) (Right) An interior application of a fiber-reinforced polymer wrap, image provided by FEMA P-312, Homeowner’s Guide to Retrofitting 3rd Edition (2014) Before flood action During flood action After flood action Flood level Existing walls Brick ties Fully grouted Existing floor New foundation extension tied to existing foundation with steel dowels Existing foundation New foundation (added to support new brick veneer) Ground New drain or relocated drain, or sump pump in crushed stone New masonry veneer New masonry rowlock Grout Existing masonry veneer For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Other considerations • The Federal Emergency Management Agency recommends that dry floodproofing should be designed by licensed professionals. Failure to anticipate hydrostatic forces (force due to the pressure of a fluid at rest) may result in extensive damage. • Placement of flood shields or waterproof membranes is not feasible during flash floods or when warning times are short. • Ongoing maintenance is required. • Flood shields and sealants may not be aesthetically pleasing. • Dry floodproofing does not mitigate the potential impact of high-velocity flood flow, wave action, erosion, or debris. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Dry Floodproofing • Addressing closures: Openings in the walls need to be either temporarily or permanently sealed shut. For example, low window openings at ground level can either have a pre-sized closure fitted over their surface or a low wall constructed around the opening. Similarly, all or part of a low window could be replaced with brick or glass block. • Using flood shields: Temporary watertight shields can be placed over windows or doors in anticipation of flooding. Most residential shields can be stored in the home and installed when needed by bolting them into place or securing them in permanently installed brackets or tracks. • Addressing interior drainage: A good interior drainage system to collect leaking water (e.g., a sump pump with an emergency power source) is an important component of a dry floodproofing system. Sanitary backflow prevention is also recommended. (Above) Metal shields installed with bolts or permanently installed tracks; image courtesy of www.psfloodbarriers.com/wp-content/uploads/ sites/4/2016/09/Flood-Plank-21.jpg (Left) Low window raised and original opening filled with brick; image provided by FEMA P-312, Homeowner’s Guide to Retrofitting 3rd Edition (2014) What are dry floodproofing methods? (continued) For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1Costs vary depending on the size of the area to be protected. Under severe flood conditions, it may be necessary to build a sandbag dike to protect your home from water damage. Sandbags that are properly filled and placed can successfully divert water—moving it around buildings rather than allowing it to flow through them. The information below outlines the materials and steps necessary to build a sandbag dike. Sandbag materials Sandbags themselves are generally made of treated burlap or woven polypropylene and measure approximately 24 inches by 14 inches. A sandy soil is best for filling sandbags, but other available materials (silt, clay, gravels, or a mixture) may be used. Sandbags can be found online and in hardware stores. The City does not endorse any specific company but some local sources of sand or gravel include: • Bjorklund & Companies, 763-444-9301 • Hedberg Supply, Landscape & Masonry, 763-545-4400 • Marshall Concrete Products, 612-789-4303 • Plaisted Companies, 763-441-1100 Filling a sandbag Filling and deploying sandbags is usually a three- person job: one person to hold the bag open, one person to shovel sand, and a third person to position the bag. The use of gloves is advised, as well as safety goggles. Bags should be filled about one-half to two- thirds full and will weigh approximately 35–40 pounds. Untied bags are recommended for most applications. Reduces exposure Reduces vulnerability COST: VARIES1 Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Sandbags Placing sandbags Remove any debris from the area before placing sandbags. To avoid placing stress on walls, you should leave at least 8 feet between the dike and the building you want to protect. Place the first layer of bags lengthwise, parallel to the direction of the water flow. The bags should be “lapped” so that the filled portion of one bag lies on the unfilled portion of the next. The untied end should be facing downstream. Similar to brick laying, offset adjacent rows or layers by one-half bag length to eliminate continuous joints. To form a tight seal, walk on the bags as they are placed and continue walking on them as succeeding layers are added. Because bags may remain untied, make certain to fold under all loose ends. image: https://www.disaster.qld.gov.au/dmp/sandbagging/Pages/default.aspx Before flood action During flood action After flood action How to make a request • During regular business hours, requests can be made by calling in to the Public Works utility line (952-826-0375). • On weekends, requests can be made by calling in to the non-emergency police (952-826-1600) to get routed to the on-call person. • Leave name, address, and the quantity of sandbags desired. If you’re unsure, describe the size of the area and Public Works can help determine how many are needed. City-provided sandbags Public Works delivers sand bags to residents when requested and will leave sand bag pallets at the end of the property driveway. Requests are typically fulfilled within 24 hours. Residents must place the sand bags themselves—Public Works staff does not place sandbags. When sandbags are no longer needed, residents may keep the sandbags or place them back on the pallet and call Public Works for pickup. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Other considerations • Sandbags can become contaminated with bacteria and other pathogens from polluted flood waters. The sand from these bags should never be used in children’s sandboxes. • Full sandbags may be stored for short periods of time and reused for same-season flood fighting. However, prolonged storage can lead to mold. According to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the safest place to dispose of full sandbags is a sanitary landfill. Sandbags may also be disposed in a demolition landfill. Be aware, however, that not all landfills will accept sandbags, so call first. • Even when properly installed, water can leak and rain may fall inside the barrier. Be prepared with a pump to remove water from inside the barrier.. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Sandbags How high and how wide should my dike be? The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recommends that your dike should have a base three times wider than its height, although a ratio of 2:1 is also commonly recommended. A triangular pyramid shape should be used for a dike that is higher than 1 foot. For heights less than a foot, support the wall of sandbags every 5 feet with clusters of bags; this will stabilize the structure. How many bags will I need? The North Dakota State Extension Service offers the following estimates for the number of sandbags needed per 100 linear feet of dike. Dike Height 3:1 base to height 2:1 base to height 2 foot 2,100 bags 1,700 bags 3 foot 4,500 bags 3,000 bags 4 foot 7,800 bags 5,500 bags 5 foot 12,000 bags 9,000 bags Sealing the dike To improve water tightness, your finished dike should be sealed with a sheet of plastic at least 6 mils thick. First, spread a loose layer of soil or sand about 1 inch deep and 1 foot wide along the bottom of the dike on the water side. Then, lay the plastic sheeting so the upper edge extends over the top of the dike and the bottom extends 1 foot beyond the bottom of the dike (over the layer of soil and sand). Be careful not to stretch the plastic too tight; this could lead to puncturing. Finally, put a row of sandbags on the bottom and top edges of the plastic to form a watertight seal and hold it in place. Be careful to avoid puncturing the plastic by walking on it. Sandbag alternatives Alternatives to sandbags include “sandless” sandbags and Hydrabarriers, which can be purchased online or at some hardware stores. The sandless bags are made of an absorbent polymer that swells on contact with water—basically self-inflating the bags to form a water barrier. The Hydrabarrier is a tube (available in different sizes) that you fill with water to form a barrier. The advantage of these systems is that they are lighter weight, reusable, and do not pose a disposal problem. The disadvantage is that these systems can be expensive to purchase. image: http://goldenlake.co/ For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1Costs of wet floodproofing vary with the methods adopted. Major costs are associated with rearrangement of utility systems, installation of flood vents, and replacement of materials that are not resistant to floods. Note that wet floodproofing will not reduce flood insurance premium rates on residential structures. What is wet floodproofing? Wet floodproofing refers to a range of strategies used to prevent or provide resistance to flood damage—while allowing water into the uninhabited portion of a building (e.g., unfinished basement, crawlspace, garage). Allowing floodwater to enter the enclosed areas of a home equalizes pressure, which can prevent structural damage. Successful wetproofing involves (1) ensuring that floodwaters inside the home rise and fall at the same rate as floodwaters outside the home, (2) reducing damage through the use of flood-resistant materials, (3) protecting service equipment inside and outside of the home, and (4) relocating any high-value items stored below the designed flood elevation (DFE). • Elevate appliances and utilities or install barriers: Items that should be elevated or protected with a barrier include your furnace and air-conditioning unit, outside air-conditioner compressor, washer and dryer, water heater, freezer, and electrical outlets and switches. You can also relocate these to a place in your home that is higher than the DFE (e.g., an attic), or build a small addition that would serve as a utility room and as storage for valuable furnishings during a flood. • Use flood-resistant materials: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) publishes flood-resistant classifications for flooring, wall, and ceiling materials, as well as the adhesives used to install them (Technical Bulletin 2-08). Carpeting, paneling, and gypsum wallboard can all be replaced with materials that would require cleaning rather than replacement. A table on the following page lists materials that are acceptable in wet floodproofing home projects. (continued on next page) Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Wet Floodproofing Reduces exposure Reduces vulnerability COST: VARIES1 Before flood action During flood action After flood action Wet floodproofing techniques for a house. Image from FEMA P-259 (Figure -10) https://www.restoration1greaterminneapolis.com/how-to-deal-with-a-flooded-basement What are wet floodproofing methods? An advantage of wet floodproofing is that it is flexible; it can be done in stages—many of them relatively inexpensively. A good time to employ wet floodproofing strategies is when you remodel your home. The following are some wet floodproofing methods: Base flood elevation Who should use wet floodproofing? If you are at risk of flooding and cannot elevate your home or build reliable flood barriers, wet floodproofing of non-living spaces is an option. It is most suitable for shallow flooding that inundates uninhabited space. It is not practical for most slab-on-grade structures that have the living space at or near ground level. Also, it is not a reasonable approach if the duration of a flood is expected to be more than one day. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Other considerations • Ongoing maintenance is required to minimize flood risks. • Pumping water from a basement too soon after a flood may lead to structural damage. • Work on electrical systems, gas systems, or air- conditioning compressors requires a licensed contractor, and permits may be required. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Wet Floodproofing What are wet floodproofing methods? (continued) Materials that are acceptable in wet floodproofing home projects: Material Type Acceptable Unacceptable Structural Flooring Materials • Concrete • Naturally decay-resistant lumber • Pressure-treated plywood • Oriented strand board (OSB) Finish Flooring Materials • Clay tile • Ceramic or porcelain tile • Terrazzo tile • Vinyl tile or sheets • Engineered wood or laminate flooring • Carpeting • Wood flooring Structural Wall and Ceiling Materials • Brick face, concrete, or concrete block • Cement board/fiber-cement board • Pressure-treated plywood • Solid, standard structural lumber (2x4) • Non-paper-faced gypsum board • Fiberglass insulation • Paper-faced gypsum board • OSB Finish Wall and Ceiling Materials • Glass blocks • Metal cabinets or doors • Latex paint • Wood cabinets and doors • Non-latex paint • Particleboard cabinets and doors • Wallpaper FEMA P-312, Homeowner’s Guide to Retrofitting 3rd Edition (2014) • Sewage backflow prevention is important; a backflow valve should be installed. • Because wet floodproofing allows your home to flood, extensive cleanup may be necessary to remove potential chemical and biological contamination and prevent mold growth and decay. • Install flood vents: Flood vents (permanent openings) allow water into the structure, equalizing interior and exterior pressures to avoid structural damage. (Above) “Wall openings must allow floodwaters not only to enter the home, but also to rise and fall at the same rate as floodwaters outside the home.” Images provided by FEMA P-312, Homeowner’s Guide to Retrofitting 3rd Edition (2014). (Left) Base flood elevation and location of flood vents. Images provided by FEMA Technical Bulletin 2, 2008, Openings in Foundation Walls and Walls of Enclosures. Base flood elevation Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Pumping Guidance If dry floodproofing methods fail during a large storm or you’ve chosen wet floodproofing, you may end up with a significant amount of water in your basement. Though your impulse may be to remove the water as soon as possible, it’s important to remember that moving too quickly may cause structural damage to your home. Even though flood waters may have receded, there is still water in the ground that may be exerting force against your basement walls. If that force is greater than the force of water inside your basement, the foundation, basement walls, or floors may rupture or crack. Pumping procedure—when and how much to pump If you need to pump water out of your basement or house, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recommends taking the following steps to avoid serious damage to your home. 1. Begin pumping only when floodwaters are no longer covering the ground outside. 2. Pump out 1 foot of water, mark the water level, and wait overnight. 3. Check the water level the next day. If the level rose to the previous mark, it is still too early to drain the basement. 4. Wait 24 hours, pump the water down 1 foot, and mark the water level. Check the level the next day. 5. When the water level stops returning to your mark, pump out 2 to 3 feet and wait overnight. Repeat this process daily until all of the water is out of the basement. Safety first! Remember that water conducts electricity. Before walking into a flooded basement make certain the power is turned off and wear heavy rubber boots and rubber gloves that do not leak. Reduces vulnerability Reduces exposure COST: VARIES1 For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1Costs rely on a number of factors—including the amount of water and whether you choose to do the pumping yourself. You can contract with a water-removal service, but you may have to wait several days for assistance. After flood action During flood action Before flood action Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Pumping Guidance For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Pumping procedure—equipment A submersible pump is needed to remove water from a flooded basement. You can rent this type of equipment from a construction rental store or a hardware store; this will be less expensive than purchasing professional pumping equipment. The pump is encased in a waterproof shell with a sealed electrical cord; it connects to a regular garden hose or a sump hose. The power source for the pump will depend on whether you have electricity. If you don’t have electricity you will need to connect to a generator. Be careful! Do not use gasoline-powered pumps or generators indoors; these can produce deadly carbon monoxide exhaust fumes. Note: opening doors and windows does not provide sufficient ventilation. Another option is a pump that runs on a 12-volt marine or car battery or a petrol/diesel driven pump. If you do have power, you can use a heavy-duty extension cord to run the pump on standard electricity—provided you have a place to plug it in. If your fuse box isolates your basement and you are absolutely sure you can disable the power in the basement, you can use electricity on the ground floor or higher. No matter what energy source you use, you will need to be careful to keep the connection between the extension cord and the pump cord away from water. You can do this by looping the cords around a ceiling joist or another heavy object. Other considerations • A second pump should be considered to provide increased capacity and act as a backup. • Strainers should be used to protect pumps from large debris. • Use clean, fresh fuel in your pump or generator and make sure you have enough available to act in a flood. • Be careful around floodwater that may have been contaminated by sewage. Tetanus shots are recommended when cleaning flooded areas. Pumping procedure—pumping out the water To pump water, a garden or sump hose should be attached to the fitting on the top of the pump. The end of the hose is then pointed away from the house to drain away to the street or storm sewer If the water is low enough, you can place the pump in the lowest part of the basement, making sure to wear rubber boots. In the event of very high water, you can lower the pump into the basement using rope. Once the pump is in place, start the generator, plug the extension cord in, and turn the pump on. If you’re using electricity, plug the extension cord into an upstairs wall socket. If your water is less than an inch deep, a wet-dry vacuum can be used. These work well, but can be very labor intensive; the tank on a wet-dry vacuum generally holds only 4 to 5 gallons of water and will need to be emptied frequently. One inch of water in a 1,500–2,000 square foot home would be 1,000–1,200 gallons and would require approximately 250 empties! image courtesy of https://www.forconstructionpros.com/equipment/ worksite/pumps/article/11477112/pick-the-right-submersible-pump- for-dewatering-applications For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. 1According to the Rain Garden Alliance, a do-it-yourself rain garden will cost about $3–$5 a square foot. If you use a landscaper to plan and install the garden, the cost will be $10–$15 a square foot or more. Plants are the most costly consideration in a rain garden. Parts of the City of Edina are within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, which offers cost-share grants for rain gardens. The minimum grant is $500 and requires a 25% match. To see if your home is located within the district and to learn more about the grant program, go to https://www.ninemilecreek.org/. Other considerations • Rain gardens require partial to full sun. They should be built at least 10 feet away from your home to prevent water damage to foundations and basements. • Rain gardens are typically 100 to 300 square feet, depending on the slope of the surrounding landscape and the size of the area draining to it; a garden will typically handle runoff from an impervious area three times its size. More than one garden may be needed to handle runoff from large surfaces (e.g., large rooftops). • To prevent plants from drowning and mosquitoes from breeding, a rain garden requires soil that is porous enough to soak up water within 48 hours of a rainstorm. You can test your soil by digging a wide 10-inch-deep hole, filling it with water, and observing whether the water disappears within 48 hours. • Before you dig, contact Gopher State One Call (811) or visit http:// www.gopherstateonecall.org/to locate electrical, gas, or telephone lines. What is a rain garden? A rain garden is a tool used to decrease runoff and filter pollutants from stormwater. These gardens, built in shallow depressions, are filled with long-rooted grasses and plants that soak up rainwater from impervious surfaces—before the polluted flow enters lakes, rivers, and wetlands. Because they decrease runoff, rain gardens are also useful in flood prevention. Once established, they require little watering and minimal maintenance. In addition to decreasing runoff and filtering pollutants, rain gardens also create habitat for birds and butterflies, recharge groundwater, reduce mosquito breeding, and enhance property value. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Rain Gardens How do I plant a rain garden? There are many online resources that provide guidance on the construction and maintenance of rain gardens, including: Rain Garden FAQs, Rain Garden Alliance Rain Gardens Provide a Healthy Corrective to Runoff Flooding, WisContext How and Why to Build a Rain Garden, U of M Extension How Much Does a Rain Garden Cost?, Cost Helper USDA Rain Garden Fact Sheet, USDA Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Grants How to Create an Effective Rain Garden, Habitat Network Rain Gardens in Minnesota, Natural Resources Conservation Service Who should use a rain garden? Rain gardens are particularly beneficial for those who have a large amount of nearby impervious surface (rooftops, walkways, driveways), have downspouts running into the lawn, or areas downhill from a downspout. They may also be helpful if you have soil erosion. (With deep-rooted plants, rain gardens hold soil in place and prevent erosion). image courtesy of Minnehahacreek.org image courtesy Natural Shore: http://www.naturalshore.com/rain-garden-project-album/ Reduces vulnerability COST: VARIES1 Reduces exposure Before flood action During flood action After flood action What is shoreline restoration? Shoreline restoration involves the use of native vegetation to provide a buffer between your yard and the water’s edge. This buffer (10–50 feet) replaces turf grass. Although shoreline restoration does not reduce your exposure to flooding, it can reduce your vulnerability. Unlike turf grass, native trees, shrubs, forbs, and grasses have long roots that better withstand the effects of flooding. Under lengthy, high-water conditions, this may prevent the need to replace flooded turf. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Shoreline Restoration How do I restore my lakeshore? “Restore Your Shores,” offered by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) (https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rys/ index.html) provides online guidance for implementing shoreland restoration projects, including steps and techniques, a plant guide, and references and resources. Comprehensive guidance, pertinent to Minnesota landscapes, is also available in the book, “Lakescaping for Wildlife and Water Quality,” published by the Minnesota DNR. Or, consult a local landscaper who specializes in shoreline restoration. Reduces exposure COST: VARIES1 Reduces vulnerability Before flood action During flood action After flood action In addition to reducing flood vulnerability, shoreland restoration has a number of ecological benefits: • Deep-rooted native plants are more resistant to wave and ice erosion and reduce the likelihood of slope failure. • Native plantings improve water quality by slowing and filtering runoff before it enters the lake. • A mixture of native vegetation provides diverse habitat for fish and wildlife. • A buffer prevents wave action from stirring up sediment that can cause the lake to become murky. • A buffer area provides privacy and aesthetic views while discouraging nuisance geese. Other considerations • Some shoreline restoration projects will require a local or Minnesota Department of Natural Resources permit. Helpful websites: https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakescaping/index.html https://www.dnr.state.mn.us/publications/waters/shoreline_alteration.html For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Parts of the City of Edina are within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, which offers cost-share grants for rain gardens. The minimum grant is $500 and requires a 25% match. To see if your home is located within the district and to learn more about the grant program, go to https://www.ninemilecreek.org/. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Helpful websites https://www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure/manage-flood-risk https://www.homeadvisor.com/r/flood-proof-landscaping/ https://www.owntheyard.com/how-to-fix-backyard-flooding/ https://aibd.org/6-backyard-flooding-solutions-landscaping-storm-proof-yard/ The damage that can be caused by flood water doesn’t stop at your front door. The way you care for your yard and how you site and construct accessory structures can reduce both flood exposure and vulnerability. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Floodproofing Accessory Structures and Yards Floodproofing yards There are many options you can consider to reduce flooding in your yard. • Make sure your yard is properly graded: Patios, driveways, walkways, flowerbeds—if possible, they should all be graded so that the water flows away from the house. • Install a rain garden: Rain gardens protect your yard from flooding by allowing runoff water to pool and slowly percolate into the ground. See the City’s factsheet for more information on rain gardens. • Install dry wells: Dry wells are underground structures that help rainwater dissipate into the ground. They can be used for wet spots or small, flood-prone areas on your property. • Create or take advantage of natural swales: Swales are depressions in the landscape that redirect water flow, normally to a dry well or a garden bed with good drainage. You can slow the flow by lining the lowest point with rocks or adding deep-rooted plants on the slope. • Use heavier mulch: Light-weight mulch can spread under flooding conditions, clogging drains. If using mulch near your home’s exterior, make sure the mulch is at least 6 inches from your siding to prevent moisture wicking and rotting. • Replace impervious surfaces: Impervious (non-porous) surfaces increase runoff. Replace them with pervious materials or landscaping. • Drain your driveway: Driveways are a big contributor to stormwater runoff. You can mitigate the impact of that stormwater by adding drainage on the sides of the pavement—or by replacing the pavement with a pervious surface. • Plant a tree: Trees create a leafy canopy that intercepts rainfall and reduces runoff. According to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, a typical street tree can intercept from 500 to 760 gallons of water per year, depending on the species. Before flood action During flood action After flood action Floodproofing accessory structures Your yard is an extension of your living space, which needs to be protected. The first step in floodproofing is to site the accessory structures on your property—your patio, fire table/pit, garden shed, gazebo—on high ground. You can also reduce your vulnerability by building these structures with flood-resistant materials. See the City’s factsheet on Wet Floodproofing for a list of flood-resistant materials. You should also secure yard items to prevent them from being damaged or swept away. Anchor them or attach them to more stable structures. Other considerations Parts of the City of Edina are within the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, which offers cost-share grants for rain gardens. The minimum grant is $500 and requires a 25% match. To see if your home is located within the district and to learn more about the grant program, go to: https://www.ninemilecreek.org/. For more information on flood resilience, contact the Engineering Department at 952-826-0371. Even if you don’t own a home, your property may be at risk during a flood. Below are some simple steps you can take to reduce that risk. Actions for Flood Resilient Homes: Reducing Risk as a Renter or Condo Owner Consider buying flood insurance It’s important to know that your regular renter’s insurance policy does not cover flooding. But, flood insurance is available for renters and condo owners through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The policy covers your personal property and contents during a flood. It does not include “loss-of-use” coverage or any additional expenses caused by a flood. Flood insurance premiums are based on a number of factors including flood risk, year of building construction, building occupancy, the number of floors, the location of your contents, and the deductible and amount of coverage you choose. Even if you live in a low-to-moderate risk area, it’s worth considering flood insurance. According to the NFIP, nearly 26 percent of all flood claims occur in these areas. Also, you may be eligible for a “preferred risk policy,” which carries the lowest premiums. The cost for renters’ flood insurance generally ranges from $150 to $900 per year. Though flood insurance is provided by the NFIP and prices are set by the NFIP, it is sold by private insurance companies. Contact your insurance agent to find out whether they can provide coverage. If not, call the NFIP at 800-427-4661 to request an agent referral. If you decide to buy insurance, don’t wait for the next storm. There’s typically a 30-day waiting period between when the policy is purchased and when coverage applies. Consider the low spaces—including underground garages If you have personal items in the basement or garage, put them in covered, plastic containers and store them on shelving—off the floor. Similarly, don’t leave valuables in your car if flood waters are predicted. Get the facts First, find out if the building where you live is in a high-risk flood area. You can check by going to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) website https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search and entering your address. It’s also helpful to know what steps your landlord/association has taken to decrease the building’s exposure and vulnerability. Here are some questions you might ask: • Does the building structure have flood insurance? This may be important because it could influence your landlord’s ability to recover following a flood—and your ability to continue living in the property. • Has the landlord/association taken flood resilience measures (wet floodproofing, dry floodproofing)? • Is there a sump pump in the building? Is there a sewer backflow prevention device? This is particularly important if you store personal items in the basement of the building. • In the event flood waters are predicted, is there available above-ground storage? • In the event of an impending flood will the landlord/association be responsible for sandbagging? If not, will you be allowed to sandbag? (See City factsheet on sandbagging for more information.) Helpful websites https://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program/How-Buy-Flood- Insurance https://www.policygenius.com/renters-insurance/what-renters-need-to-know- about-flood-insurance/ Floodwater level G Appendix G: Task Force charge EDINA ADVISORY TASK FORCE I FLOOD RISK REDUCTION STRATEGY I CITY OF EDINA Page 1 CITY MANAGER TASK FORCE PROJECT: FLOOD RISK REDUCTION STRATEGY PURPOSE Support the City’s development of a strategy to address flood risk and resiliency. OBJECTIVE Provide recommendations to inform a Flood Risk Reduction Strategy to be considered for adoption by the City Council and incorporation as a major amendment to the City’s Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. METHODOLOGY - Learn about technical challenges and opportunities from the Expert Panel (EP) - Review policies and practices of other communities - Review past City studies/initiatives - Promote conversations with stakeholders to evaluate community values - Apply gained knowledge on technical feasibility and community values to weigh tradeoffs - Participate in defining the flood risk service target for the stormwater utility TIMELINE June 2019 through December 2019 KEY DATES June 2019 City Manager appoints Task Force members September 4, 2019 Task Force presents recommendations to City Council (work session) December 17, 2019 City Council considers adoption of the final Flood Risk Reduction Strategy COMMITMENT - Appointed members will be asked to fulfill their work until Council adopts the final Flood Risk Reduction Strategy in December 2019 - Appointed members should expect to meet at least monthly with additional off-line work - Appointed members should consider project timeline prior to appointments MEETINGS - The Task Force will establish their schedule including meeting times and dates as needed to complete the work - The Task Force will be invited to attend meetings with the Expert Panel - Conclusion of work must fall into the indicated timeline - Meetings are open to the public LEVEL OF AUTHORITY EDINA ADVISORY TASK FORCE I FLOOD RISK REDUCTION STRATEGY I CITY OF EDINA Page 2 CITY MANAGER The City Manager has the authority to: - Establish and appoint Task Force members - Appoint/remove members as he sees fit - Designate the Staff Liaison and any additional staff support needed - Authorize financial resources - Enter into a service contract with a subject matter expert/consultant TASK FORCE The Task Force has the authority to: - Conduct public engagement and collect input using the City’s public engagement protocols - Provide input on the strategy - Make a recommendation on the final Flood Risk Reduction Strategy which will be presented to Council for consideration TASK FORCE LEADERSHIP The City Manager will designate a member of the Task Force to serve as the Chair and another member as the Vice Chair. The role of the Chair will be to: - Prepare the meeting agenda - Lead meetings and facilitate discussions - Maintain meeting decorum - Encourage participation of all members The Vice Chair will support the Chair as needed and perform the Chair duties if the Chair is unavailable. STAFF LIAISON The City Manager will designate the staff liaison to the Task Force. The role of the Liaison will be to: - Support the Task Force Chair in preparing agendas and meeting materials - Provide technical expertise and access to City resources - Relay information from City Manager to Task Force and vice versa - Submit packet materials for City Council review The Task Force does not direct the work of the liaison. RESOURCES AVAILABLE The Task Force will have access to City resources available for advisory groups i.e. marketing/communications, meeting supplies, etc. Also, see City Manager’s level of authority. OUTCOMES A Flood Risk Reduction Strategy that: - Incorporates local challenges, opportunities, knowledge, and community values EDINA ADVISORY TASK FORCE I FLOOD RISK REDUCTION STRATEGY I CITY OF EDINA Page 3 - Incorporates voices from throughout the City of Edina. The Morningside neighborhood has been identified in the Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan as a focal geography for case study; however, outcomes from the strategy development ought to be able to scale city-wide. - Identifies action steps for building community capacity to address flood risk and resiliency in Edina. MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION The City of Edina’s Volunteer Edina program will manage the recruitment, application and onboarding process. CONSIDERATIONS & COMPOSITION The City Manager will appoint up to seven members with a variety of perspectives and experiences on flood risk and resiliency from throughout the City. H Appendix H: Potential action matrix key, ranked response, and potential action matrix Actions Sheets Key Sector: The sector of work under which the action would fall. Infrastructure (I), Regulatory Program (R), Outreach and Engagement (O), and Emergency Services (E). Task Force Rank: Based on aggregate of individual Task Force member rankings. Task Force members were asked to rank their top 10 with the action believed to have the most community enthusiasm ranked number 1 and the action believed to have the least community enthusiasm ranked number 10. Actions beyond 10 were effectively not ranked. Cost Score: Staff scored. $ Minor; Savings or efficiency, takes minor amount of staff time, or can roll into existing duties with existing staff time and resources, <0 to 20hrs, <0 to $2K $$ Modest; Modest additional costs, modest amount of staff time. 20 to 100hrs, $2-10K $$$ Moderate; Moderate additional costs, takes moderate amount of additional staff time, or can be contracted out in future budgets. 100-500hrs, $10-50K $$$$ High; Additional costs, takes additional staff time, can be contracted out with additional resources. 500-2000hrs, $50-200K $$$$$ Major; Significant costs, takes significant amount of staff time, or can be included in future capital improvement plans. 2000+hrs, $200K+ Staff Rated Effectiveness Score: Staff scored. Based on effectiveness and confidence at reducing community vulnerability to flooding, at reducing community exposure to flooding, and at reducing the community share of climate change drivers. Action Category: Quick Win = do now or contract under flood risk reduction effort. Planning = develop a plan as part of flood risk reduction effort, or include in Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan amendment, future budget, or Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Development = may be worth doing with additional resources, a special circumstance, a partnership, or as technology improvements change cost structure. None = benefit is not worth the cost or effort. Task ForceAverage RankCostEffectivenessCategoryI.07 Infrastructure Better Maintain Existing System 5.0 $$$$$ high Planning I.08 Infrastructure Control Sources of Clogs 7.3 $$$$$ high Planning E.01 Emergency Services Develop Local Flooding Emergency Response Plan 7.4 $$$ medium Planning I.15 Infrastructure New Storage in Parks 7.6 $$$$$ high Development I.19 Infrastructure Buy Low Homes 8.4 $$$$$ low None I.16 Infrastructure New Storage in Roads 8.4 $$$$$ high Development I.13 Infrastructure Search for System Constraints and Quick Wins 9.0 $$$ high Planning I.10 Infrastructure Reduce Sanitary System Inflow 9.1 $$$$$ medium Ongoing I.24 Infrastructure Flood Storage with Predictive Pumping 9.1 $$$$$ high Development R.08 Regulatory Program Update Plans with Flood Risk 9.3 $$$ low Planning R.03 Regulatory Program Regulate Impervious 9.3 $$$$ low Development I.25 Infrastructure Capital Project Prioritization Framework 9.5 $$ medium Development I.01 Infrastructure Citywide Risk Modeling 9.6 $$$ high Planning R.04 Regulatory Program Require Private Flood Storage 9.8 $$$$ low None E.02 Emergency Services Define and Communicate the Available Services 9.9 $$ medium Quick Win I.09 Infrastructure Reduce Vulnerability of Sanitary Lift Stations 10.0 $$$$$ medium Development I.14 Infrastructure Bigger Pipes 10.0 $$$$$ high Development I.03 Infrastructure Peak Flood Visualization 10.1 $$$ high Planning I.04 Infrastructure Flow Path Visualization 10.3 $$$ high Planning O.08 Outreach and Engagement Develop Flood Intervention Fact Sheets 10.3 $$$ medium Quick Win O.07 Outreach and Engagement Develop Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)10.5 $$ high Quick Win I.17 Infrastructure Design to a Future Risk Level 10.6 $$$$$ medium Planning I.18 Infrastructure Plan Emergency Overflow Paths 10.6 $$$ high Planning O.01 Outreach and Engagement Build Awareness of Stormwater System 10.6 $$ low Planning I.02 Infrastructure Standardize Failure Analysis 10.6 $$$$ medium Development O.06 Outreach and Engagement Promote Sandbag Service 10.8 $$ high Quick Win O.10 Outreach and Engagement Host Flood Summit 10.8 $$$ medium Development R.02 Regulatory Program Flow Path Review 10.9 $$$ high Planning O.05 Outreach and Engagement Develop a 'What is My Flood Risk?" Map 10.9 $$$ high Quick Win I.05 Infrastructure Predictive Snowmelt Modeling 11.0 $$$ low Development I.06 Infrastructure Active Lake Level Monitoring, Smart Infrastructure Pilot 11.0 $$$$ high Development I.11 Infrastructure Assess Water Supply System Risk 11.0 $$$$ medium Planning I.12 Infrastructure Communicate Risk to Power and Utility Industry 11.0 $$ medium Development I.20 Infrastructure Incentivize Redevelopment of Exposed Structures 11.0 $$$$$ low None R.01 Regulatory Program More Permit Review and Regulation 11.0 $$$ medium Development R.05 Regulatory Program Regulate Development to a Higher Flood Standard 11.0 $$ low Development R.06 Regulatory Program Tiered Stormwater Utility Fee Based on Impervious Cover 11.0 $$$ low Development R.07 Regulatory Program Participate in the Community Rating System 11.0 $$ low Planning O.02 Outreach and Engagement Develop and Communicate Dynamic Flood Threat Indicator 11.0 $$$ low Development O.03 Outreach and Engagement Groundwater Level Viewer 11.0 $$ low Planning O.04 Outreach and Engagement Promote WaterAlert (USGS) Subscriptions 11.0 $ low Quick Win O.09 Outreach and Engagement Provide Stormwater Technical Assistance Grant Program 11.0 $$$ medium Quick Win O.11 Outreach and Engagement Engage With Stakeholders at Time of Capital Investment 11.0 $$ medium Development O.12 Outreach and Engagement Engage Realtors, Developers, Insurers on Local Flood Risk 11.0 $ medium Development ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryI.01InfrastructureCitywide Risk ModelingCreate a standard method across the city (and potentially across other nearby cities) to analyze the risk and consequence of potential for failure of the entire storm sewer system, pipe by pipe, structure by structure. Additionally, this would include creating a standard method to determine impacts due to failure of a part of the system. Finally, reporting methods (maps, prioritized infrastructure components, etc.) would be standardized so that infrastructure risk in different parts of the city and even nearby cities can be easily compared by staff, residents, and decision-makers.A general understanding of the risk of each part of the storm sewer infrastructure system will be able to help prioritize maintenance and inspection activities. Additionally, failure analysis which is often risk based, is not currently standard and is generally quantified on a case by case basis and by the people involved. Therefore, comparing infrastructure risk in different parts of a city or between cities is quite difficult. The only way to know which parts of the infrastructure system should be prioritized in maintenance, with a finite maintenance crew, is to assess the risk of entire storm sewer system in a standard and comprehensive way. The process of evaluating risk of infrastructure may not lend itself to a process that is general. It may be a process that is so "case by case" that the standardized method may become overly complicated and onerous. TBD $$$ high PlanningI.02InfrastructureStandardize Failure AnalysisCreate a standard process for investigating reported or actual failures after significant events. Post event investigation would survey debris lines for peak flow elevations, review damage, investigate system function using hydrologic models, investigate past maintenance records and report expected and actual system performance.This is an alternative or lead-in to smart infrastructure that allows the organization to build knowledge of system function, and periodically review and plan interventions in operations and maintenance that may lead to better system function.Additional data could sit on the shelf if there is not organizational capacity to review, utilize or react to it.TBD $$$$ medium DevelopmentI.03InfrastructurePeak Flood VisualizationCreate products that visualize and explain the extent of expected flooding during storm events. The various types of products could be paper and/or digital maps, the online water resources web map, Google Earth xml files, or other innovative methods. Creating maps or other visualizations of the potential extent of flooding helps identify the locations throughout the city that are most likely to flood. Additionally, similar to the activity of education and outreach, identifying areas of potential flooding and areas that do not show flooding help the public become aware of instances when the system is not functioning as expected. As the public becomes more aware of flooding throughout the city through these products, the new knowledge can likely motivate more citizens to take part in flood risk reduction efforts when they are aware of the extent of flooding throughout the city. With new flood mapping that is far more extensive than traditional FEMA maps, flood insurance prices and home prices may be affected. Maps alone do not tell the entire story; they cannot explain other flood characteristics such as duration. The public may react to the maps by implementing a fix that doesn't appropriately address the issue, i.e., a resident might plan to place a sandbag wall when the duration of flooding is so long that they might still be exposed to basement flooding from groundwater seepage. Some interpretations of the flood maps from the public may not be accurate. Notes concerning the reliability of the tools must be included (based on a calibrated or uncalibrated model, validated with observed data, etc.). TBD $$$ high Planning ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryI.04InfrastructureFlow Path VisualizationCreate visual products that explain the routes that water would flow during storm events. The various types of products could be paper and/or digital maps with flow direction arrows, the online water resources web map, Google Earth xml files, animations or videos, or other innovative methods. Creating maps or other visualizations of flood water flow paths helps identify the locations throughout the city that should remain open (no obstructions, no development, no pedestrians, cars, etc.) during a flood. Additionally, similar to the activity of education and outreach, identifying areas where water should be flowing during flooding events helps the public be aware of times when the system is not functioning as expected. Areas that would be emergency overflow areas (EOFs) during a flood can also be improved prior to flooding so that when activated, they do not erode. With new flood mapping that is far more extensive than traditional FEMA maps, flood insurance prices and home prices may be affected. Maps alone do not tell the entire story; they cannot explain other flood characteristics such as duration. Some reactions to the flood maps from the public may not be entirely appropriate. Notes concerning the reliability of the tools must be included (based on a calibrated or uncalibrated model, validated with observed data, etc.). Homeowners who live adjacent to flow paths and/or emergency over flows (EOFs) may take it into their own hands, on their own property, to alter the terrain so that water does not flow adjacent to their home. This may have other adverse consequences on their own or on other people's homes. TBD $$$ high PlanningI.05InfrastructurePredictive Snowmelt ModelingForecasted/predicted snowmelt modeling to help the city better understand spring flood risk.Predictive snowmelt modeling may help city staff and the community better understand spring flood risk. Forecasted high springtime water levels associated increased flood risk may inform flood risk reduction measures by the city (e.g. preparation for emergency pumping, sandbags, etc.), especially for landlocked basins and basins with restricted outlets.While melt can be estimated, it is uncertain due to duration of melt and any intervening rainfalls. This can lead undue alarm or a 'cry-wolf' affect. This effort may be better at a watershed or metro area level. Alternatives include amplifying general messages from the NWS. Existing water levels and snowpack measurements are required to forecast spring water levels. Collecting this information may take considerable staff time; but without this information, the snowmelt modeling may only provide a limited benefit for restricted outlet and landlocked basins.TBD $$$ low DevelopmentI.06InfrastructureActive Lake Level Monitoring, Smart Infrastructure PilotConstruct water level and discharge measurement sensors at key stormwater management system points (i.e. critical lakes, ponds, streams, and pipes).Current water level measurements can be used to monitor flood exposure, and therefore inform flood management activities (i.e. emergency pumping, sandbagging) as well as optimize operation of dynamic stormwater management systems equipped with adjustable weirs and outlets. Inconsistencies between measured data and flood models has led to identification of stormwater infrastructure no longer functioning as intended (i.e. sediment filled pipes, pipes with frost heaves, sediment filled channels, clogged outlets, etc.). Increasing the number of sensors throughout the city would allow for a more widespread system performance evaluation. Sensors can be difficult to maintain and are frequently damaged by adverse weather conditions and vandalism. Discharge monitoring may lead to identification of Inflow and Infiltration (I&I) issues. Data connections could be considered to creek flow gages maintained by watershed districts.The ability to construct and utilize adjustable weirs based on forecasted data may be limited by the DNR. For these additional measurements to be useful, the existing flood models may need to be refined to provide real-time forecasting abilities.TBD $$$$ high Development ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryI.07InfrastructureBetter Maintain Existing SystemUse a proactive asset management strategy to proactively inspect system to 1) identify infrastructure with relatively minor issues that can be readily repaired, and 2) add operations to remove collected debris and sediment from system trash racks, storm sewer pipes, catch basins, and inlets.Repair and replace stormwater infrastructure before minor issues escalate to costly replacements (inspect concrete pipe cracks, CCTV, stormwater pump head tests, ditch/stream thalweg surveys).Additionally, trash racks, culvert inlets, and storm sewer pipes can be blocked by sediment and debris. Poorly performing infrastructure reduces the overall stormwater infrastructure system efficiency and results in additional flooding/drainage issues. Addressing minor issues may provide water quality benefits. Less complaints from residents and more confidence in the stormwater management system.TBD $$$$$ high PlanningI.08InfrastructureControl Sources of ClogsStreet and flow path debris can clogs and plug stormwater infrastructure. Proactive street sweeping and maintenance of inlets and flow paths can reduce debris sources. Trash racks, culvert inlets, and storm sewer pipes can be blocked by sediment and debris, resulting in additional flooding/drainage issues. Even if partially plugged, additional flooding can occur. To address these sources of clogs and debris, the city could evaluate the benefits of implementing/constructing more stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) (i.e. vegetative cover, construction stormwater management, etc.). Addressing the sources of clogs and debris may provide water quality benefits and documentation of these measures may be useful for the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program.Addressing the sources of clogs and debris may also require enforcement, which could adversely impact relationships with private property owners in the city. TBD $$$$$ high PlanningI.09InfrastructureReduce Vulnerability of Sanitary Lift Stations Assess risk, floodproof, raise or relocate sanitary lift stations out of floodplain. For those sanitary lift stations that are low in elevation and within the floodplain, it may be important to elevate the lift station, or move it entirely so that it is no longer in the floodplain.When sanitary lift stations are in the floodplain, they can become unreachable during a significant flood. Additionally, they may become inundated with stormwater. This could cause a problem by allowing stormwater into the sanitary system, overwhelming it with too much flow. Improvements could include raising the electrical and controls systems, floodproofing the hatch, planning for emergency sandbagging and pumping to access, raising a section of the structure, or relocating entirely. Often these features are placed where they are for multiple very good reasons. Moving a lift station is a significant task, especially when space in a well-developed city is hard to come by. And finding another place out of the floodplain that is still as good as the original place (with regard to the other deciding factors) is a difficult task.TBD $$$$$ medium DevelopmentI.10InfrastructureReduce Sanitary System InflowFailures in the sanitary sewer system can cause backup into structures. The long term reduction of sources of infiltration and inflow of surface and groundwaters can incrementally reduce risk.This program is ongoing and associated with the sanitary sewer utility. It is ongoing in standalone projects and the neighborhood and Municipal State Aid (MSA) street reconstruction programs.TBD $$$$$ medium OngoingI.11InfrastructureEvaluate Water Supply System RiskFor those water supply systems (for example, wells) that are low in elevation and within the floodplain, it may be important to elevate the system, or move it entirely so that it is no longer in the floodplain.When water supply systems are in the floodplain, they can become unreachable during a significant flood. Additionally, they may become inundated with stormwater. This could cause a problem by contaminating the water supply system and creating an expensive condition that requires remediation.Often these features are placed where they are for multiple very good reasons. Moving water supply systems is a significant task, especially when space in a well-developed city is hard to come by. And finding another place out of the floodplain that is still as good as the original place (with regard to the other deciding factors) is a difficult task. Often distribution pipes are buried under roads and this would require tearing up roads. TBD $$$$ medium Planning ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryI.12InfrastructureCommunicate Risk to Power and Utility IndustryMuch like an emergency action plan, or education and outreach, this activity would be providing the proper information to private utility companies (electric, internet, fiber optic, etc.) of the locations and facilities that are most flood prone. Ideally, the activity that publishes flood extent visualizations could feed into this one. Access to buried utilities could be very limited around flood prone facilities. During flood events, driven often by large storm events, electricity could be down in parts of the city. The private utility companies should be aware of the areas and facilities prone to flooding so that they can plan to reduce the vulnerability of exposed systems, or be better prepared to fix elements of their system during and after a storm. This could become a daunting task every time the modeling is updated and the maps are recreated. Additionally, if there are flooding issues and private utilities are down, the city could be blamed or even sued if the private utilities company feels that the provided information was not accurate enough to help them be successful. TBD $$ medium DevelopmentI.13InfrastructureSearch for System Constraints and Quick Wins The stormwater network involves a complex system of overland flow, stormwater pipes, ditches, ponds, basins, and streams to convey stormwater off of the landscape. Using existing models and infrastructure data, identify the isolated and "easy to solve" choke points that may be limiting the overall capacity of the stormwater management system. Significant reductions in flood risk may be achievable in areas with "easy to solve" stand-alone constraints. These "easy to solve" fixes are likely to be significantly less expensive than other comprehensive system changes.Some of these retrofits are likely to be located within stormwater easements on private property (i.e. backyard flooding problems). Replacement/retrofit of the storm sewer in these areas may be disruptive.(Assume this is a desktop review to find these "easy to solve" retrofits and other activities are the construction/implementation for those locations). The effort can be used to inform future project scope and selection to better target resources to flood risk reduction.TBD $$$ high PlanningI.14InfrastructureBigger Pipes Replace undersized storm sewer in specific flood areas in some areas where there are no/limited downstream impacts associated with larger discharge from bigger pipes. Replace undersized storm sewer in specific flood areas to improve discharge away from the site and reduce flooding for areas without concerns of downstream impacts.In many instances, retrofitting bigger pipes is likely to lead to downstream impacts. Furthermore, other governing agencies, such as watershed management organizations or downstream cities, may limit or refuse additional discharge associated with larger pipes because of downstream impacts. There are limited opportunities for this type of risk transfer after the affects of climate change are factored in to an already constrained system.TBD $$$$$ high DevelopmentI.15InfrastructureNew Storage in ParksRetrofit new storage into or under park spaces.There is limited available, open space for construction of stormwater storage. Utilizing the space in or under park spaces is one of the few remaining places for stormwater storage. Increased stormwater storage will reduce downstream discharge and reduce flood risk (impacts) to downstream properties.There will likely resistance from the community to flooded parks and additional resources may be required to convert the park to a multipurpose land use. The addition of new storage may not be applicable everywhere, including sites with limited infiltration capacity, polluted ground, adjacent to wellheads, or with high bedrock. To use park spaces as flood storage, the city will likely need to educate residents about the multipurpose land use and that the park space will be flooded from time to time. The Park and Recreation Department, Park and Recreation Commission, and park users would be stakeholders.Stormwater reuse for irrigation may be an option is some parks.TBD $$$$$ high Development ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryI.16InfrastructureNew Storage in RoadsRetrofit new stormwater storage into or under roads.There is limited available, open green space for construction of stormwater storage (i.e., a stormwater pond). As roads and parking lots are reconstructed, utilize this space in or under parking lots/roads as one of the few remaining places for stormwater storage. Increased stormwater storage can help reduce downstream discharge and reduce flood risk (impacts) to downstream properties.Flooded roads and parking lots may receive pushback from the community and additional resources may be required to educate residents about where to drive/park during wet periods. The addition of new storage may not be applicable everywhere, including sites with limited infiltration capacity, polluted ground, adjacent to wellheads, or with high bedrock. Furthermore, stormwater storage on roadways is limited by requirements for emergency vehicle access. Storage under roadways is also limited by other buried utilities.TBD $$$$$ high DevelopmentI.17InfrastructureDesign to a Future Risk LevelWhen designing a part of the stormwater infrastructure system, we can no longer rely on using design storm events that are based solely on past observed data. We should be considering what climate forecasting models are telling us, and we should be considering the expected life of the infrastructure.A part of the stormwater infrastructure system that is mean to last 5 years and then no longer function does not necessarily need to be overly concerned with what the climate may be 30 years from now. Additionally, the probability of a 1% annual chance event occurring in the next 5 years is only about 5 percent. On the contrary, a part of the system meanT to be functional for the next 50 years should most certainly be considering the changing climate and the predictions of future large storm events. The probability of a 1% annual chance event occurring in the next 50 years is 40 percent. Given that, the chance of a piece of infrastructure being tested by its design storm during its life depends on the expected life of the infrastructure. And the magnitude of the change in the characteristics of the design storm event also depends on the expected life of the infrastructure. This approach will create even more uncertainty in the design process. In all likelihood, ponds, pipes, structures, weirs, pumps, and all other infrastructure will be designed bigger, potentially uncomfortably big and uncomfortably expensive, if the future climate risk is seriously considered in design. TBD $$$$$ medium PlanningI.18InfrastructurePlan Emergency Overflow PathsPlanning emergency flow paths is the approach of understanding the natural emergency overflows, and then planning to create, maintain, and protect those that exist, that safely pass stormwater flow, and therefore protect people and structures from flooding and harm. Having a prepared understanding of the emergency flow paths, rather than surprise of where stormwater ends up flowing, is beneficial for the protection of infrastructure within the city. Additionally, similar to the activity of publishing visualizations of flow paths, this planning can help understand the function of the system and whether or not it is operating appropriately during large flood events. Some residents may not like where emergency overflows are planned, prepared, maintained and protected. This would impact park uses. There are certainly instances of unplanned overflow locations that will surprise the public, and require study and private or public action to limit exposure. There may be pushback from the public in creating or maintaining these features. Outreach and would be necessary to communicate where these areas are and how park uses may be impacted.TBD $$$ high Planning ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryI.19InfrastructureBuy Low HomesOffer to purchase homes that are so flood exposed that the cost to protect them from flooding (or significantly reduce their flood exposure) is so high that it is beyond the value of the home. This is much like totaling a car after an accident significant enough that it doesn't even make sense to try and fix the car.The cost of capital projects to protect some homes can be very high, particularly for some homes that are built very low and near bodies of water. The vulnerability can be due to a number of factors and decisions when the home was built. Regardless of the reason for the high vulnerability, the cost to protect homes in this condition is beyond the value of the home itself. Additionally, there may be a cost in emergency rescues for people who live in those homes during flood events. Therefore, buying the home is the most cost-effective solution. Buyouts have been shown to be a cost-saving measure for taxpayers because the damages avoided result in cost savings on both flood insurance and disaster relief.Strategies to reduce vulnerability of these homes to flood can be much more fruitful. Buying out a resident is an emotional process; it may or may not be easy for a person to move, even if it is for their protection and benefit. Often, the cost/benefit for acquisitions makes the most sense on the lowest value homes - it is important to consider offsetting acquisitions with affordable housing options. Removing the vulnerable home will also remove a property/home from the tax base of the city. The loss in tax base may make sense if a 'fix' is considerably more expensive. The city then would have to decide if it is possible to redevelop the site, raise the future structure to limit exposure, or leave it vacant. A vacant site may provide minimal temporary storage. Leaving properties vacant could also increase green space. If state or federal funding is used, it might be deed restricted as open space in perpetuity.TBD $$$$$ low NoneI.20InfrastructureIncentivize Redevelopment of Exposed StructuresThe city can create a program that is available to residents where they can redevelop or reduce the flood risk of their home and be helped financially by the city. A redevelopment project of a home is expensive financially, takes time and effort, can be stressful if the home is inhabitable for a time, and has other factors that make it difficult. Incentives offered by the city can be motivating to a homeowner to help them decide to take action and protect themselves. The incentives can also turn the necessary project from impossible to possible financially. If the voluntary acquisitions are not an option, this approach may be able to reduce flood risk while maintaining, or even improving, the tax base. This process of redevelopment is happening without incentives. Incentives complicate the financial proposition, and involve the city in a process that is atypical and may cause more uncertainty and conflict. Incentives may need to be large to convince a homeowner to take on such a big task. The overall cost of the city depends on the number of homes that they intend to provide aid to, and the number of people willing to join the incentive program. TBD $$$$$ low None ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryI.24InfrastructureFlood Storage with Predictive PumpingAdd the innovative technology that monitors current conditions, tracks forecasts, models predicted flooding, and operates pumps to respond, to pump stations on water bodies that could benefit from predictive pumping flood risk reduction strategies.Water bodies with passive outlets can only be drawn down to the outlet's invert, or sometimes below with long periods of evaporation and minimal rain. All of the water in the water body is taking up storage that cannot be filled with incoming stormwater. A water body with a pumped outlet could potentially be drawn down further than normal to create the opportunity for added stormwater storage during a flood event. This is a way to create or provide storage without actually creating additional ponds, underground storage, or other types of storage on the landscape. It's simply a way to better utilize the current volume available for storage within the city. This method (predictive pumping) requires good weather forecasts, calibrated models with proven prediction capabilities. This method will likely be a long process of working with the DNR to develop a plan that improves storage capacity for the protection of the people, but also promotes protection of the other living things in and around the water body. Retrofitting predictive pumping will require more than electronics, wiring, and programming logic. It will likely require modifications to pipes on the suction side of the pump to be able to draw the water body down further. Some lift stations are quite small (fitting in the space of a manhole perhaps) and retrofitting this type of capability may require a small box or building on the surface to house the equipment. TBD $$$$$ high DevelopmentI.25InfrastructureDevelop Capital Project Prioritization FrameworkMaximize the effectiveness of limited funds by being deliberate in examining the vulnerability to floods and the greatest sources of possible disruption. Develop a scoring system using cost benefit analysis to identify and prioritize capital projects. The method used should be objective, transparent, and easy for the public to access and understand.Capital projects don't go through a vetting process. Requests are considered without determining how a specific issue ranks in comparison to others with regard to flood exposure, effectiveness, etc.There is a feeling among the Task Force that 'the squeaky wheel gets the grease'.Some project petitioners may find their project doesn't even register when compared to others. Even among Task Force members this would likely be the case.Judging criteria would have to be determined.TBD $$ medium DevelopmentR.01Regulatory ProgramMore Permit Review and RegulationEngineering review for small additions, accessory structures (sheds), impervious expansions not related to a building (deck/patio/etc.). Permits for grading, new homes, and major remodels with footprint changes all include engineering review for flow paths, grading and drainage. Retaining wall, minor remodels, interior remodels, mechanical, and other permit types are not reviewed.Reviewing more permit types may catch additional issues relating to site-to-site, drainage.This program is staff intensive, and would require additional resources for a fairly limited benefit.TBD $$$ medium DevelopmentR.02Regulatory ProgramRegulate Flow PathsInventory overland flow paths. Consider flow paths in permit review process. Make room for and plan for flow where it occurs by grading or armoring flow paths. Divert or limit unplanned flow paths by requiring engineered grading plans during permit review, when serious issue areas are encountered. Some improvements may not be presently triggering a permit review by the Engineering Department. Staff could investigate and identify issue areas, create a comprehensive list, and require private properties to address the risk in design if at the time a permit is applied for on an issue area.Minor addition to staff review process for permits that are already reviewed by Engineering.Minor addition in permits that would trigger a review by Engineering.May limit property owners ability to implement improvements on their property or increase their costs.Policy or code revision may be necessary.TBD $$$ high Planning ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryR.03Regulatory ProgramRegulate ImperviousImpervious surfaces generate more runoff. Limiting impervious surfaces by changing ordinance can reduce runoff generation.Analysis in task force effort showed this approach is very limited in terms of effectiveness.Major additional cost to some private parties. Moderate addition to staff review process for permits that are already reviewed by Engineering.Moderate addition in permits that would trigger a review by Engineering.May limit property owners ability to implement improvements on their property or increase their costs.Policy or code revision would be necessary.Would increase green space and may promote more trees. Both cost and benefit is highly variable depending on the level of regulation, and if mitigation is allowed. The costs are born by both the public, and private parties, depending on the level of regulation.TBD $$$$ low DevelopmentR.04Regulatory ProgramRequire Private Flood StorageProjects that trigger the regulatory check would be required to store volume on their site.There is a perception that redevelopment is adding volume and contributing to flood impacts. Analysis in task force effort showed this approach is very limited in terms of effectiveness. Current regulatory program manages risk on a permit-by-permit basis for residential, commercial, and industrial sites. Sites larger than one acre in size are required to control stormwater volume under the Construction Stormwater Permit.Major addition to staff review process for permits that are already reviewed by Engineering. Additional design, coaching, and inspection necessary.Post-construction program with inspections necessary.Maintenance agreements or other legal instrument necessary.Enforcement necessary.Will limit property owners ability to implement improvements on their property and will increase their costs.Policy or code revision would be necessary. There are additional costs that would be born by private parties that is not included in the costs score.TBD $$$$ low NoneR.05Regulatory ProgramRegulate Development to a Higher Flood StandardLevel of protection is currently the 1% annual chance (100-year) storm. This would be more restrictive, applying standards for a larger storm event such as the 0.2% annual chance (500-year) storm. (i.e. higher lowest floors and potentially further setback from water).Climate change is a main driver of increased flooding. Future predictions are that flood events will be larger and more frequent. Minor addition to staff review process for permits that are already reviewed by Engineering.Minor addition in permits that would trigger a review by Engineering.May limit property owners ability to implement improvements on their property or increase their costs.Policy or code revision will be necessary.TBD $$ low Development ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryR.06Regulatory ProgramTier Stormwater Utility Fee Based on Impervious CoverHigh impervious sites pay more. Model site runoff generation and rework the land use x acreage calculations to consider specific impervious of the individual site.Make the polluter pay' concept. Applying penalties for adding impervious may deter those from implementing projects. Staff intensive. Potential for a lot of negotiating back and forth about impervious cover. Would need to consider how residential stormwater BMPs like raingardens, landscaping, permeable pavements, and rain barrels fit it. May require staff intensive site inspections/verifications and annual or biannual updates. Some owners may be willing to 'pay their way out' to still be able to complete their project.TBD $$$ low DevelopmentR.07Regulatory ProgramParticipate in the Community Rating SystemThe City of Edina participates in the National Flood Insurance Program.The National Flood Insurance Program's (NFIP) Community Rating System (CRS) is a voluntary incentive program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain management activities that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements.As a result, flood insurance premium rates are discounted to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from the community actions.Potential cost savings for those holding policies. Number of policies and staff time required will determine if participation is cost-effective.TBD $$ low PlanningR.08Regulatory ProgramUpdate Plans with Flood RiskRoll the Flood Risk Reduction Strategy and Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan amendment into the Comprehensive Plan with a major amendment.Promote a citywide vision for flood risk reduction. Need to collaborate with other comp plans and groups such as the Southdale work group and other small area plans.TBD $$$ low PlanningO.01Outreach and EngagementPromote Awareness of Stormwater SystemEducation and outreach to community on the function and importance of the stormwater management system.An education and outreach program will help the community understand the function and importance of the stormwater management system and its role to minimize flooding and manage water quality. Education may improve flooding issues (e.g. improved participation in Adopt-a-Drain), identify stormwater infrastructure that is no longer functioning as designed, and help residents understand multipurpose land use (e.g. flooded parks and soccer fields).Additional understanding of flood risk has the potential to impact property values may reduce some property values. Synergy with MS4 required community education/outreach may limit additional city resources required. Education of the community may also improve water quality (reducing illicit dumping, salt usage, etc.). Staff would utilize customer service standards of integrity, quality, and service to assist residents in accessing available resources.TBD $$ low Planning ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryO.02Outreach and EngagementDevelop and Communicate Dynamic Flood Threat IndicatorForecast flood threat for design storms and also scenarios such as ice jams, saturated conditions, and snow melt. Host the dynamic indicator online.Perception of flood threat determines action. Would require moderate maintenance effort.Groundwater level and extent is highly uncertain and non-continuous. May provide false sense of security. TBD $$$ low DevelopmentO.03Outreach and EngagementDevelop Groundwater Level ViewerUsers can view relative groundwater level with year over year changes.Flooding risk may increase if shallow groundwater is high and stormwater infiltration is limited.May provide false sense of comfort. Groundwater elevations and extent is extremely variable spatially and temporally. Might be difficult to relate relative groundwater level to an individual basement elevation. Money may be better spent encouraging those at greatest risk to invest in draintile and sump pump systems instead.TBD $$ low PlanningO.04Outreach and EngagementPromote WaterAlert (USGS) SubscriptionsAnyone can sign up for text alerts for available United States Geological Survey (USGS) stream gauge sites.Program already operating. Would be low cost/energy to implement. Changes can be viewed in nearly real-time. Experience may help customers to benchmark their own risk on the hydrograph (water elevation graph).May provide false sense of comfort. Urban streams tend to be flashy (i.e., flow and elevation can increase rapidly).Can add to website Frequently Asked Questions.TBD $ low Quick WinO.05Outreach and EngagementDevelop a 'What is My Flood Risk?" MapComplementary to existing water resources map with the goal of communicating flood risk clearly.Better communication of flood risk. Understanding circumstance is first step in addressing vulnerability and exposure.Concern over impact on property values as community becomes more flood aware.It may be difficult to show the depth of flooding on the map - some may be an inch whereas others may be more than a foot.Some assumptions are made about topography - more detailed surveys on a site by site basis could show structures higher or lower than the model and aerial photo suggest.Concern about accuracy and completeness. Feedback from those that use the map is critical.TBD $$$ high Quick WinO.06Outreach and EngagementPromote Sandbag ServiceCreate series of videos to communicate how to make a request for sandbags and how to build a sandbag wall. Train staff how to receive requests and provide assistance over the phone.Most are unaware of the service. Those that are aware highly value the service.Some property owners and renters may have limited ability to place their own sandbags. Unclear what service provider might do this type of work if it were hired out.Disposal of sandbags post-event.Staff would need to be trained on how to receive requests and provide assistance over the phone.TBD $$ high Quick Win ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryO.07Outreach and EngagementDevelop Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)Available on the City website. A resource for reception staff to direct customers to.Would help to debunk myths. Help people self-serve the information. More immediate access to information versus calling a staff person, although always an option.Occasional review and minor edits would be needed. Need to inform staff that the resource is available to share with customers. Standard customer service standards of integrity, quality, and service apply.TBD $$ high Quick WinO.08Outreach and EngagementDevelop Flood Intervention Fact SheetsDevelop Fact Sheets for common interventions that property owners and renters could implement to reduce their exposure and vulnerability to flooding. Interventions may be pre, mid, or post storm. Fact sheets would provide a description, general cost information, and appropriate applications. Examples include floodproofing, elevating utilities, flood insurance, sanitary backflow prevention, sandbagging, among others. Some feedback suggests that the interactive water resources map in its current form requires technical expertise to interpret. Changes to the interactive map would make the flood risk information more accessible.A potential barrier to reducing one’s own exposure to flooding may be their perceived ability (knowledge, skills, and resources) to take action. Other barriers, such as cost may limit a property owner or renter's ability to implement.Renters may have limited ability to implement strategies.Considerations ought to be made for all residential structures, not just single dwelling units.Fact sheets may be used by sellers to show how structures are less exposed/vulnerable.TBD $$$ medium Quick WinO.09Outreach and EngagementProvide Stormwater Technical Assistance Grant ProgramPilot year completed in 2019. Competitive grants help pay for technical evaluation of an issue affecting a resident’s property. A report documents understanding of the problem and lays out a potential plan that could then be implemented by the property owner, at their cost. Some technical assistance can increase the perceived ability (expertise, knowledge, resources) for an individual to help themselves. Case studies may be useful to others in similar situations.Grant covers design, up to a cap. Grant does not cover implementation.Reformat to cover more, from 1:1 to presentation and future design consultations.This could be like a mini flood summit.$20,000/yr existing funding.Would need to ensure the program is attractive to applicants.TBD $$$ medium Quick WinO.10Outreach and EngagementHost Flood SummitDirect mail invitations to at-risk properties. Get all stakeholders together including representatives from neighborhoods, insurance, emergency service professionals, county, police and fire, landscapers, home service providers, MN DNR, engagement professionals, decision-makers, Watershed Districts, infrastructure experts, neighboring cities. All share and discuss roles and approaches for a changing climate with increasing flood risk.Incorporates various approaches involved in reducing exposure, increasing resilience to changing risks, transformation, reducing vulnerability, transferring and sharing risks, and preparing, responding, and recovering.Would require major staff effort and coordination of other parties. Would be a pilot. Unaware of a local model to follow or existing process/program to leverage.Consider equity when selecting a pilot community.TBD $$$ medium Development ID Sector Activity Name Description Justification/Motivating factors Tradeoffs and Other Considerations Task Force RankCost ScoreStaff Rated Effectiveness ScoreAction CategoryO.11Outreach and EngagementEngage with Stakeholders at Time of Capital InvestmentIncorporate into public improvements such as street reconstruction and park improvement projects. Develop custom engagement plans as appropriate.Incorporate into public improvements such as street reconstruction and park improvement projects. Develop custom engagement plans as appropriate.Opportunities to address problem areas may lie outside of the public improvement project boundaries.Some solutions may require private property cooperation in the form of easements, agreements, and assessments.This is a long term strategy driven by private and public investment.TBD $$ medium DevelopmentO.12Outreach and EngagementEngage with Realtors, Developers, and Insurance Agents on Local Flood RiskHost a class to inform realtors, developers, and insurance agents on local flood risk. Presentation materials could be hosted online or made into a brief video.As more stakeholders understand flood risk, there will likely be a market effect.As more stakeholders understand flood risk, there may be a market effect.Desire for residents and property owners to be engaged first.Information must be accurate, current, and easy to understand.TBD $ medium DevelopmentE.01Emergency ServicesDevelop Local Flooding Emergency Response PlanSource flood threat information and predict flood threat.Define affected areas/parties and frontline communities.Develop warning system.Develop emergency response plan.Establish public information program.Develop maintenance and improvement program.Coordinate with other departments/agencies.A hazard response plan exists for major disasters only.Customers expect a higher level of service and response than the current major disaster response plan provides.The perceived flood threat likely influences property owner/renter behavior.The plan should consider frontline communities and vulnerability. Developing a plan based on historical service requests alone is not an equitable approach.This strategy doesn't effect the flood, but instead effects the preparation for and recovery after a disaster. Damages may be reduced and a return to normalcy may happen more rapidly.Would require setting a trigger condition.Opportunity to consider better protections for frontline communities.TBD $$$ medium PlanningE.02Emergency ServicesDefine and Communicate the Available ServicesInfo about what the City can and can’t do about active flooding; explanation of how the City prioritizes flood-related requests for service posted to City website. Call center training and emergency response plan inclusion. There is a gap between the status quo service level and customer expectations. Better defining available services may motivate property owners and renters to take actions to reduce their own exposure.Potential equity disparity if service delivery is driven by requests for service only. Have a plan for engaging with frontline communities, reaching out rather than only waiting for a request for service.TBD $$ medium Quick Win APPENDIX L Preliminary Assessment Roll MORNINGSIDE D/E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA‐461 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 1 702824130108 4200 42ND ST WDONALD E NOTVIK 0.5 $4,650.00 2 702824420002 4201 42ND ST WR LARSON & A ANDRESEN 1 $9,300.00 3 702824130109 4202 42ND ST WT W & S L MARTENS 1 $9,300.00 4 702824420001 4205 42ND ST W LARRY H STOTTS ETAL 1 $9,300.00 5 702824130123 4212 42ND ST WL SUTIN & M K NULTY 1 $9,300.00 6 702824420003 4213 42ND ST WS B & V T ANDERSON 1 $9,300.00 7 702824420041 4215 42ND ST WSTEPHEN G & OLGA V ENGELS 1 $9,300.00 8 702824420040 4217 42ND ST WROD AUGUST & DAWN SCHOLL 1 $9,300.00 9 702824420039 4221 42ND ST WD & S MACPHERSON 1 $9,300.00 10 702824130121 4224 42ND ST WJOSEPH S MCAULIFF ETAL 0.5 $4,650.00 11 702824130120 4300 42ND ST WJOSEPH P HOLEWA 1 $9,300.00 12 702824420044 4301 42ND ST WD A ROSENBERG/G A ROSENBERG 1 $9,300.00 13 702824130119 4304 42ND ST WJULIA KOSTERS TRUST 1 $9,300.00 14 702824420043 4305 42ND ST W LYNETTE R ANDOR 1 $9,300.00 15 702824130118 4308 42ND ST WB & C BOONSTRA 0.5 $4,650.00 16 702824420042 4309 42ND ST WSTEVEN J DOVORANY 1 $9,300.00 17 702824420084 4313 42ND ST WCAROLYN REIGELSBERGER MORGAN 1 $9,300.00 18 702824420083 4317 42ND ST WVINCENT DURAY 1 $9,300.00 19 702824420082 4321 42ND ST WMARY T ABSOLON 1 $9,300.00 20 702824130117 4324 42ND ST WM H PHOTOGRAPHER & L SHI 0.5 $4,650.00 21 702824130116 4330 42ND ST WLINDA S BERBEROGLU 1 $9,300.00 22 702824130139 4404 42ND ST W JEFFREY A/JULIA POPE STEELE 1 $9,300.00 23 702824130138 4406 42ND ST WSETH JACOB SERGENT LEVENTHAL 1 $9,300.00 24 702824420122 4407 42ND ST WMICHAEL A HAMMER & S HAMMER 1 $9,300.00 25 702824130113 4408 42ND ST WJ E NIELSEN & A F NIELSEN 0.5 $4,650.00 26 702824130112 4500 42ND ST WG B SMITH & E D SMITH 0.5 $4,650.00 27 702824130111 4502 42ND ST WT M MCINTYRE ET AL TRUSTEES 1 $9,300.00 28 702824130110 4504 42ND ST WJ HOGERVORST & J PECORARO 1 $9,300.00 29 702824440116 4022 44TH ST WJ VANZANDT/RONALD W VANZANDT 0 $0.00 30 702824430131 4100 44TH ST WANDREW R & LINDA W STOTTS 0 $0.00 31 702824430119 4200 BRANSON ST J H LADOUSA & E G LADOUSA 1 $9,300.00 32 702824430118 4202 BRANSON ST J T QUINLAN & R A QUINLAN 1 $9,300.00 33 702824430117 4204 BRANSON ST M CANCIALOSI/N E CANCIALOSI 1 $9,300.00 34 702824430121 4205 BRANSON ST JOHN BLACK & EMILY E BLACK 1 $9,300.00 35 702824430116 4206 BRANSON ST COLIN JONES & BRIANNA JONES 1 $9,300.00 36 702824430122 4207 BRANSON ST MARK ALEXANDER STEVENS 1 $9,300.00 37 702824430115 4208 BRANSON ST BRIAN F & ANNIKA C JOY 1 $9,300.00 38 702824430123 4209 BRANSON ST L J FAHRNER LIV TRUST ET AL 1 $9,300.00 39 702824430114 4210 BRANSON ST S D OSTLIE & C M OSTLIE 1 $9,300.00 40 702824430124 4211 BRANSON ST KAREN A SEAL 1 $9,300.00 41 702824430153 4212 BRANSON ST C C PADESKY & E W PADESKY 1 $9,300.00 42 702824430125 4213 BRANSON ST K C HEINECKE & E L HEINECKE 1 $9,300.00 43 702824430112 4214 BRANSON ST EUGENE L MATTSON ETAL 1 $9,300.00 44 702824430126 4215 BRANSON ST VAUGHN P HILST ETAL 1 $9,300.00 45 702824430111 4300 BRANSON ST NASSIM ROSSI TRUST ET AL 1 $9,300.00 46 702824430083 4301 BRANSON ST B D SCHMIDT & D T SCHMIDT 1 $9,300.00 47 702824430110 4302 BRANSON ST JEFFREY/ELIZABETH M GENRICH 1 $9,300.00 48 702824430084 4303 BRANSON ST J D DYKSTRA & M K DYKSTRA 1 $9,300.00 49 702824430076 4304 BRANSON ST M J PLATTETER/S L PLATTETER 1 $9,300.00 50 702824430085 4305 BRANSON ST TIMOTHY T BENNETT ET AL 1 $9,300.00 51 702824430078 4306 BRANSON ST R C & P M MAUDE‐GRIFFIN 1 $9,300.00 52 702824430086 4307 BRANSON ST HONGWEI OYANG & HUIJIE LIN 1 $9,300.00 53 702824430073 4308 BRANSON ST PATRICIA G MILLS TRUST 1 $9,300.00 54 702824430087 4309 BRANSON ST THE CREDIT TRUST 1 $9,300.00 55 702824430072 4310 BRANSON ST J P LASSIG & A A LASSIG 1 $9,300.00 MORNINGSIDE D/E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA‐461 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 56 702824430088 4311 BRANSON ST MARIA K STOTESBERY ET AL 1 $9,300.00 57 702824430068 4312 BRANSON ST QI ZHAO & ZHI YANG 1 $9,300.00 58 702824430089 4313 BRANSON ST ANDREW W MAHONEY & K MAHONEY 1 $9,300.00 59 702824430071 4314 BRANSON ST N RAJALINGAM/M D RAJALINGAM 1 $9,300.00 60 702824430090 4315 BRANSON ST D KLUESNER & E KLUESNER 1 $9,300.00 61 702824430066 4316 BRANSON ST ADRIANE HAWES & SHANE HAWES 1 $9,300.00 62 702824430065 4400 BRANSON ST D WATTSON & M M GUTIERREZ 1 $9,300.00 63 702824430091 4401 BRANSON ST 4401 BRANSON LLC 1 $9,300.00 64 702824430062 4402 BRANSON ST W & M KLATT 1 $9,300.00 65 702824430092 4403 BRANSON ST 4403 BRANSON ST PROPS LLC 1 $9,300.00 66 702824430059 4404 BRANSON ST JOANNA E BENNETT TRUST 1 $9,300.00 67 702824430093 4405 BRANSON ST K B KETCHUM & V M MCCARTHY 1 $9,300.00 68 702824430060 4406 BRANSON ST M J MITCHELL & D J MITCHELL 1 $9,300.00 69 702824430094 4407 BRANSON ST MARION MCNURLEN/ LANE AYRES 1 $9,300.00 70 702824430057 4408 BRANSON ST J A CHRISTIAANSEN ET AL 1 $9,300.00 71 702824430095 4409 BRANSON ST BENJAMIN TAYLOR/SARA TAYLOR 1 $9,300.00 72 702824430141 4410 BRANSON ST ANNE E F & OKECHUKWU A AZODO 1 $9,300.00 73 702824430054 4411 BRANSON ST K S REBSTOCK/PETER REBSTOCK 1 $9,300.00 74 702824420045 4206 CROCKER AVE S & P PORTER 1 $9,300.00 75 702824420038 4209 CROCKER AVE BRETT BROHL & SARA BROHL 1 $9,300.00 76 702824420046 4212 CROCKER AVE PODALY U JAY & DESMOND B JAY 1 $9,300.00 77 702824420037 4213 CROCKER AVE TIMOTHY/SUSAN GRUIDL 1 $9,300.00 78 702824420035 4215 CROCKER AVE BRUCE GEORGE REITER 1 $9,300.00 79 702824420047 4216 CROCKER AVE DAVID/CATHERINE PINSKE TRUST 1 $9,300.00 80 702824420036 4217 CROCKER AVE F R C BACON & A BACON 1 $9,300.00 81 702824420034 4219 CROCKER AVE GALEN L LUNDGREN & WIFE 1 $9,300.00 82 702824420048 4220 CROCKER AVE CHELSEA IHNAT & DANIEL IHNAT 1 $9,300.00 83 702824420033 4221 CROCKER AVE TOLLBERG HOMES LLC 1 $9,300.00 84 702824420032 4223 CROCKER AVE GERLINDE S PAULAT 1 $9,300.00 85 702824420049 4224 CROCKER AVE R & S LANDRUD 1 $9,300.00 86 702824420031 4225 CROCKER AVE KARL O SHARP ETAL 1 $9,300.00 87 702824420050 4226 CROCKER AVE S & D GORMAN 1 $9,300.00 88 702824420030 4227 CROCKER AVE ROBERT P MONGE ETAL 1 $9,300.00 89 702824420051 4228 CROCKER AVE B A GILLOON & C L GILLOON 1 $9,300.00 90 702824420029 4229 CROCKER AVE STEPHEN LESOURD/SHAUNA YUAN 1 $9,300.00 91 702824420052 4230 CROCKER AVE M V SCHAEFER & K M SCHAEFER 1 $9,300.00 92 702824420028 4231 CROCKER AVE MATTHEW GILLMER & K GILLMER 1 $9,300.00 93 702824420053 4232 CROCKER AVE WILLIAM J & BARBARA L BUENZ 1 $9,300.00 94 702824420027 4233 CROCKER AVE HANS P KUDER/KAITLIN L LYTLE 1 $9,300.00 95 702824420054 4234 CROCKER AVE G M CARLSON & J J CARLSON 1 $9,300.00 96 702824420025 4235 CROCKER AVE A T MISSAGHI & A MISSAGHI 1 $9,300.00 97 702824420055 4236 CROCKER AVE K D POTTS & H A BEAL 1 $9,300.00 98 702824420026 4237 CROCKER AVE S B RUUD & L R RUUD 1 $9,300.00 99 702824420056 4238 CROCKER AVE G M D & R L M TRUST 1 $9,300.00 100 702824420023 4239 CROCKER AVE L J DEVORE & J DEVORE 1 $9,300.00 101 702824420057 4240 CROCKER AVE ALYSSA L THOMAS TRUST 1 $9,300.00 102 702824420024 4241 CROCKER AVE LYLE R EIDE & WIFE 1 $9,300.00 103 702824420058 4242 CROCKER AVE MONIQUE J WERRY 1 $9,300.00 104 702824420022 4243 CROCKER AVE W OLEXY & J K HESSION 1 $9,300.00 105 702824420059 4244 CROCKER AVE PAUL EKLUND THOMPSON 1 $9,300.00 106 702824420021 4245 CROCKER AVE L J MADDAUS‐WHITE ET AL 1 $9,300.00 107 702824420060 4246 CROCKER AVE T J BRAATEN & E G BRAATEN 1 $9,300.00 108 702824420020 4247 CROCKER AVE B G JOHNSON & B N JOHNSON 1 $9,300.00 109 702824420062 4248 CROCKER AVE FRANCES L SIFTAR 1 $9,300.00 110 702824420019 4249 CROCKER AVE GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD HOMES INC 1 $9,300.00 111 702824410127 4201 GRIMES AVE AMY STRODL & JASON STRODL 0.67 $6,231.00 MORNINGSIDE D/E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA‐461 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 112 702824420004 4208 GRIMES AVE JONATHAN REX GROSS 1 $9,300.00 113 702824410123 4209 GRIMES AVE J P MELLEMA & D A MELLEMA 1 $9,300.00 114 702824420005 4212 GRIMES AVE J J BRAKKE PAYNE & T L PAYNE 1 $9,300.00 115 702824410122 4213 GRIMES AVE MAHESH JOHARI & WEI DONG 1 $9,300.00 116 702824410120 4215 GRIMES AVE G T GENUNG & S L DALLIN 1 $9,300.00 117 702824420006 4216 GRIMES AVE G H WILSON & L T WILSON 1 $9,300.00 118 702824410121 4217 GRIMES AVE R S GREENE & R TAYLOR‐GREENE 1 $9,300.00 119 702824420007 4218 GRIMES AVE HEIDI & DARREN WENNEN 1 $9,300.00 120 702824410118 4219 GRIMES AVE M M CAVANAUGH/R D LAVERCOMBE 1 $9,300.00 121 702824410119 4221 GRIMES AVE JOSEPH CHISLER 1 $9,300.00 122 702824420009 4222 GRIMES AVE H R BERG/J A GUNDERSON BERG 1 $9,300.00 123 702824410116 4223 GRIMES AVE S BLATNIK & A M CURTIN 1 $9,300.00 124 702824420008 4224 GRIMES AVE C A HALLBERG/J S RUNESTRAND 1 $9,300.00 125 702824410117 4225 GRIMES AVE CAROL A FRANZEN 1 $9,300.00 126 702824420010 4226 GRIMES AVE R P & V M KEARNEY 1 $9,300.00 127 702824410114 4227 GRIMES AVE KYLE MEEHAN & KATIE MEEHAN 1 $9,300.00 128 702824410115 4229 GRIMES AVE V R SHENAI & AMITA V SHENAI 1 $9,300.00 129 702824420011 4230 GRIMES AVE RAYMOND V HALL ETAL 1 $9,300.00 130 702824410113 4231 GRIMES AVE STEVEN MORGAN 1 $9,300.00 131 702824420012 4232 GRIMES AVE KATE AMELIA QUALE 1 $9,300.00 132 702824420013 4234 GRIMES AVE MARTHA J ARNESON 1 $9,300.00 133 702824410112 4235 GRIMES AVE N T WISSINK & S S WISSINK 1 $9,300.00 134 702824420014 4238 GRIMES AVE THE JELTEMA LIVING TRUST 1 $9,300.00 135 702824410111 4239 GRIMES AVE JOHN GEELAN & MEGAN FEENEY 1 $9,300.00 136 702824420015 4240 GRIMES AVE GRAFE TRUST 1 $9,300.00 137 702824420016 4242 GRIMES AVE GRAFE TRUST 1 $9,300.00 138 702824410110 4243 GRIMES AVE JEFFREY & JENIFER SHOEMATE 1 $9,300.00 139 702824420125 4246 GRIMES AVE HELEN S BURKE 1 $9,300.00 140 702824410108 4247 GRIMES AVE JOSEPH BAUER & BRIANNE BAUER 1 $9,300.00 141 702824430150 4306 GRIMES AVE MATTHEW B KRUSH REVOC TRUST 1 $9,300.00 142 702824440117 4307 GRIMES AVE PETER R & MENA K BJERKE 1 $9,300.00 143 702824440118 4311 GRIMES AVE L S PARMEKAR & L J PARMEKAR 1 $9,300.00 144 702824440114 4313 GRIMES AVE B GILLMER & C CURRIER 1 $9,300.00 145 702824440115 4315 GRIMES AVE C F GRAFT & J A GRAFT 1 $9,300.00 146 702824430120 4324 GRIMES AVE SARAH HUSS & JOSEPH HUSS 1 $9,300.00 147 702824130122 4125 KIPLING AVE J M SEVERSON & T A SPITALE 0.5 $4,650.00 148 702824420135 4401 LITTEL ST ANDREW E DAVIS & K H DAVIS 1 $9,300.00 149 702824420121 4200 LYNN AVE B A BENYAS & D S BENYAS 1 $9,300.00 150 702824420081 4211 LYNN AVE J A & A B WHITE 1 $9,300.00 151 702824420109 4212 LYNN AVE E & S FLACH 1 $9,300.00 152 702824420080 4213 LYNN AVE T J FINER & A K FINER 1 $9,300.00 153 702824420079 4215 LYNN AVE D A & M R HORAN 1 $9,300.00 154 702824420110 4216 LYNN AVE J M BUSZIN & M E LOGEAIS 1 $9,300.00 155 702824420078 4217 LYNN AVE CASEY CARL & JAMIE CARL 1 $9,300.00 156 702824420077 4219 LYNN AVE R G PARISH & A H PARISH 1 $9,300.00 157 702824420111 4220 LYNN AVE HEATHER L BRACKEN 1 $9,300.00 158 702824420076 4221 LYNN AVE P A & J D SIDELL 1 $9,300.00 159 702824420075 4223 LYNN AVE I TOWNSEND & K TOWNSEND 1 $9,300.00 160 702824420112 4224 LYNN AVE T J RUDNICKI/K J H RUDNICKI 1 $9,300.00 161 702824420074 4225 LYNN AVE N P BISHOP & K M BISHOP 1 $9,300.00 162 702824420072 4227 LYNN AVE ROBERT J LOGELIN 1 $9,300.00 163 702824420113 4228 LYNN AVE KENNETH L & JUDITH R HANSEN 1 $9,300.00 164 702824420073 4231 LYNN AVE EUGENE EDWARD VEIT 1 $9,300.00 165 702824420114 4232 LYNN AVE T J & M B GREELEY 1 $9,300.00 166 702824420085 4405 LITTEL ST CITY OF EDINA 0 $0.00 167 702824420071 4233 LYNN AVE J M HARRIS & S S HARRIS 1 $9,300.00 MORNINGSIDE D/E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA‐461 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 168 702824420086 4234 LYNN AVE PETER GABLER & KAREN GABLER 1 $9,300.00 169 702824420070 4235 LYNN AVE JOHN H MITCHELL TRUST 1 $9,300.00 170 702824420127 4236 LYNN AVE NANCY B KILLILEA REV TRUST 1 $9,300.00 171 702824420069 4237 LYNN AVE LACHLAN J BADENOCH 1 $9,300.00 172 702824420088 4238 LYNN AVE M S HUNT & C OFFICER‐HUNT 1 $9,300.00 173 702824420068 4239 LYNN AVE MICHAEL J DEVINE ET AL 1 $9,300.00 174 702824420087 4240 LYNN AVE C HAMMERSTRAND ET AL 1 $9,300.00 175 702824420090 4242 LYNN AVE JEFFREY A OHM & JOYCE E OHM 1 $9,300.00 176 702824420066 4243 LYNN AVE M S BRINKMAN & M Q BRINKMAN 1 $9,300.00 177 702824420089 4244 LYNN AVE M S BROWN & A L SZYMCZAK 1 $9,300.00 178 702824420067 4245 LYNN AVE AARON JILSON & K F JILLSON 1 $9,300.00 179 702824420093 4246 LYNN AVE S CAVANAUGH & T CAVANAUGH 1 $9,300.00 180 702824420063 4247 LYNN AVE ALEX J WILSON & A N WILSON 1 $9,300.00 181 702824410109 4114 MORNINGSIDE RD J D ENGELSMA & E H ENGELSMA 0 $0.00 182 702824440122 4115 MORNINGSIDE RD EHREN J SEIM & HOLLY A SEIM 0 $0.00 183 702824420126 4200 MORNINGSIDE RD R & J WALKOVETS 1 $9,300.00 184 702824430148 4201 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MORNINGSIDE CHURCH 3.04 $28,272.00 185 702824420017 4208 MORNINGSIDE RD GREENWOOD DESIGN BUILD LLC 1 $9,300.00 186 702824430151 4209 MORNINGSIDE RD DAVID R & ELIZABETH P CECCHI 1 $9,300.00 187 702824430038 4211 MORNINGSIDE RD C S HAYHOE & B S HAYHOE 1 $9,300.00 188 702824430152 4213 MORNINGSIDE RD STEWART RALLIS/MONICA RALLIS 1 $9,300.00 189 702824430107 4215 MORNINGSIDE RD SCOTT R INGRAM ETAL 1 $9,300.00 190 702824430108 4301 MORNINGSIDE RD R M LIESTMAN & K S LIESTMAN 1 $9,300.00 191 702824430109 4303 MORNINGSIDE RD J W TAYLOR & K E TAYLOR 1 $9,300.00 192 702824430079 4305 MORNINGSIDE RD M A BANFIELD & L L BANFIELD 1 $9,300.00 193 702824430077 4307 MORNINGSIDE RD T J MCGILL & L K MCGILL 1 $9,300.00 194 702824420061 4308 MORNINGSIDE RD C C BINDERT/BRIANA L BINDERT 1 $9,300.00 195 702824430075 4309 MORNINGSIDE RD D & S TOTH 1 $9,300.00 196 702824420065 4310 MORNINGSIDE RD B W CIFERRI & B L CIFERRI 1 $9,300.00 197 702824430074 4311 MORNINGSIDE RD AMIT BHARGAVA/ANNE BHARGAVA 1 $9,300.00 198 702824430070 4313 MORNINGSIDE RD PETER CLAYBURGH 1 $9,300.00 199 702824430069 4315 MORNINGSIDE RD A K YANG & L A VOSSLER‐YANG 1 $9,300.00 200 702824430067 4317 MORNINGSIDE RD M D HOBBS & J D HOBBS 1 $9,300.00 201 702824420064 4350 MORNINGSIDE RD THOMAS J PLANT/JUDY L PLANT 1 $9,300.00 202 702824420092 4400 MORNINGSIDE RD SANFORD BERMAN 1 $9,300.00 203 702824430064 4401 MORNINGSIDE RD S C FLEMMING & S L DINAPOLI 1 $9,300.00 204 702824430063 4403 MORNINGSIDE RD JUSTIN E STEINBRUCHEL ET AL 1 $9,300.00 205 702824430061 4405 MORNINGSIDE RD JASON STRODL & AMY STRODL 1 $9,300.00 206 702824430058 4409 MORNINGSIDE RD IMRAN SYED & MEHER RAHMAN 1 $9,300.00 207 702824430132 4411 MORNINGSIDE RD K M PRINCE & M J PRINCE 1 $9,300.00 208 702824430133 4413 MORNINGSIDE RD J A WILDE & C A WILDE 1 $9,300.00 209 702824430135 4415 MORNINGSIDE RD M C PECARD & C M BEHREND 1 $9,300.00 210 702824430134 4417 MORNINGSIDE RD S LAFRENZ & T LAFRENZ 1 $9,300.00 211 702824340082 4501 MORNINGSIDE RD TALLAKSON FAMILY LIV REC TRU 0.5 $4,650.00 212 702824420101 4200 OAKDALE AVE T MARTINEZ & A MARTINEZ 1 $9,300.00 213 702824420123 4201 OAKDALE AVE P & S LEDIN 1 $9,300.00 214 702824420102 4204 OAKDALE AVE J BALLARD & K BALLARD 1 $9,300.00 215 702824420124 4205 OAKDALE AVE GAVIN QUINN & KATIE QUINN 1 $9,300.00 216 702824420103 4208 OAKDALE AVE DAVID SIEBEN/KATHRYN SIEBEN 1 $9,300.00 217 702824420120 4211 OAKDALE AVE KAY FINBERG JOHNSON 1 $9,300.00 218 702824420104 4212 OAKDALE AVE N M BIZILY & T K D BIZILY 1 $9,300.00 219 702824420119 4215 OAKDALE AVE H M GRAVES & J P GRAVES 1 $9,300.00 220 702824420105 4216 OAKDALE AVE D P JUNKER & J M BERGSTEDT 1 $9,300.00 221 702824420118 4219 OAKDALE AVE B & J STROMBERG JR 1 $9,300.00 222 702824420106 4220 OAKDALE AVE J P GOAN & S C GOAN 1 $9,300.00 223 702824420117 4223 OAKDALE AVE S P MURNAN & A H MURNAN 1 $9,300.00 MORNINGSIDE D/E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA‐461 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PID HOUSE NO. STREET OWNER ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 224 702824420107 4224 OAKDALE AVE M A STEVENS & J L STEVENS 1 $9,300.00 225 702824420116 4227 OAKDALE AVE T B MOLLDREM/R A H MOLLDREM 1 $9,300.00 226 702824420108 4228 OAKDALE AVE T A & A J YOUEL 1 $9,300.00 227 702824420115 4231 OAKDALE AVE J J SCHWERT & C P SCHWERT 1 $9,300.00 228 702824420136 4232 OAKDALE AVE CAROL E SIDELL 1 $9,300.00 229 702824430136 4303 OAKDALE AVE K VICKMAN & J VICKMAN 1 $9,300.00 230 702824430137 4305 OAKDALE AVE SACHIN CHAUHAN/UPAMA UNIYAL 1 $9,300.00 231 702824340083 4306 OAKDALE AVE GROUNDUP DEVELOPMENT LLC 1 $9,300.00 232 702824430138 4307 OAKDALE AVE S HANNULA & K LAWTON 1 $9,300.00 233 702824430139 4309 OAKDALE AVE MARY E GROTTE 1 $9,300.00 234 702824340084 4312 OAKDALE AVE ANDRIA ROSS‐REDPATH REV TRST 1 $9,300.00 235 702824430140 4315 OAKDALE AVE M S VALGEMAE/R A VALGEMAE TR 1 $9,300.00 236 702824340085 4318 OAKDALE AVE ANN VICTORIA HOFFMAN TRUSTEE 1 $9,300.00 237 702824340086 4324 OAKDALE AVE LINDA M TILLITT 1 $9,300.00 238 702824340087 4330 OAKDALE AVE C B JOHNS & C M JOHNS 1 $9,300.00 239 702824340088 4334 OAKDALE AVE T R PFEIFER JR & E R PEPIN 1 $9,300.00 240 702824340073 4338 OAKDALE AVE A A GLAISNER & L M GLAISNER 1 $9,300.00 241 702824340074 4342 OAKDALE AVE R K & C A JOYCE 1 $9,300.00 242 702824430056 4344 OAKDALE AVE D J POWELL & KIARA J POWELL 1 $9,300.00 243 702824430055 4348 OAKDALE AVE SUSAN L SHERIDAN 1 $9,300.00 244 702824430052 4352 OAKDALE AVE PAUL J DONNAY THREE LLC 1 $9,300.00 245 702824430051 4353 OAKDALE AVE MITCHELL & JENNIFER BEST 1 $9,300.00 246 702824430053 4356 OAKDALE AVE KATE M CARPENTER 1 $9,300.00 247 702824430049 4360 OAKDALE AVE T M MCGOWAN & C J MCGOWAN 1 $9,300.00 248 702824430042 4361 OAKDALE AVE J P NOESKE & A J NOESKE 1 $9,300.00 249 702824430050 4364 OAKDALE AVE G R SKOV & J M UNZICKER 1 $9,300.00 250 702824430041 4365 OAKDALE AVE L A COOLEY & J L THAYER 1 $9,300.00 251 702824430045 4368 OAKDALE AVE C W & C A BEHLING 1 $9,300.00 252 702824430048 4370 OAKDALE AVE AMY B JOHNSON 1 $9,300.00 253 702824420138 4245 SIDELL TR RICHARD HARDY & SARAH HARDY 0.5 $4,650.00 254 702824420129 4248 SIDELL TR JASON ZUCKER & CARLY ZUCKER 0.5 $4,650.00 Total 245.71 $2,285,103.00 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates November 23, 2021, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 19 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 23rd day of November, 2021. ________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk 0702824430109 JEREMY & KRISTY TAYLOR 4303 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420006 GARRETT H WILSON & & LAURA THATCHER WILSON 4216 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430064 SCOTT FLEMMING & SUSAN DINAPOLI 4401 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430135 MICHAEL C PECAED & CHRISTINE M BEHREND 4415 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430058 IMRAN SHAFI SYED & MEHER KHALID RAHMAN 4409 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430132 KATHERINE & MICHAEL PRINCE 4411 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430108 RYAN & KATHRYN LIESTMAN 4301 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430077 TIMOTHY J MCGILL & LAURA K MCGILL 4307 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430134 SCOTT LAFRENZ & TERI LAFRENZ 4417 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420014 WADE & NICOLLE GULBRANSEN 4016 SALEM AVE ST LOUIS PARK MN 55416 0702824420002 RANDALL LARSON & ANGELICA ANDRESEN 4201 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824130112 GORDON BRAWN SMITH & ERIN DUDLEY SMITH 4500 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824130117 MUFADDAL H PHOTOGRAPHER & LIXIA SHI 4324 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824130121 JOSEPH & TIA MCAULIFF 4224 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430060 MAURA J MITCHELL & DAVID J MITCHELL 4230 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430079 MATTHEW & LAURENCE BANFIELD 4305 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824130110 JOEP HOGERVORST & JESSICA PECORARO 4504 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430069 ALAN K YANG & LORI A VOSSLER-YANG 4315 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420102 JEFFREY & KRISTIN BALLARD 4204 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420060 TREVOR & EYLEEN BRAATEN 4246 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420063 ALEX & ALISON WILSON 4247 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420074 NICHOLAS & KILIAN BISHOP 4225 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420068 MICHAEL J DEVINE & EDMONDA BRUSCELLA DEVINE 4239 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420087 CHRISTOPHER & ALICIA HAMMERSTRAND 4240 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420061 CHRISTOPHER & BRIANA BINDERT 4308 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420027 HANS KUDER & KAITLIN LYTLE 4233 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420028 MATTHEW & KARIE GILLMER 4231 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420051 BENJAMIN & CONSTANCE GILLOON 4228 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420056 GREGORY M DAGGETT & RUTH MERID 4238 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420075 ISAAC & KATHERINE TOWNSEND 4223 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420127 PETER & NANCY KILLILEA 4236 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420080 TAD & ALEXANDRA FINER 4213 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420107 JENNIFER STEVENS 4224 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420067 AARON & KATHERINE JILLSON 4245 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420101 TOM & AIMEE MARTINEZ 4200 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420104 NEIL M BIZILY & TARA K DOYLE BIZILY 4212 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420065 BRINK & BETSY CIFERRI 4310 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420038 BRETT & SARAH BROHL 4209 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420022 WILLIAM OLEXY & JANE KING HESSION 4243 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420117 GREGORY & JESSICA HEIDEMANN 4223 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420110 JUSTIN M BUSZIN & MARY E LOGEAIS 4216 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410110 KIM CLINE & NATHAN OTREMBA 4243 GRIMES AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824410120 REAMONN STYNES & MAX STYNES 4215 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410112 NATHANIEL & STEPHANIE WISSINK 4235 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410121 RICHARD S GREENE & TAMELA R TAYLOR-GREENE 4217 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410116 STEPHEN BLATNIK & ANN M CURTIN 4223 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410115 VASANTH & AMITA SHENAI 4229 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430065 DANIEL WATTSON & MARIA MERCEDES GUTIERREZ 4400 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430049 TIMOTHY & CAROLINE MCGOWAN 4360 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430057 RYAN & MICHELLE SULLIVAN 4408 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430056 DAVID & KIARA POWELL 4344 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824430095 BENJAMIN & SARA TAYLOR 4409 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430111 FEDERICO & NASSIM ROSSI 4300 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430093 KATHERINE B KETCHUM & VIRGINIA M MCCARTHY 4405 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430123 RYAN & NICOLE WILLIAMS 4209 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430063 JUSTIN & ADITI STEINBRUCHEL 6224 PEACEDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430110 JEFFREY GENRICH & ELIZABETH A MENAPACE-GENRICH 4302 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430119 JESSE & ERIKA LADOUSA 4200 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430085 TIMOTHY T BENNETT & INNA SHABASH-BENNETT 4305 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430138 SETH HANNULA & KATHERINE LAWTON 4307 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430137 SACHIN CHAUHAN & UPAMA UNIYAL 4305 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430117 MICHAEL & NICOLE CANCIALOSI 4204 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430072 JEFFREY & AMY ANNE LASSIG 4310 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430150 MATTHEW KRUSH & ELIZABETH FALLON 4306 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430140 MARK & RUTH VALGEMAE 4315 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430054 KATHERINE & PETER REBSTOCK 4411 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430088 MJL HOMES LLC 18624 KALMAR TRAIL LAKEVILLE MN 55044 0702824430118 JOHN & RACHEL A QUINLAN 4202 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430136 KURT & JEANNETTE VICKMAN 4303 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430071 NATHAN & MACKENZIE RAJALINGAM 4314 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430089 ANDREW & KAREN MAHONEY 4313 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824440114 AARON & ASHLEY YENTZ 4313 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824440115 CHRISTOPHER & JESSICA A GRAFT 4315 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430120 SARAH HUSS & JOSEPH HUSS 4324 GRIMES AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824430051 MITCHELL & JENNIFER BEST 4220 CHOWEN AVE S MINNEAPOLIS MN 55410 0702824340087 CHRISTOPHER & CORRAL JOHNS 4330 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824130108 DONALD E NOTVIK 4200-42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824340084 ANDREA & SCOTT A REDPATH 4312 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430053 KATE M CARPENTER 4356 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430148 EDINA MORNINGSIDE CHURCH 4201 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430087 DEIRDRE OLSON 3809 ISLAND VIEW CIRCLE NW PRIOR LAKE MN 55372 0702824430066 ADRIANE HAWES & SHANE HAWES 4316 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824420004 JONATHAN REX GROSS 4208 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430074 AMIT BHARGAVA/ANNE BHARGAVA 4311 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824130120 JOSEPH P HOLEWA 4300 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420005 THOMAS L PAYNE 4212 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824130118 ERIN & THOMAS POWELL 4308 W 42ND ST EDINA MN 55416 0702824420009 H R BERG/J A GUNDERSON BERG 4222 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430076 MICHAEL/STEPHANIE PLATTETER 4304 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430045 CHRISTOPHER & CHERYL BEHLING 4368 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824430124 KAREN A SEAL 4211 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824340085 ANN V HOFFMAN 4318 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430107 SCOTT R INGRAM 4215 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430070 HILLARY FOX CLAYBURGH 4313 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430125 KENNETH & ELIZABETH HEINECKE 4213 BRANSON STREET EDINA MN 55424 0702824420012 KATE AMELIA QUALE 4232 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430090 DAVID & ELIZABETH KLUESNER 4315 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430041 LINTON COOLEY & JOHN THAYER 4365 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824430121 JOHN & EMILY BLACK 4205 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824420015 TIMOTHY H GRAFE 4242 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420125 HELEN BURKE 4246 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430061 NEXT NEST MN LLC 4201 GRIMES AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824130139 JEFFREY A STEELE 4404 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430059 JOANNA & ANDREW BENNETT 4404 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430038 CHRISTOPHER & BARBARA HAYHOE 4211 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420007 HEIDI & DARREN WENNEN 4218 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430084 JEFFREY D & MOLLY K DYKSTRA 4303 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824130123 MAB NULTY & LAWRENCE SUTIN 4212 W 42ND ST EDINA MN 55416 0702824430094 MARION MCNURLEN/ LANE AYRES 4407 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824340086 ALAN CLINARD & MICHELE KAPLAN CLINARD 4324 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824430048 AMY B JOHNSON 4370 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430126 VAUGHN P HILST 4215 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430122 MARK ALEXANDER STEVENS 4207 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824420010 ROBERT & VIRGINIA KEARNEY 4226 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420011 PATRICK & RACHEL LYTLE 4230 GRIMES AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824430153 CORY & ELIZABETH PADESKY 4212 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430075 LORAN & CHRISTY GUTT 4309 MORNINGSIDE ROAD EDINA MN 55416 0702824130111 TODD & CAROLYN MCINTYRE 4502 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430114 STEVEN & CATHY OSTLIE 4210 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430141 ANNE E F & OKECHUKWU A AZODO 4410 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430068 QI ZHAO & ZHI YANG 4312 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430139 MARY E GROTTE 1932 DREW AV S MPLS MN 55416 0702824430091 JENNIFER & CHRISTOPHER EDE 4413 GRIMES AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824430092 ABRAHAM & NINA FIELDS 4403 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824130122 T A SPITALE & J M SEVERSON 4125 KIPLING AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824130113 JOHN E NIELSEN 4408 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430112 EUGENE L MATTSON 4214 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430133 JAMES A & CONNIE A WILDE 4413 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430083 BRYAN & DARLENE SCHMIDT 4301 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824420008 C HALLBERG & J RUNESTRAND 4224 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824430052 JOHN & MADELINE MCELHENNY 4352 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824420129 DRAGANA & AARON BERG 4248 SIDELL TR EDINA MN 55416 0702824420016 TIMOTHY H GRAFE 4242 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420126 JANET C WALKOVETS 4200 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824340082 W L TALLAKSON 4501 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430116 ANGELA VANGRIMSVEN 4206 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824130109 THOMAS W & SONJA L MARTENS 4202 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430067 MICHAEL D & JOHNNA D HOBBS 4317 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824340083 JOHN & JACQUELYN PETERKA 3680 LANDINGS DRIVE EXCELSIOR MN 55331 0702824430115 BRIAN F & ANNIKA C JOY 4208 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824130116 LINDA S BERBEROGLU 4330 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430062 W NICHOLAS & M JAYNE A KLATT 4402 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430078 ROLAND C MAUDE-GRIFFIN 4306 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430042 J P NOESKE & A J NOESKE 4361 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824420013 MARTHA J ARNESON 4234 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824340074 ROBERT K & CYNTHIA A JOYCE 4342 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824430151 ANGELA VANGRINSVEN 4209 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824340073 ANDREW & LISA GLAISNER 4338 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824130119 JULIA KOSTERS 4304 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 JAY KOSTERS 5813 TINGDALE AVE EDINA MN 55436 0702824340088 E R & T R PFEIFER JR 4334 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430086 HONGWEI OYANG & HUIJIE LIN 4307 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430055 SUSAN L SHERIDAN 4348 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55424 0702824130138 SETH JACOB SERGENT LEVENTHAL 4406 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824430073 PATRICIA G MILLS 4308 BRANSON ST EDINA MN 55424 0702824430050 GLENN SKOV & JEAN UNZICKER 4364 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824430152 STEWART RALLIS/MONICA RALLIS 4213 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824430131 ANDREW R STOTTS 4100 44TH ST W EDINA MN 55424 0702824420025 TAJALLI & AMIR MISSAGHI 4235 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420043 LYNETTE R ANDOR 4305 W 42ND ST EDINA MN 55416 0702824420090 JEFFREY A & JOYCE E OHM 4242 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420035 BRUCE G REITER 4215 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420083 VINCENT DURAY 4317 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420049 ROBERT G & SHARON L LANDRUD 4224 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420089 ANNETTE SZYMCZAK BROWN 4244 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420071 JAMES M HARRIS 4233 LYNN AVE SO EDINA MN 55416 0702824420079 DAVID A HORAN 4215 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420034 GALEN L LUNDGREN 4219 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420026 STANLEY B & LISA RAE RUUD 4237 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420053 WILLIAM J BUENZ 4232 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420122 MICHAEL & STACEY HAMMER 4407 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420023 LAWRENCE J DEVORE 4239 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420052 TIMOTHY & STEPHANIE OEHLER 4230 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420059 PAUL E THOMPSON 4244 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420040 ROD AUGUST & DAWN SCHOLL 4217 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420086 PETER GABLER & KAREN GABLER 4234 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420039 DAVID E MACPHERSON 4221 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420057 ALYSSA & ROBERT THOMAS 4240 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420045 STEVEN W & PEGGY R PORTER 4206 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420033 ERIK & MORGAN GRENZ 4221 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420085 CITY OF EDINA 4801 50TH ST W EDINA MN 55424 0702824420036 FRANK & ANNLIV BACON 4217 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420029 STEPHEN LESOURD & SHUANA YUAN 4229 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420003 S BRIAN & VALERIE T ANDERSON 4213 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420017 ROSEMARY LELICH 5555 78TH ST W, STE L EDINA MN 55439 0702824420088 JENS KNUTSON & MEREDITH CAIN- NEILSEN 4238 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420058 MONIQUE J WERRY 4242 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420136 CAROL & FRANK SIDELL 4232 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420123 PAUL & SHARON LEDIN 4201 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420070 JOHN H MITCHELL 4235 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420042 STEVEN J DOVORANY 4309 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420081 JOHN A & ANN B WHITE 4211 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420019 KUSHAL CHOTTEPANDA & SARAH BAKKEN 4249 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420121 BRADLEY & DIANE BENYAS 4200 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420046 PODALY & DESMOND JAY 4212 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420138 RICHARD HARDY & SARAH HARDY 4245 SIDELL TRAIL EDINA MN 55416 0702824420030 ROBERT P MONGE 4227 CROCKER AVE SO EDINA MN 55416 0702824420135 REBECCA REMARICK 3918 SUNNYSIDE RD EDINA MN 55424 0702824420077 ROBERT G & AMY H PARISH 4219 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420093 STACEY CAVANAUGH 4246 LYNN AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824420024 LYLE R EIDE 4241 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420064 THOMAS J PLANT/JUDY L PLANT 4350 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420055 KENNETH POTTS & HEATHER BEAL 4236 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420048 CHELSEA IHNAT & DANIEL IHNAT 4220 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420021 L J MADDAUS-WHITE/T A WHITE 4245 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420050 STEVEN G & DIANE L GORMAN 4226 CROCKER AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824420037 TIM AND SUSAN GRUIDL 4213 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420072 ROBERT J LOGELIN 4227 LYNN AVE SO EDINA MN 55416 0702824420103 DAVID & KATRHYN SIEBEN 4208 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420076 PHILIP A & JENNIFER D SIDELL 4221 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420041 STEPHEN G & OLGA V ENGELS 4215 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420032 GERLINDE S PAULAT 4223 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420078 CASEY CARL 4217 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420108 THEODORE A & AMELIA J YOUEL 4228 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420062 PAUL & JANNA SIFTAR 4248 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420047 DAVID D & CATHERINE A PINSKE 4216 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420073 GENE E VEIT 4231 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420084 CAROLYN REIGELSBERGER MORGAN 4313 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420069 LACHLAN J BADENOCH 4237 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420066 M S BRINKMAN & M Q BRINKMAN 4243 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420031 KARL O & MARY L SHARP 4225 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420092 SANFORD BERMAN 4400 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824420082 MARY T ABSOLON 4321 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420105 D P JUNKER & J M BERGSTEDT 4216 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420106 JOHN P GOAN & SUZANNE C GOAN 4220 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420044 DANIEL A ROSENBERG 4301 42ND ST W EDINA MN 55416 0702824420054 JENNIFER & GREGORY CARLSON 4234 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420020 BRIAN G & BETSY N JOHNSON 4247 CROCKER AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420001 LARRY H STOTTS 4205 W 42ND ST EDINA MN 55416 0702824420114 TIMOTHY J/MALINDA B GREELEY 4232 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420112 TIMOTHY & KATHY RUDNICKI 4224 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420119 HYUN MEE & JEFFREY GRAVES 4215 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420118 BERT E STROMBERG JR 4219 OAKDALE AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824420116 TODD & RACHAEL MOLLDREM 4012 INGLEWOOOD AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420124 GAVIN QUINN & KATIE QUINN 4205 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420115 JAMES J & CAROLINE E SCHWERT 4231 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420120 KAY FINBERG JOHNSON 4211 OAKDALE AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420109 ERIC & SUSAN FLACH 4212 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420111 HEATHER BRACKEN 4220 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824420113 STEVEN & KRISTEN CHRISTIANSON 4228 LYNN AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410111 JOHN GEELAN & MEGAN FEENEY 4239 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824440117 PETER R BJERKE 4307 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824410109 JAMES & ELIZABETH ENGELSMA 4114 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 0702824440116 JENNIFER L VAN ZANDT 4022 44TH ST W EDINA MN 55424 0702824410113 STEVEN MORGAN 4231 GRIMES AVENUE SOUTH EDINA MN 55416 0702824410114 KYLE & KATIE MEEHAN 4227 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410127 AMY STRODL & JASON STRODL 4201 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410118 RICHARD LAVERCOMBE 4219 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410122 MAHESH JOHARI & WEI DONG 4213 GRIMES AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824410108 JOSEPH BAUER 4247 GRIMES AVE S EDINA MN 55416 0702824440118 LARS S PARMEKAR 4311 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55424 0702824410119 JOSEPH CHISLER 4221 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410117 CAROL A FRANZEN 4225 GRIMES AVE EDINA MN 55416 0702824410123 JAMES PETER MELLEMA 4209 GRIMES AVE SO EDINA MN 55416 0702824440122 EHREN J SEIM & HOLLY A SEIM 4115 MORNINGSIDE RD EDINA MN 55416 November 24, 2021 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-461 MORNINGSIDE D & E NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION The Edina City Council will meet at Edina City Hall on Monday, Dec. 13, 2021, at 6:00 p.m., to consider the public hearing on roadway improvements for Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction. This hearing is being conducted under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed in the summer of 2022 with the assessment hearing occurring in the fall of 2022. The estimated cost is $2,285,103.00 and is funded by special assessment. The estimated cost per assessable lot is $9,300.00 per residential equivalent unit. The assessment can be divided over a fifteen-year period with interest accumulating on the unpaid balance. The area proposed to be assessed the cost of the proposed improvement includes the following: 4200 to 4504 West 42nd Street, 4022 and 4100 West 44th Street, 4200 to 4411 Branson Street, 4206 to 4249 Crocker Avenue, 4201 to 4324 Grimes Avenue, 4125 Kipling Avenue, 4401 Littel Street, 4200 to 4247 Lynn Avenue, 4114 to 4501 Morningside Rd, 4200 to 4370 Oakdale Avenue, 4245 and 4248 Sidell Trail Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those properties which are considered to be benefited by the improvement. The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close of the hearing. Staff’s recommendations to City Council are: • Grimes Avenue south of Morningside Road reconstructed to 30-feet wide, Morningside Road reconstructed to 28- feet wide, West 42nd Street and Oakdale Avenue south of Branson Street reconstructed to 27-feet wide; all other streets reconstructed to 24-feet wide • Grimes Avenue bike boulevard pavement striping • Partial replacement of concrete sidewalk due to utility improvements • New concrete curb and gutter and new asphalt pavement on all streets • Storm sewer improvements to reduce flood risk and resolve local drainages issues • Partial replacement of watermain; full replacement of hydrants, valves and water services • Spot repairs of the sanitary sewer main and installation of sump drains where feasible The Engineering Study will be available online as part of the Dec. 13 City Council meeting agenda at http://bit.ly/2y3wCOo; under Meeting Type select City Council Meeting, click Search and you will see the Dec. 13 Agenda. Due to a low survey response rate, a neighborhood wide in person Q&A meeting will not occur. To comment, you may: • Post questions online at https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningside-d-e for review by City Council and Engineering • Write to City of Edina, Attention Engineering, 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina, MN 55439. • Watch or attend public hearing to offer comments, leave a voicemail in advance, or submit your comments online. Ways to participate are included in this mailing. How to Participate in a Public Hearing HOW TO PARTICIPATE: Public hearing input can be provided in a variety of ways to the City Council. Options 1 & 2 are available now: 1) Complete the Public Hearing Comment Form online at: https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/public-hearings 2) Leave a voicemail with your feedback. (952-826-0377) Options 3 & 4 are available the night of the public hearing meetings: 3) Watch the meeting and call in to provide testimony. a. Edina TV (Comcast Channels 813 or 16) b. Facebook.com/EdinaMN c. EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeetings • City Council: Call in to provide live testimony at the September 9th meeting, 1-800-374- 0221. The Conference ID 4628128. 4) Attend the meetings to provide testimony, City Hall Council Chambers, 4801 W. 50th S DEADLINES: The City Council is scheduled to make a decision at its December 21 meeting. Deadline for comments via voicemail or BetterTogetherEdina.org is Noon, Wednesday, December 15. FURTHER INFORMATION: City of Edina Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina, MN 55439, 952-826-0371 The CITYofEDINAMorningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionBA-461Public Improvement Hearings December 13, 2021 The CITYofEDINAProject Details – Morningside D & E•254 properties •1.98 miles of road•32,583 square yards of street pavement•8 existing fire hydrants•46 existing sanitary manholeswww.EdinaMN.gov2 The CITYofEDINAExisting Watermain Conditions•6” & 12” Cast iron and CIPP lined pipes (2015)•Moderate amount of watermain breaks•Some original fire hydrants•(not current City standard)•Large number of hydrants and gate valves replaced in the last 10 years•Some gate valves nearing end of useful lifewww.EdinaMN.gov3 The CITYofEDINAProposed Watermain Improvements•Replace watermain that wasn’t lined in 2015•Replace water services project wide•Replace all gate valves more than 10 years old•Upgrade non-standard hydrants to City standard with Storz connection•Verify appropriate hydrant spacing and add hydrants if needed to meet public safety standards•Paid for under watermain fundwww.EdinaMN.gov4 The CITYofEDINAExisting Sanitary Sewer Conditions•Clay pipes in fair condition•Inflow and infiltration (I&I) occurring in system•Localized sanitary sewer pipe defects•-Root intrusion and encrustation account for majority of problems•Many manholes are in poor conditionwww.EdinaMN.gov5 The CITYofEDINAProposed Sanitary Sewer Improvements•Spot trunk pipe repairs and cured-in-place pipe liners to reduce I&I•Replace manhole castings and rings•New precast manholes to replace poor condition manholes•Paid for from sanitary sewer fundwww.EdinaMN.gov6 The CITYofEDINAExisting Storm Sewer Condition•The entire project area has curb and gutter•Primarily reinforced concrete pipes•Majority of structures are in poor condition•System is undersizedwww.EdinaMN.gov7 The CITYofEDINAProposed Storm Sewer Improvements•Modifications to roadway and storm sewer to improve existing drainage issues•Replace curb and gutter•Install sump drain pipe where feasible•Incorporating design recommendations from the Morningside Flood Risk Reduction Strategy•Paid for by the storm sewer fundwww.EdinaMN.gov8 The CITYofEDINAMorningside Flood Risk Reduction Strategywww.EdinaMN.gov9•Upsizing of storm sewer•Branson Street, Grimes Avenue, Morningside Road, Crocker Avenue and West 42ndStreet•Will impact public and private utilities on Crocker Avenue and West 42ndStreet, with significant excavations The CITYofEDINAExisting Roadways Conditions•Streets resurfaced and curb and gutter installed 1978•Existing street widths vary between 25’ and 35’•Average of 28’ through project area•Primarily silty sandy soils with some poorly graded sand and clay sections. www.EdinaMN.gov10 The CITYofEDINAExisting Roadways Conditions•City of Edina Network Average Pavement Condition Index – 76•Morningside D&E – 5www.EdinaMN.gov11 The CITYofEDINAProposed Roadway Improvements•Construct new roadway section•Bituminous roads, per city standard•Recycle existing asphalt pavement material•Some subgrade corrections anticipated•24-30’ street widths proposed, meeting Living Streets Planwww.EdinaMN.gov12 The CITYofEDINALiving Streets Planwww.EdinaMN.gov13•27’ and 24’ street widths•Storm water management•Less impervious surface6.6 acres through 2021•Reduced life cycle cost The CITYofEDINAPedestrian and Bicycle Improvementswww.EdinaMN.gov14•Spot repair of sidewalks due to utility improvements•Updated ADA pedestrian ramps•Grimes Avenue - Bike Boulevard pavement markings and signage The CITYofEDINAPedestrian and Bicycle Improvementswww.EdinaMN.gov15•Southwest corner Grimes Ave and W 42ndSt – No walk extension The CITYofEDINA•Irrigation systems and pet fences•Landscaping•Outwalks/stepsRight-of-Way Impactswww.EdinaMN.gov16 The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov17Item Amount Total Cost Funding SourceRoadway$ 2,285,103 Special AssessmentsRoadway$ 950,000 Property TaxesRoadway Total:$ 3,235,103 Sanitary Sewer$ 613,800 Watermain$ 1,912,900 Storm Sewer *$ 1,994,600 Utility Total:$ 4,521,300 City Utility FundsSidewalk Total:$ 86,700 PACS FundProject Total:$ 7,843,103 Storm Sewer – Flood Risk Reduction Strategy$ 12,250,000 City Utility Funds*Includes concrete curb and gutter•Engineering, clerical, finance costs and contingency includedEstimated Project Costs The CITYofEDINASpecial Assessmentswww.EdinaMN.gov18-AConstruction Year% of Local Roadway Costs Assessed 2020100%202178.90%202273.64%202368.38%2024-203563.12%-5.26%20360%•Assigned to benefitting properties of public improvements•2021 Policy Change •‐Transition to taxes over 16 year•Covers 73.64% of roadway costs for 2022 Morningside D & E project The CITYofEDINASpecial Assessments•Covers 73.64% of roadway costs•- Roadway and driveway removals•-Asphalt pavement•- Restoration•- Indirect Costs – engineering, finance, soil investigations, mailings•Remainder of roadway costs are covered by property taxeswww.EdinaMN.gov19-A The CITYofEDINAResidential Equivalent Units•Assessments distributed based on REUs•- Factor used to compare properties to a single-family residence•Additional factors for commercial, industrial, and public-use propertieswww.EdinaMN.gov20Scenario Land Use Class REU FactorA Single-Family Residential 1.0I Institutional – Places of Worship 0.2* The CITYofEDINAEstimated Roadway Assessmentswww.EdinaMN.gov21•254 properties (245.71 REUs)•- 1 REU per single-family home•- 0.5 REU for corner properties•$2,285,103 / 245.71 REUs = $9,300 per REU The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov22•Special assessments are valid if; •‐The assessment does not exceed the special benefit measured by the increase in market value due to the improvement.•Licensed and Qualified Appraisal Firm•Properties could see an average price benefit of: •‐$14,000 to $20,000 per buildable lot•Preliminary Assessment•‐$9,300Market Benefit Estimate The CITYofEDINAAssessment Payment Options•Final assessment amount will be sent one year after project completion (Fall 2023)•- Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid future interest charges•- Pay min. 25%; balance rolls to property taxes over 15 years•- Roll entire amount to property taxes over 15 years•- Defer payment if 65 years of age or older and meet specific income requirementswww.EdinaMN.gov23 The CITYofEDINAProject Schedulewww.EdinaMN.gov24Neighborhood Open House (all 2021/2022 projects) September 26, 2019Neighborhood Informational Video PresentationsWinter & Fall 2021ETC Engineering Study Review October 28, 2021Public Hearing Opens / Receive Engineering StudyDecember 13, 2021Public Hearing ClosesDecember 15, 2021Public Hearing DecisionDecember 21, 2021Bid Opening March/April 2022Award Contract / Begin Construction Spring 2022Complete Construction Fall 2022Final Assessment HearingOctober 2023 The CITYofEDINARecommendationwww.EdinaMN.gov25•Staff believes this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure•Motion to close the public hearing at noon, December 15,and to continue action on the item to the December 21 City Council meeting. (Improvement No. BA-461) The CITYofEDINAThank you for your time!www.EdinaMN.gov26 The CITYofEDINAMorningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionBA-461December 21, 2021 The CITYofEDINA•Live Public Hearing Dec. 133 comments•Better Together Edina4 comments•Variety of Options to Participate•Comments SummarySupport for the Grimes Avenue bike boulevardAssessment questionsOverhead utilities, construction questions2Public Engagement Summarywww.EdinaMN.gov The CITYofEDINAStaff Recommendationwww.EdinaMN.gov3•Grimes Avenue - Bike Boulevard pavement markings and signage The CITYofEDINARecommendationwww.EdinaMN.gov4•Staff believes this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure•Approve Grimes Avenue Bike Boulevard•- Requires a minimum of 3 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass •Approve Resolution No. 2021-123•-Authorize Morningside D & E Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction (Improvement No. BA-461)•- Projects with special assessments requires a minimum of 4 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass for staff-initiated projects Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: IX.D. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Report / Recommendation From:Aaron T. Ditzler, PE, Assistant City Engineer Item Activity: Subject:Resolution No. 2021-122: Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-463 Action CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Adopt Resolution No. 2021-122, approving the Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, and approving the 8-foot shared use path width to accommodate both pedestrians and bicyclists of all ages and abilities north of Waterman Avenue. INTRODUCTION: Public hearing comments were received on the BetterTogetherEdina website. Online comments were similar to the comments received at the Public Hearing. See the attached documentation and staff report for additional details. ATTACHMENTS: Description Staff Report: Blake Rd Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Resolution No. 2021-122 Better Together Edina: Resident Public Hearing Testimony Engineering Study BA-463 Certificate of Mailing BA-463 Intersection Analysis Staff Presentation, Dec 13 2021 Staff Presentation 12-21-21 December 21, 2021 Mayor and City Council Aaron T. Ditzler, PE, Assistant City Engineer Chad A. Millner, PE, Director of Engineering Resolution No. 2021-122: Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-463 Information / Background: On December 13, 2021, the City Council reviewed the Engineering Study and conducted a public hearing on the Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction Project. The City provided individuals several ways to provide public input in the public hearing. Between November 24, 2021 when public hearing notices were mailed and noon Wednesday, Dec. 15, when the public hearing closed, 12 comments were received on BetterTogetherEdina.org (BTE). As you might recall, 6 people either provided in person testimony or called in to the virtual meeting to provide live testimony. Throughout the process, residents have been told it was not necessary to provide testimony in more than one way; all feedback is considered equally, regardless of the way in which it was submitted. The testimony on BTE was primarily relating to protecting the mature trees, minimizing construction impacts, reducing the width of the 8’ shared use path, as well as requesting the shared use path material be changed from asphalt to concrete. Additional testimony included requests for a formal marked crosswalk at Maloney Avenue, requests against the roundabout, a request to narrow the bicycle lanes, a request to not assess property owners along Blake Road because the road is a regional collector road, a request against the installation of the shared use path, a request to avoid the industrial appearance of the steel retaining wall adjacent to Mirror Lakes. Staff is collecting additional information to share with the City Council on retaining wall details adjacent to Mirror Lake and truck turning graphics at the roundabout. The City was successful on Dec. 16 requesting two municipal state aid design variances that will allow the road to stay where it is today. Recommendation Staff recommends adopting Resolution No. 2021-122, approving the Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-463, including the 8-foot shared use path width to accommodate both pedestrians and bicyclists of all ages and abilities north of Waterman Avenue. STAFF REPORT Page 2 With this approval, staff will continue to work with residents and adjust widths as practical to protect trees. Staff recommends immediately changing the width of the on-street bike lanes from 6-ft to 5-ft to help protect trees and reduce impacts to Mirror Lake. The material type of the shared use path can be changed from asphalt to concrete for an estimated additional cost of $100,000. The project budget can support the change, but we seek council direction. Staff also continues to support the installation of a roundabout. An intersection analysis memo has been attached detailing why a roundabout is recommended. Authorizing sidewalk and shared use path installation requires a minimum of 3 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass. For staff-initiated projects, authorizing projects with special assessments requires a minimum of 4 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass. Recall the estimated pending assessment is $7,000 per REU. RESOLUTION NO. 2021-122 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT FOR BLAKE ROAD A, B & C NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-463 WHEREAS, a resolution of the City Council, adopted the 3rd day of November 2021, fixed a date for a council hearing on Improvement No. BA-463, the proposed improvement of Blake Road A, B & C Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction; and WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weekly published notices of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 13th day of December 2021, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: 1. Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible to update aging infrastructure. 2. Such improvement is hereby ordered. 3. The city engineer is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement. 4. The city council declares its official intent to reimburse itself for the costs of the improvement from the proceeds of tax exempt bonds. Dated: December 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 December 21, 2021, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Special Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this ______ day of __________, 20___. _______________________________ City Clerk Survey Responses 30 January 2019 - 15 December 2021 Public Hearing Comments - Blake Road A, B, & C Roadway Reconstruction Better Together Edina Project: Blake Road A, B, & C Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction VISITORS 25 CONTRIBUTORS 12 RESPONSES 13 1 Registered 0 Unverified 11 Anonymous 1 Registered 0 Unverified 12 Anonymous Respondent No:1 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 06, 2021 14:54:48 pm Last Seen:Dec 06, 2021 14:54:48 pm Q1.First & Last Name Roger & Joyce Fitzgerald Q2.Address 416 Blake Rd S Q3.Comment We are writing to address issues of concern related to the above project and to make recommendations that overall, will promote more positive outcomes regarding the proposed reconstruction on Blake Road S. Although we will not be able to attend the hearing in person due to out of state travel plans, please regard these comments as if presented in person at the scheduled hearing. 1. We believe an 8’ “shared use path” is too wide next to a 6’ wide bike path. We want to see “shared use path” narrowed to 5’ sidewalk. a. We question use of the phrase “shared use path” when previous studies have shown the need for pedestrian sidewalk and separately the construction of bike lanes as planned. b. “Shared use path” would imply that both bikers and pedestrians would use the path which is redundant and unnecessary with two bike paths proposed one on each side of Blake Road. 2. The pedestrian sidewalk referred to here as “shared use path” should be concrete and not asphalt. If asphalt is used, it should be on the proposed bike paths. a. A change from asphalt to concrete is consistent with the concrete sidewalk that was recently constructed north of Spruce St. in Hopkins and is proposed south of Interlochen. b. Concrete historically weathers temperature extremes and use over the years better than asphalt c. A negative impression is created aesthetically and visually with a section of walkway abruptly changing from concrete, as proposed south of Interlocken, to asphalt, back to new concrete sidewalk north of Spruce Street, Hopkins. In fact that newly constructed concrete sidewalk runs through Hopkins up to Highway 7. There is great inconsistency in this design of asphalt vs. concrete as it relates to the Blake Road reconstruction project. 3. We believe the mature trees existing along Blake Road will have a better chance of surviving the road reconstruction if the “8’ shared use path” as proposed is narrowed to a 5’concrete sidewalk. Respondent No:2 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 08, 2021 06:10:25 am Last Seen:Dec 08, 2021 06:10:25 am Q1.First & Last Name William Pierro Q2.Address 6324 Waterman Ave Q3.Comment How do we on or near Blake Road benefit from these upgrades more than others? More traffic? This project appears to be one that should come out of the general fund as it impacts people from all of Edina and the surrounding area, not specifically or prominently those that live on or near Blake Road. It is referenced as a reconstruction not a simple overlay and repair. Problem. The estimated cost is $272,860.00 and the plan is to fund it via special assessment. The estimated cost per assessable lot is $7,000.00 per residential equivalent unit. Solution. From the City of Edina regarding using general funds versus assessments: “it became apparent the City may not be able to justify the benefit of the cost to each property owner as required by Minnesota law.” This says it all! How about using some of the $4.9 MM in American Rescue Plan Act or the huge infrastructure funds that will be coming from The Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act)? From City of Edina regarding using general funds versus assessments: “it became apparent the City may not be able to justify the benefit of the cost to each property owner as required by Minnesota law.” This says it all! Based upon the above information the funding should come from the city as a whole not the few that live along Blake Road. Thank you Respondent No:3 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 08, 2021 08:11:58 am Last Seen:Dec 08, 2021 08:11:58 am Q1.First & Last Name William Pierro Q2.Address 6324 Waterman Ave Q3.Comment From the Living Street Plan Funding Sources Chapter 429 Special Assessments Special assessments are a charge imposed on properties for a particular improvement that benefits the owners of those selected properties. The authority to use special assessments originates in the State constitution which allows the State Legislature to give cities and other governmental units the authority “to levy and collect assessments for local improvements upon property benefited thereby.” The Legislature confers that authority to cities in Minnesota State Statutes Chapter 429. An example of when the City may use special assessments is a street reconstruction project, for which adjacent properties pay for all or a portion of the construction costs. Such improvements may include Living Streets elements as described in this Plan. Once again I do not see how the local residents benefit from this improvement more than all the others that will be using Blake Road and thus the funding should come from the city budget or from How about using some of the $4.9 MM in American Rescue Plan Act or the huge infrastructure funds that will be coming from The Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act)? Thank You Respondent No:4 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 12, 2021 13:15:18 pm Last Seen:Dec 12, 2021 13:15:18 pm Q1.First & Last Name Nick Mattison Q2.Address 5111 Scriver Road Q3.Comment As part of the project, I’d like to see the following achieved if possible: 1) Minimal disruption to mature trees 2) Limited use of retaining walls unless needed 3) Partnership with property owners to minimize disruption and achieve positive outcomes for both the city and the property owners. Respondent No:5 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 12, 2021 14:48:45 pm Last Seen:Dec 12, 2021 14:48:45 pm Q1.First & Last Name Thomas J. Stein Q2.Address 409 Blake Road South, Edina, MN 55343-8552 Q3.Comment DATE: Sunday, Dec. 12, 2021 TO: Edina City Council and Edina City Engineering Department FROM: Thomas J. Stein, 409 Blake Rd. South, Edina, MN RE: 8-ft. (wide) asphalt shared-use path and 6-ft. (wide) concrete sidewalk, among proposals for Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction How many times does the City of Edina have to be told NOT to try to run sidewalks and sidepaths (aka shared use paths) over people's front lawns? The Edina residents of Blake Rd. South and Interlachen Blvd. went through this with the City of Edina 15 years ago, in 2006. The City finally realized that these proposals were not physically feasible, were not economically justifiable and were not socially (number of users) needed -- and wisely dropped them. When Interlachen Park, Hopkins residents faced this exact same issue in 2002 with regard to a proposed "recreational trail" and / or sidewalk to be built along the south side of Excelsior Blvd. and on property the length of Homedale Rd., connecting Excelsior Blvd. to the park at the end of Homedale, the City of Hopkins held a neighborhood meeting at what was then called St. John's Church in Interlachen Park, March or April 2002. A representative from Hopkins City Hall was there, as were many residents, including my brother-in-law (a lawyer) and sister. To quote my brother-in-law almost verbatim, "Before the representative from Hopkins City Hall practically had a chance to say anything, the residents let him know -- in no uncertain terms -- that they did not want this proposed trail or sidewalk. By the time he had a chance to get up and speak, the trail and sidewalk down Homedale Rd. were already off the table." And the residents of Interlachen Park never heard anything about it again. Get the picture? We'll see if the City of Edina has learned anything from things like this. I've been in contact with my neighbors, and we'll be there at the public hearing on Monday night. Sincerely , Thomas J. Stein Respondent No:6 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 13, 2021 11:08:21 am Last Seen:Dec 13, 2021 11:08:21 am Q1.First & Last Name Nick Jude Q2.Address 5117 Scriver Rd Q3.Comment While we understand there should be an overall improvement to the area from this project through improved roads and accessibility with adding sidewalks, we would like to voice a few concerns as we evaluate the project. We would like to suggest that you do everything you can to limit the impact to the homeowners who have yards on Blake Rd. Our concern is with modifying our yard after spending a lot of time and money to improve our yard through landscaping, a new fence and irrigation - this was mainly done to reduce the noise of Blake Rd and add privacy. We fear that the project will increase traffic and noise and reduce privacy. We would appreciate it if you can minimize the lane sizes of both vehicles and especially bike lanes. We would like to see no impact to our trees including Arbs that were planted for privacy as well as our fence. Anything that can be done to reduce the speed of traffic including reducing the speed limit would be supported. Respondent No:7 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 13, 2021 21:01:20 pm Last Seen:Dec 13, 2021 21:01:20 pm Q1.First & Last Name Mike Snell Q2.Address 412 John Street Q3.Comment Hello - I agree with my neighbor who is requesting a crosswalk at the intersection of Maloney and Blake to safely connect pedestrians to the sidewalks. Our neighborhood is made of 3 cul-de-sacs and with the data around 10k vehicles per day traveling this section of Blake, I would like to see safety improvements. There are at least 20 children in our neighborhood alone and there are others who travel to our neighborhood as well and will need to cross this intersection to get to the mixed use path. Lastly, this is also an intersection that is a bus stop for children who need to cross Blake to get to the bus stop as well. I emplore the council to think about the safety of our children and all residents that need to cross this intersection. We unfortunately lost our safe way to pass to other neighborhoods and to cross Blake at the the crosswalk that Hopkins has installed at spruce and Blake when 6233 Belmore Ln was sold. The kids previously were able to pass through this property on the land that was given to this property by the city years ago. Thank you Respondent No:8 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 14, 2021 10:11:20 am Last Seen:Dec 14, 2021 10:11:20 am Q1.First & Last Name Reed Hart Q2.Address 412 Blake Road S, Edina 55343 Q3.Comment While I generally support the Blake Road Reconstruction project, I have one objection to the project as proposed, and that is the 8” shared use path alongside the 6” bike path in the plan for the west side of Blake Road. I have 3 concerns: 1. An 8” shared use path is redundant next to a bike path. As both an avid cyclist and daily dog walker my belief is that shared use paths should only be used when there is no other option. Cyclists, pedestrians, dogs, young children, etc. proceeding at differing speeds don’t mix well. A 5” sidewalk for pedestrians and a bike path for cyclists is a perfect solution. During the City Councils hearing meeting on Monday evening the City Engineer stated that the 8” mixed use path is to accommodate cyclists who may not feel comfortable riding in the bike path. It doesn’t make sense to plan a major part of the project based on the proposition that some people may feel uncomfortable riding in the bike lane. 2. An 8” shared use path poses an unnecessary risk to the large trees lining the west side of the street between Spruce Rd and Maloney Ave. While I’m sure the plan’s aim is to preserve these trees, every foot that is carved out closer to them and their root system poses a risk of harming them, harm that may not be apparent for months or years after the project is completed. Theirs is not reason to risk this if it’s not necessary. 3. A 5” concrete sidewalk looks better visually and enhances the character of the neighborhood. For these reasons I’d encourage the city engineering department and the council to reconsider this portion of the project’s design. Respondent No:9 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 14, 2021 15:35:20 pm Last Seen:Dec 14, 2021 15:35:20 pm Q1.First & Last Name Thomas J. Stein Q2.Address 409 Blake Road South, Edina, MN 55343-8552 Q3.Comment DATE: Tuesday, Dec. 14, 2021 TO: Edina City Council and City of Edina Engineering Department FROM: Thomas J. Stein, 409 Blake Road South, Edina, MN 55343-8552 RE: 8-ft. (wide) asphalt shared-use path, 6-ft. (wide) concrete sidewalk, proposals in Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction What an incredible disappointment. I attended the Monday, Dec. 13 Edina City Council public hearing. I would have liked to have gotten up to speak (despite great discomfort speaking in front of people), but after watching the Council respond to speakers it became clear that the Council wasn't interested in what the speakers had to say. Yes, the Council invited public comment, but they showed little to no interest in WHAT each speaker said. When Council members and Engineering Dept. staff did speak, the level of discourse demonstrated that they had no interest in the main focus of the meeting: debating the merits of THE PROPOSALS THEMSELVES. To the contrary: the interest was only in clarifying the details. Your focus on the minutiae of sidewalks and sidepaths and roundabouts revealed the smallness of your thinking -- instead of why these proposals should be considered IN THE FIRST PLACE. It was "token talk". It was self-serving. It was angering. And it was a waste of my time and my fellow attendee's time. The 8-ft. wide asphalt shared-use path run over people's front lawns is so crazy on the face of it that it's not worth discussing here. The sidewalk is totally unnecessary as virtually no one walks this section of Blake. (Has the City of Edina even done a pedestrian count? Or a cyclist count?) And the roundabout? That's beyond speechless. (A simple metered access -- as they have at highway entrance ramps -- in effect at peak times would accomplish the same thing and be much safer.) It is obvious that the Edina City Council has learned nothing over the years and with all its past experience, about listening to residents, spending money in a fiscally responsible way, and simply using plain common sense. It reminded me of the last time I attended an Edina City Council meeting, in 2006. It was about the same issue: sidewalks and sidepaths down Blake Rd. South and Interlachen Blvd. As I wrote in my previous email, these issues were wisely dropped 15 years ago. And now they are back. The Hopkins City Council got the message in 2002 and the issue never came up again (see previous email). The Edina City Council apparently isn't so smart. What an incredible disappointment. YOU ... are an incredible disappointment. Sincerely, Thomas J. Stein Respondent No:10 Login:Registered Responded At:Dec 14, 2021 18:33:34 pm Last Seen:Dec 15, 2021 02:26:47 am Q1.First & Last Name Ted Carlson Q2.Address 5516 Knoll Drive Q3.Comment My family of four lives south of this proposed improvement in the Parkwood Knolls neighborhood. Every time we leave the neighborhood to the north we comment on the poor condition of the Blake Road and Interlachen intersection. There is literally ZERO infrastructure in the current design for support of pedestrians and bikes, and when we see either using the roadway, we are shocked that there has not been a tragic incident (yet). Making these improvements is beneficial to all residents of Edina, and especially beneficial to those that live within close proximity. Access to the Blake Road LRT will be enhanced. We are excited and supportive of this project. Thank you for taking the initiative for making our City better together. Respondent No:11 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 15, 2021 08:19:50 am Last Seen:Dec 15, 2021 08:19:50 am Q1.First & Last Name Robert Frimerman Q2.Address 6229 Maloney Ave Q3.Comment Edina City Staff, While I generally agree we need improvements to Blake Road to increase safety, decrease the speed of traffic and better manage the traffic flow, I do have some concerns and comments with the current designed shared with the residences. These comments are listed below. Thank you. 1) I would like to ask for a painted cross walk across Blake at the intersection of Maloney, but no cross-walk lights. 2) If trees need to be removed, the ask would be to look at the count and maturity and to replace a net-positive count of the most matures trees possible in the area. 3) The project talks about 8 foot to 11 foot steal retaining wall along the shore and land bridge. While it was shared that steal is the preferred choice due to soil type or other building constraints, the ask would be to look at covering the steal with a more ecstatically positive covering. Possibly a stamped concrete cover or something to soften the walls. Adding, lining the bottom with a rock skirt along the waterfront would be preferred. 4) While I understand given the smaller size of the round-a-bout it was shared that a green center is not an option and paved concrete is the preferred choice of the city. I would like to ask that we look at a grass permeable surface as trucks should not be traveling over the center on a regular basis. Even a single tree in the center would be better than the current concrete plan. I would ask the team to assess any other options to green this area and even a smaller raised bed in the center. The current steal and concrete design greatly alters the current esthetics and characters of the neighborhood. Anything the City can do to better integrate a greener, softer design is being asked of the City. Respondent No:12 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 15, 2021 09:30:35 am Last Seen:Dec 15, 2021 09:30:35 am Q1.First & Last Name Steven Ward Q2.Address 421 Blake Road South Q3.Comment BASIC FACTS: Blake Road and Blake Road combined with Interlachen Boulevard are the only North-South roads between U.S. Highway 169 and State Highway 100. It travels from State Highway 7 to Vernon Avenue South. This road passes through 3 cities, St. Louis Park, Hopkins, and Edina. This makes Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard a major thoroughfare; nearly 10,000 vehicles drive on these roads every day. It is NOT a neighbor road. Thousands of people living in Edina and multiple cities will benefit from this Roadway Reconstruction. QUESTIONS: 1. So explain to me how it is fair and logical for just a few people (58) should pay for this massive roadway reconstruction? 2. Why are the other residences on Interlachen Boulevard (this includes those homes with an Interlachen Boulevard address and the ones at an intersection with Interlachen Boulevard) excluded? How is that fair and logical? 3. Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction, Improvement No. BA-463 contains the words “Neighborhood Roadway” but as I pointed out, Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard are not “Neighborhood” roads but a major thoroughfare. So explain why these roads fall under the purview of a “Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction”? 4 . Why is Interlachen Country Club not included? They are responsible for a tremendous amount of traffic. 5. Is the plan to install new sidewalk along Interlachen Boulevard until it meets with existing sidewalk? ANSWERS: I asked the City of Edina’s Assistant City Engineer question number one. His response was “20 years ago the Edina City Council created and implemented a policy to asses residential property owners for the cost of Neighborhood Roadway Reconstructions.”. This is a poor policy for several reasons. One of them is this policy does NOT take into account of the situation where thousands of people will benefit with only a few paying for it. Since Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard are now Edina city roads (they used to be Hennepin County Road 20), Edina city property taxes should be used to pay for this “Major Thoroughfare Roadway Reconstruction”. BICYCLING: A big topic. In my opinion, as a mode of transportation, it has its limitations in a state with approximately 5 months of Winter. Let me describe my own biking experiences because I believe they will provide insight into biking decisions. I grew up at 421 Blake Road South. I did not have any problems biking on Blake Road or any of the other streets in my neighborhood as a child, teenager, or young adult. I biked to Knollwood Mall (I know it is no longer called Knollwood Mall and I remember when it was called Knollwood Plaza) for years to catch an express bus to the University of Minnesota. I never had any issues. Based on my experience, an 8-foot asphalt shared use path along the west side of Blake Road is NOT required! TREES AND HAND-BUILT RETAINING WALL: It was brought to my attention on 12/13/2021’s public hearing there is an impressive hand-built retaining wall at 300 Blake Road South. It was also brought to my attention of several very mature trees (one of them over 100 years old) along the west side of Blake Road South. The wall and trees are threatened by the 8-foot asphalt shared use path. Nobody wants to kill these majestic trees. The simplest and best solution is to install a standard 5-foot sidewalk. This will match the sidewalk on Maloney Avenue in appearance. If the wall and trees are still threatened then reduce the width of the vehicle lanes to 10-feet and/or the bike lanes to 5-feet. ROUNDABOUT (OR SHOULD I SAY MINI-ROUNDABOUT): Usually, adding a roundabout improves an intersection; but in this situation with the high traffic (approximately 10,000 vehicles per day) very little improvement in traffic flow will be achieved. In my opinion, spending a lot money without much improvement is a poor idea. It would be a mini-roundabout as there is not room to install a true roundabout. This is from Edina’s Director of Engineering, Mr. Chad Millner presentation at the Edina public hearing on 12/13/2021. Mr. Millner mentioned the following: - The proposed mini-roundabout has the big weakness of not allowing a truck to navigate it. And being a major thoroughfare, trucks will be driving on this road. - The right-of-way will not provide the required space and homeowners will have to lose property. - Exceptions (or are they called variances) are required. Bottom line, a mini-roundabout is not the solution. To be honest, I do not have a solution. I am not sure there is a solution. WALKWAY: A walkway is proposed to be added to the land bridge (called the “pathway”) separating Mirror Lake. Its purpose is to provide a walking and possible biking path across the pathway. It would transition to the proposed sidewalk on Blake Road as it runs toward Vernon Avenue South. It is expensive and aesthetically unappealing. Nobody I spoke with in the audience at the public hearing liked the walkway. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project, scheduled for construction in 2022, includes: 1. New asphalt pavement on all streets. 2. Blake Road reconstructed to 34-feet wide with no parking on either side of the street. 3. New concrete curb and gutter on all streets. 4. Two 6-foot concrete on-street bike lanes on each side of the street. 5. New 8-foot asphalt shared use path on the west side of Blake Road north of Interlachen Boulevard. 6. New 6-foot concrete sidewalk on the west side of Blake Road south of Interlachen Boulevard. 7. Partial replacement of watermain and water services; full replacement of hydrants and valves. 8. Spot repairs of sanitary sewer main. 9. Storm sewer improvements to resolve local drainage issues and installation of sump drains where feasible. 10. Mini-roundabout at Interlachen Boulevard. 11. Add a walkway near the mini-roundabout at Interlachen Boulevard. MY RESPONSES TO THE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1. No contest. 2. No contest unless the overall width needs to be reduced to save the trees and retaining wall. 3. No contest. 4. No contest unless the width needs to be reduced to save the trees and retaining wall. 5. Change to a 5-foot concrete sidewalk. 5-feet is a standard sidewalk width. 6. Change to a 5-foot concrete sidewalk. 7. No contest. 8. No contest. 9. No contest. 10. Do NOT install a mini-roundabout. Make no changes at this time. 11. Do NOT install a walkway. This means there will be a small break in the sidewalk across the pathway. FINAL THOUGHTS: I know the City of Edina has a plan. But remember a plan is something to deviate from and this plan needs some modifications. I am willing to work with the City of Edina to develop an equitable plan everyone call live with because right, now many cannot. Respondent No:13 Login:Anonymous Responded At:Dec 15, 2021 09:42:56 am Last Seen:Dec 15, 2021 09:42:56 am Q1.First & Last Name Peter Hemstad Q2.Address 402 Blake Road South Q3.Comment First of all, I'd like to thank the Mayor, the City Council, and the City Engineers for listening to the concerns residents have about this project and being willing to consider alternatives. The main concern I expressed at the council meeting was about preserving the large oak and elm trees on the 400 block of Blake Road. I feel the best option would be to replace the 8' asphalt shared use path with a 5' concrete sidewalk in conjunction with an adjacent bike lane. This configuration should be sufficient for all pedestrian and bicycle traffic and would greatly reduce the impact on the root systems of the trees in question. It would also look better and hold up much better over time, reducing maintenance costs. This is also consistent with the city's own Comprehensive Plan. On page 63 of the City of Edina Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan there is a map of the Proposed Pedestrian Network that clearly shows a shared use path terminating at Mendelssohn followed by a new primary sidewalk extending from there to the Hopkins border. That's exactly what we are asking for! A similar map was included in the documentation provided for the council meeting in Appendix B, page 400. Please follow this plan. One more thing. I think it's a great idea to have a substantial 'gateway' sign going south on Blake at the Hopkins border. It would be ironic though, if a few years from now there was a nice concrete sidewalk on the Hopkins side of the sign and a deteriorating asphalt path on the Edina side. That's probably not the visual message the council would like to send for people entering Edina. ENGINEERING STUDY BLAKE ROAD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION Scriver Road to Spruce Road IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-463 DECEMBER 1, 2021 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CITY OF EDINA 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. 42003 11/30/21 Aaron Ditzler Reg. No. Date Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 2 SUMMARY: The project involves reconstruction of local bituminous streets, replacement of existing concrete curb and gutter, installation of new concrete curb and gutter, construction of a roundabout, new concrete sidewalks and shared-use paths and localized rehabilitation of the sanitary sewer, watermain and storm sewer systems in the neighborhood. The estimated total project cost is $12,152,060. The estimated roadway construction cost is $9,368,660; 97% of the roadway cost will be funded by Municipal State Aid (MSA) funds and 3% will be funded through special assessments at a rate of approximately $7,000 per residential equivalent unit (REU). Utility improvements amount to $2,286,400 and will be funded through the City’s utility funds. Sidewalk improvements are estimated to cost $497,000 and will be funded through a combination of MSA and Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund. INITIATION: The project was initiated by the Engineering Department as part of the City’s Neighborhood Reconstruction Program, identified in the Capital Improvement Plan. The project complies with the City’s Living Streets Policy, Vision Edina’s mission statement to “provide effective and valued public services” and “maintain a sound public infrastructure” and the “Strong Foundations” City budget goal. This project addresses traffic operations and safety as well as updating substandard infrastructure with improvements associated with the roadway condition, watermain system, storm sewer system, sanitary sewer system and pedestrian facilities. LOCATION: The project includes Blake Road between Scriver Road and Spruce Road. A detailed location map of the project is shown in Figure 1. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 3 Figure 1: Project Area Map Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS: Roadways The roadways in this neighborhood were originally constructed between 1937 and 1945 (see Photo 1). Photo 1: Blake Road from Scriver Road to Spruce Road, 1969 Blake Road between Scriver Road and Spruce Road is included in the City’s Municipal State Aid (MSA) Street system, a program administered by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). This program provides funding to assist municipalities with the construction and maintenance of roadways which carry relatively heavier traffic than local roadways. Maintenance records indicate seal coating was performed within a portion of the Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 5 project area in 2008; bituminous overlays were performed within portions of the project area in 2003, 2009 and 2015. Approximately 65% of Blake Road does not have concrete curb and gutter. The roadway width ranges from 30’ to 36’ (measured from the face of curb or the edge of the existing bituminous pavement). A recent geotechnical evaluation of the project area performed by Braun Intertec showed the roadway section varies from 4” to 8” of pavement over an apparent aggregate base followed by primarily sandy clay soils with some silty sandy soils. As part of the City’s Pavement Management Program, all streets are regularly evaluated and rated on a scale from 1 to 100; 100 representing a brand-new road surface and 0 being extremely poor. This rating is referred to as the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) and is determined based on existing conditions and defects (alligator cracking, raveling, potholes, etc.). The average PCI for the City of Edina is 76 and the average PCI for Blake Road is 25. An example of the current pavement condition can be seen in Photo 2. Photo 2: Existing Pavement Condition Traffic and Crash Data Staff measured traffic volumes and speeds at several locations within or near the neighborhood. Average daily traffic volumes along Blake Road range between 3,289 and 9,758 vehicles per day (measured between 2013 and 2021) with 85th percentile speeds between 19.6 and 34.2 miles per hour in 2021. Traffic and crash data for this project is shown in Appendix A. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 6 Multi-Modal Transportation Pedestrian Facilities A sidewalk is present on the east side of Blake Road between Scriver and Lake Ridge Roads. The sidewalk is adjacent to the existing concrete curb and gutter for much of the block. Sidewalks are also present immediately adjacent to the project area on Blake Road and Maloney Avenue (see Appendix B). Bicycle Facilities Standard on-street bicycle lanes are present between Waterman Avenue and Spruce Road, and shared bicycle lanes are present between Scriver Road and Waterman Avenue. Standard and shared bicycle lane markings exist immediately south of the project area on Blake Road and standard bicycle lane markings exist immediately east of the project area on Interlachen Boulevard (see Appendix C). Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer system consists of 9” vitrified clay pipe (VCP) installed between 1954 and 1964. Historical records indicate there have been few sewer back-ups or blockages in the area (see Appendix D). Watermain The watermain system consists of 6” cast iron pipe (CIP) and 12” ductile iron pipe (DIP) installed between 1963 and 1967. The overall system has experienced a moderate number of breaks north of Interlachen Boulevard, and no breaks south of Interlachen Boulevard (see Appendix D). Most of the fire hydrants were installed between 1963 and 1967. A majority of properties between Interlachen Boulevard and Waterman Avenue are served from water services connected to the watermain on Waterman Avenue. Many homes in the neighborhood were constructed prior to the availability of municipal water. Although several have had private wells properly sealed, City records suggest some remain unsealed. Based on Utility Billing records, there is a single property in the project area that relies on private wells for domestic water. Staff will communicate the benefits of connecting to the City water supply to the property owner. Storm Sewer The storm sewer network is in both the Nine Mile Creek and Minnehaha Creek Watershed Districts. The system consists of 12” - 18” reinforced concrete pipe (RCP), 18” corrugated metal pipe (CMP) and 10” polyvinyl chloride pipe (PVC) installed between 1967 and 2003. There are a moderate amount of storm sewer inlets and pipes located within the project area. The majority of Blake Road streets within the project area drain to Mirror Lake (and subsequently, Minnehaha Creek), while a small portion drains to stormwater ponds south of Belmore Lane and just west of the Interlachen golf course. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 7 Private Utilities Gas, electric, communications, cable and fiber optic utilities are present in the neighborhood. These utilities are a combination of overheard and underground facilities located in backyards or along the boulevards. Street lighting consists of standard “cobra head” lights mounted on wooden poles located throughout the project area as shown in Appendix E. CenterPoint Energy completed improvements to their 24” natural gas beltline between Waterman Avenue and Spruce Road in 2019. DESIGN INPUT: City Council 2018 Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan This plan, part of the 2018 Comprehensive Plan, was developed to guide the City’s efforts to create a comprehensive pedestrian and bicycle network. As shown in Appendix B, there is a proposed sidewalk between Lake Ridge Road and Spruce Road, and a shared-use path between the two Interlachen Boulevard intersections. This shared-use path would be part of the City’s Twin Loops facility. Appendix C shows proposed bicycle lanes between Scriver Road and Spruce Road. 2015 Living Streets Policy This policy balances the needs of motorists, pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The City will apply the Policy to all street projects, including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation or change in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. The Living Streets Plan includes 15 principles to guide implementation of the Policy, divided into four categories: All Users and All Modes, Connectivity, Context Sensitivity and Sustainability. Below is a summary of how these principles are incorporated into this project: All Users and All Modes – This project will improve mobility and access to the transportation network for a variety of users, including pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors and people with disabilities. Replacement of the pavement surfaces and traffic control signage will enhance safety and convenience for all users. Connectivity – This project involves maintaining a transportation system that can accommodate all modes of travel. Existing right-of-way will be repurposed to provide new multimodal transportation facilities, which in combination with existing and planned facilities, will form a multimodal network within the neighborhood. Context Sensitivity – Engineering strives to preserve and protect natural features within or adjacent to construction sites where feasible, including trees, waterways and sensitive slopes. Residents within the project area were invited to complete a questionnaire soliciting input on project design components, including multi-modal transportation, street lighting and local drainage problems. Sustainability – Engineering works closely with Public Works to implement infrastructure improvements with consideration of lifecycle costs and future maintenance. The new roadway section can be easily maintained long-term with the use of proactive rehabilitation treatments, which will significantly extend the life of Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 8 the pavement. Reductions in impervious surfaces benefit water quality and may lessen the demand for chemicals to manage snow and ice (such as chloride). Construction operations are required to use the smallest footprint necessary to complete the work; this includes utilizing trenchless technologies, such as pipe bursting or cured-in-place pipe liners. This project will also reduce inflow and infiltration of clean water into the sanitary sewer system, minimizing regional wastewater treatment, reducing the risk of sewage surcharges, and limiting the risk of back-ups to residential properties. Relevant portions of the Living Streets Plan can be found in Appendix F. 2018 Comprehensive Water Resource Management Plan The CWRMP identified multiple areas of flood inundation within the project area for both the 10-percent and 1-percent-annual-chance flood event (also referred to as the 10-year and 100-year frequency event, respectively). The first area is south of Lake Ridge Road (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Blake Road and Lake Ridge Road Backyard Flood Zone A backyard depression area collects 2.2 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties that drains into the City’s storm sewer system that runs along Blake Road and discharges into Mirror Lake. The 1-percent and 10-percent-annual-chance events may impact the structure at 5100 Lake Ridge Road. ML_7 Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 9 The second area is Mirror Lakes adjacent to Blake Road (see Figure 3). Figure 3: Blake Road Roadway Flood Zone (ML_1 & 32) Mirror Lake and its 288-acre watershed primarily impact the backyards along lake. The Mirror Lake storm sewer outlet is pumped to the Blake Road storm sewer system south of the project area. This system flows south and ultimately discharges to Mud Lake. The 1-percent and 10-percent-annual-chance events do not impact structures along Blake Road. The third area is between Belmore Lane and Spruce Road (see Figure 4). ML_1 ML_32 Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 10 Figure 4: Blake Road Backyard Flood Zones (HO_4 & HO_16) Backyard depression area HO_4 collects approximately 2.6 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties and discharges to the City’s storm sewer system via a backyard catch basin at 301 Blake Road. Further downstream, the City’s storm sewer system discharges to another stormwater pond, which is pumped to a storm sewer system that discharged into a City of Hopkins storm sewer system. The 1-percent and 10-percent annual-chance events could impact the structures at 301 and 309 Blake Road. Stormwater pond HO_16 collects approximately 2.7 acres of stormwater from the neighboring properties and discharges to the City’s storm sewer system that connects to the backyard catch basin at 301 Blake Road referenced above. Staff Public Works A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Public Works Department. They support installation of concrete curb and gutter, as well as replacement of deficient watermain components (including fire hydrants, gate valves and water services). They HO_16 HO_4 Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 11 recommended replacement of an existing cracked RC storm sewer pipe in front of 412 Blake Road. They also recommend replacement of existing CMP and PVC storm sewer within the project area. Police and Fire A draft engineering study was provided to the City’s Police and Fire Departments. The Fire Department supports watermain improvements, including adding fire hydrants as necessary to meet public safety standards. They noted that temporary fire hydrants should be of a consistent style for ease of access, that emergency access should always be maintained during construction and that drive widths and turn arounds should meet fire code. Edina Transportation Commission Prior to the Edina Transportation Commission (ETC) regular meeting on October 28, 2021, a draft engineering study was provided for review. Relevant minutes from the ETC meetings are included in Appendix G. Residents As part of the Engineering Department’s practice of notifying residents 2-3 years prior to a potential reconstruction project, residents were invited to an open house in September 2019. Materials from these meetings are available upon request. Additionally, virtual neighborhood informational presentations were posted on Better Together Edina in August 2020 and October 2021. Residents were notified of the virtual meetings and were able to directly ask questions to staff from the Better Together Edina website, as well as telephone and email. Materials from this presentation can be found in Appendix H. On June 11, 2021, residents in Blake Road were asked to complete a questionnaire, soliciting feedback on motorized and non-motorized transportation, street lighting and local drainage problems within the project area. The questionnaire was completed by 9 of 48 property owners, a return rate of 19%. The following is a summary of feedback received from residents: 6 of 9 were concerned or very concerned with the speed of traffic in the neighborhood; 3 of 9 were not concerned. 7 of 9 were concerned or very concerned with motorist behavior in the neighborhood; 2 of 9 were not concerned. 3 of 9 identified an unsafe intersection within the neighborhood. 6 of 9 walk, run, or jog in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. 4 of 9 ride a bicycle in the neighborhood at least 2-3 times per week. 0 reported parking on the street at least 2-3 times per week; 8 reported parking on the street less than once per month. 0 identified localized drainage problems in the neighborhood. *Percentages based on number of returned surveys The full questionnaire and responses can be found in Appendix I. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 12 Relevant correspondence from residents regarding the project can be found in Appendix J. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS: The proposed improvements acknowledge many of the comments and concerns raised by residents throughout the information gathering process, while still maintaining the desired minimum standards of MSA, Engineering, Public Works and other City staff. Roadways Typical Section The bituminous roadways are proposed to be completely reconstructed to the subgrade. The existing bituminous pavement and suitable aggregate material will be recycled for use as base material in the new roadway where feasible. Aggregate base material will be graded and compacted as the base layer prior to placement bituminous pavement. The following typical sections are based on the existing soil subgrade and traffic volumes. 1. Blake Road between Scriver Road and Interlachen Boulevard: a. 8” of aggregate base, 2.5” of bituminous non-wear and 3” of bituminous wear course. 2. Interlachen Boulevard and Blake Road between Interlachen Boulevard and Spruce Road: a. 12” of aggregate base, 3” of bituminous non-wear and 4” of bituminous wear course. Unsuitable subgrade materials will be replaced as necessary to provide adequate support for the new roadbed. Moderate subgrade removals are anticipated project wide, based on the preliminary soil boring reports prepared by Braun Intertec. The reconstructed sections will meet the requirements of a minimum 20-year pavement design life based on projected traffic loadings. Blake Road is designated as a Collector in the Living Streets Plan. Per the design guidelines of this plan, Collectors have a design width (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb) of 32’ without parking and 40’ with parking. The proposed typical section will have a 34’ width (measured from the face of curb to the face of curb), including two 11’ driving lanes with bulkhead style concrete curb and gutter. The proposed schematic layout for Blake Road can be found in Appendix K. Geometric Modifications A one-lane roundabout is proposed for the northern intersection of Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard (see Figure 5). This facility will reduce vehicle queues and delays during peak hours, slow traffic along Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard, and improve safety for pedestrian, cyclist and motor vehicles traveling along the corridor. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 13 Figure 5: Proposed Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard Roundabout Parking Per the Living Streets Plan, on-street parking should be evaluated based on classification, adjacent land use, existing demand and costs of construction and maintenance. As Blake Road is classified as a Collector and given the limited right-of- way, on-street parking will continue to be restricted on both sides due to the combination of the 22’ street section width and 6’ on-street bicycle lanes as reference on Figure 6. Figure 6: Proposed Blake Road Typical Section Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 14 Roadway Signage All traffic signage within the project area, including street name blades, will be replaced to improve visibility and reflectivity (see Appendix E). All new signs will conform to the standards of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). New signage will include No Parking, 25- and 30-mph speed limit signs. Retaining Walls Due to the existing topography and presence of Mirror Lake within or very near the right of way, significant retaining walls in both length and heigh are required to support the proposed roadway, pedestrian and bicycle improvements. Multi-Modal Transportation Pedestrian Facilities A 6’ edge-of-road -style concrete sidewalk is proposed on both sides of Blake Road between Scriver and Lake Ridge Roads. This sidewalk will connect to the existing sidewalk on the east side of Blake Road south of Scriver Road. A 6’ edge-of-road - style concrete sidewalk is proposed on the west side of Blake Road between Lake Ridge Road and Interlachen Boulevard. An 8’ shared-use path is proposed on the west side of Blake Road between Interlachen Boulevard and Spruce Road. This path will connect to an existing sidewalk on Blake Road north of Spruce Road in Hopkins, and an existing sidewalk on Maloney Avenue west of Blake Road. An 8’ shared-use path is also proposed on the Blake Road land bridge between the two Interlachen Boulevards. This path will connect to proposed future paths on Interlachen Boulevard east and west of Blake Road. These future paths will comprise a portion of the Twin Loops network. Bicycle Facilities Two 6’ on-street bicycle lanes are proposed on each side of Blake Road between Scriver and Spruce Roads. The bicycle lanes will be concrete to distinguish the bicycle and vehicle travel lanes. The bicycle lanes will connect to existing bicycle lanes on Blake Road south of Scriver Road, north of Spruce Road, and on Interlachen Boulevard east of Blake Road. The bicycle lanes will provide an improved connection to the future Southwest Light Rail Transit Station on Blake Road just north of Excelsior Boulevard in Hopkins. Figure 7 shows all existing and proposed bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 15 Figure 7: Existing and Proposed Pedestrian Facilities All adjacent pedestrian curb ramps will be reconstructed to meet the current design standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and portions of the existing sidewalk will be reconstructed as necessary. Because Blake Road is designated as a Municipal State Aid roadway, the proposed sidewalk and shared-use path will be maintained by City staff, including snow removal. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 16 Public Utilities Sanitary Sewer The sanitary sewer main has been televised, and portions will be repaired using a combination of open cut and cured-in-place-pipe (CIPP) methods. These repairs will address the issues of sags, cracks and groundwater infiltration into the sewer main. The manhole castings will also be removed and replaced to reduce inflow and infiltration of stormwater. Watermain Echologics, LLC was hired by the City to perform a non-invasive pipe condition assessment on the watermain within the project area, and staff has reviewed historical break data to determine the extent of improvements needed. The existing watermain north of Interlachen Boulevard will be replaced using a combination of pipe bursting and open cut methods, and associated water service will also be replaced. A 6” watermain will be added between Interlachen Boulevard and Waterman Avenue, and associated water services will also be added for potential private connections by adjacent property owners. SEH was hired by the City to evaluate the City’s water supply system and prepare and overall Water Supply Plan. The Plan recommends a 12” watermain be added along Interlachen Boulevard between Blake Road and Mirror Lakes Drive to improve flow from both water treatment plant 4 and 6. The improvement will also help increase system redundancy, transmission capacity and overall water system circulation. Therefore, a 12” watermain will be added from Blake Road to the project limits on Interlachen Boulevard using a combination of horizontal directional drilling and open cut methods. All gate valves and fire hydrants within the project area will be replaced and, if needed, additional hydrants will be installed to meet current public safety standards. The new fire hydrants will include the Storz nozzle fittings desired by the Edina Fire Department for quick connection of fire hoses. As part of the City’s Wellhead Protection Plan, staff plans to engage property owners who have unsealed private wells and encourage them to have them properly sealed. Storm Sewer Based on existing conditions and the scope of utility work, new concrete curb and gutter will be installed throughout the project, providing a continuous, functional conduit for stormwater. The storm sewer network will have modifications to resolve existing drainage issues at various locations throughout the neighborhood. Some of the existing structures will be removed and replaced due to their poor condition or due to new road geometry. Some structures may be installed with sump structures to collect sediment and debris before it enters Mirror Lake. The 10” PVC storm sewer north of Lake Ridge Road will be replaced with a 12” pipe to reduce flood risk to the structure at 5100 Lake Ridge Road. Sump drains will be installed where feasible to allow property owners to connect their sump pump discharges directly into the storm sewer system. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 17 Staff will evaluate the existing drainage areas and if necessary, extend storm sewer pipes and inlets to satisfy MnDOT’s requirement to keep the vehicle driving lanes sufficiently clear of stormwater during a 10-year storm event. Staff will communicate and coordinate with adjacent property owners as necessary. The modeled flood risk along Mirror Lake is regional in nature and influencing the flood elevation cannot be addressed within the scope of this project. The 2018 Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan noted that the most likely option to reduce flooding impacts noted in HO_4 and HO_16 is to increase the downstream pipe capacity, which may also require upsizing the existing lift station, both of which will not be part of the Blake Road project scope of work. The project location adjacent to Mirror Lake offers challenges from a storm water perspective. To meet the transportation goals, widening of the corridor is needed, requiring soil fill within Mirror Lake that will impact the floodplain, possibly requiring mitigation. Stormwater permits are necessary due to the increased impervious surface and floodplain impacts associated with the improvements. Coordination is underway with Nine Mile Creek Watershed District, Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the Department of Natural Resources, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Stormwater improvement Best Management Practices will be evaluated during the design phase, including potential floodplain mitigation. Private Utilities Staff met with representatives of several private utility companies on November 15, 2021, to discuss the proposed 2022 reconstruction projects and preliminary improvements. CenterPoint Energy will resume improvements to their 24” natural gas beltline between Scriver Road and Waterman Avenue prior to or during the City’s project. Portions of the private utility networks may receive upgrades prior to construction; however, this work is not part of the City’s project. Currently, the City does not have a standard to determine where and when street lighting should be improved. Unlike other infrastructure improvements, lighting can be installed at a later date with minimal disturbance through the use of trenchless technologies. The lighting in the neighborhood is sufficient to delineate the intersections; therefore, staff is recommending no revisions to the current street lighting. RIGHT-OF-WAY/ EASEMENTS: The existing Blake Road right-of-way width is 66’. It is anticipated that the majority of this project can be constructed within existing ROW. Many properties have vegetation, boulders or other landscaped items within the right-of-way. A portion of these landscape items will interfere with some of the proposed infrastructure improvements and will need to be removed to complete the necessary work. Discussions are ongoing with a few properties for temporary and permanent easements to construct the project. Specifically, the property owners between 6300 and 6308 Interlachen Boulevard along the private street have verbally committed to providing easements for the project. Staff continues to work with impacted properties on the necessary easements. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 18 PROJECT COSTS: The total estimated project cost is $12,152,060 (see Table 1). The total cost includes direct costs for engineering, clerical and construction finance costs from the start of the project to the final assessment hearing. The estimated roadway project cost is $9,368,660; 97% will be funded through MSA funds and 3% will be funded through special assessments. Utility improvements amount to $2,286,400 and will be funded through a combination of MSA and City utility funds. Sidewalk facility improvements amount to $497,000 and will be funded through a combination of MSA and PACS funds. Item Estimated Cost 1 City PACS MSA Special Assessments Roadway $ 9,095,800 $ 272,860 Storm Sewer 2 $ 1,003,200 Water Main $ 1,050,000 Sanitary Sewer $ 233,200 Sidewalk $ 99,400 $ 397,600 Subtotal $ 2,286,400 $ 99,400 $ 9,493,400 $ 272,860 Project Total $12,152,060 1 Costs are in 2022 dollars 2 Assumes 100% storm sewer participation from City. If the MSA roadway contractor bid costs are favorable, a portion of the storm sewer costs may be supplemented by MSA funds. Table 1: Estimated Project Costs ASSESSMENTS: Assessments will be levied against the benefiting adjacent properties pursuant to Chapter 429 of the Minnesota State Statues. Based on the City’s Special Assessment Policy, there are 38.98 roadway residential equivalent units (REUs) in the Blake Road project area. The estimated assessment per REU is $7,000 (see Figure 8). The preliminary assessment roll can be found in Appendix L. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 19 Figure 8: Preliminary Roadway Assessment Map All single-family residential properties located entirely within the project area receive an assessment of 1 REU, except for the properties shown in the tables below. There are 20 single-family residential properties located in the project limits that have been previously assessed a partial REU or are corner lots with an adjacent street that will be assessed with a future project. Tables 2 & 3 show their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 20 PID House Number Street Type of Property Proposed REU REU Factor Assessable REU 3011721410041 5000 OAK BEND LA Three-sided Corner lot 1 0.33 0.33 3011721120102 300 BLAKE RD S Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721120036 316 BLAKE RD S Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721120054 402 BLAKE RD S Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721140007 605 BLAKE RD S Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721410014 5108 BLAKE RD S Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 2911721320003 5125 BLAKE RD S Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 2911721320004 5100 LAKE RIDGE RD Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 2911721320005 5101 LAKE RIDGE RD Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721120049 6408 MALONEY AVE Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721130059 6401 MENDELSSOHN LA Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 2911721320005 5101 SCRIVER RD Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721410015 5111 SCRIVER RD Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721410016 5117 SCRIVER RD Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 3011721140046 6324 WATERMAN AVE Corner lot 1 0.5 0.5 Table 3: Previously Assessed Single-Family Residential Properties Table 2: Single-Family Residential Corner Properties with Future Additional Assessment PID House Number Street Previous Project Previous REU Assigned Proposed REU Assessable REU 3011721110025 301 BLAKE RD S Mendelssohn A / Interlachen Park A – 2013 0.33 1 0.67 3011721110030 321 BLAKE RD S Mendelssohn A / Interlachen Park A – 2013 0.33 1 0.67 3011721110060 401 BLAKE RD S Mendelssohn A / Interlachen Park A – 2013 0.33 1 0.67 3011721110065 421 BLAKE RD S Mendelssohn A / Interlachen Park A – 2013 0.33 1 0.67 3011721140051 501 BLAKE RD S Mendelssohn A / Interlachen Park A – 2013 0.33 1 0.67 Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 21 There are six City owned properties located in the project limits. Table 4 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s current assessment policy. PID House Number Street Description Comments Proposed REU 3011721140024 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Mirror Lake side of Blake Road between Interlachen Boulevard and Waterman Avenue Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 3011721140025 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Mirror Lake east side of land bridge between both Interlachen Boulevards Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 3011721140036 24 Address Unassigned Mirror Lake side of Blake Road between Interlachen Boulevard and Waterman Avenue Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 3011721120037 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Parcel south of 312 Blake Road Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 3011721120038 312 BLAKE RD S Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 3011721410042 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Mirror Lake side of Blake Road across from 5000 Oak Bend Lane Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 Table 4: City-Owned Properties There is one place of worship property located in the project limits, Table 5 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. PID House Number Street Type of Property Gross Square Footage Institutional REU (Based on Square Footage) Corner REU Factor Assessable REU 3011721130001 500 BLAKE ROAD S Church 22,987 4.60 0.5 2.30 Table 5: Institutional – Places of Worship Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 22 There are four residential properties located in the project limits that are not assessed. Table 6 shows their REU calculations based on the City’s assessment policy. PID House Number Street Description Comments Proposed REU 3011721410031 5001 OAK BEND LANE 29.87 feet of Blake Road frontage and existing Blake Road topography does not support a potential driveway access to Blake Road. 0 3011721410007 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Mirror Lake side of Blake Road across from 5020 Blake Road Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 3011721410009 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Mirror Lake side of Blake Road across from 5101 Blake Road Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 3011721140056 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED Mirror Lake side of Interlachen Boulevard across from 6224 Interlachen Boulevard Not developable with current zoning and flood plain restrictions. 0 Table 6: Residential Properties Not Assessed PROJECT SCHEDULE: The following schedule outlines the past and future tasks to be performed related to the project: Neighborhood Open House (all 2021/2022 projects) September 26, 2019 Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation (all 2022 and Future projects) March 11, 2021 Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation (all 2022 projects) October 2021 ETC Engineering Study Review October 28, 2021 Receive Engineering Study December 13, 2021 Open Public Improvement Hearing December 13, 2021 Close Public Improvement Hearing December 21, 2021 Public Improvement Hearing Council Decision December 21, 2021 Bid Opening March/April 2022 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2022 Complete Construction Fall 2022 Final Assessment Hearing October 2023 Engineering Study Blake Road A, B &C Roadway Reconstruction BA-463 December 1, 2021 23 RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the project can be completed during the 2022 construction season, assuming sufficient MnDOT State Aid funding is available. Staff believes the construction of this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure along Blake Road. APPENDIX: A. Traffic and Crash Data B. Comprehensive Plan Update – Pedestrian Facilities C. Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities D. Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks E. Streetlights and Signs F. Living Streets Plan G. Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes H. Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation Materials I. Resident Questionnaire J. Correspondence from Residents K. Blake Road Proposed Layout L. Preliminary Assessment Roll APPENDIX A Traffic and Crash Data Location Year ADT 85% Speed A 2001 8152 38.7 B 2005 2009 2013 2015 2021 9133 6857 9758 8604 4730 36.2 36.3 35.6 34 34.2 C 2005 9358 33.7 D 2001 11849 31.4 E 2005 7846 36.6 F 2016 2021 8684 5861 36.9 37 G 2009 2013 2016 2021 3684 4101 3289 3633 12.7 20.4 21.6 19.6 1‐ Peds 2016 NB+SB= 96 EB+WB= 37 2‐ Peds + Bikes 2020 Peds= 50 Bikes= 7 ACBDEFGHCrash DataLocation Severity Year Month TimeAPossible Injury– Westbound vehicle fail to yieldProperty Damage – Collision with post20142017FebruaryAugust5:00 pm.1:00 am.BProperty Damage – Eastbound collision due to ice2019 November 6:00 pm.CProperty Damage – Collision with utility/light pole2019 July 11:00 am.DMinor Injury – Collision with bicyclistMinor Injury ‐Ran off road (intoxicated)Property Damage –Rear‐endProperty Damage – Failure to yield2011201220142015AprilOctoberSeptemberSeptember5:00 pm.2:00 pm.6:00 pm.5:00 pm.EPossible Injury –Rear‐end 2016 June 2:00 pm.FProperty Damage – Northbound failure to yieldSerious Injury –Head‐onProperty Damage –Rear‐end201720172021JuneSeptemberFebruary3:00 pm.3:00 pm.10:00 am.GProperty Damage – Failure to yield 2015 August 3:00 pm.HPossible Injury –Head‐onProperty Damage –Ran off road (intoxicated)20112016JanuaryJune10:00 am.7:00 am.Blake Road APPENDIX B City Comprehensive Plan Update – Pedestrian Facilities Map ?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y Mud Lake )y ?ÞA@ ?úA@ Minnehaha Creek Nin e M ile Cr eek Nine Mile CreekBLAKE RDSCHAEFER RDVERNON AVEFRANCE AVE SXERXES AVE SCAHILL RD70TH ST W 66TH ST W YORK AVE SINTERLACHEN BLVD MALONEY AVE 4 4 T H S T W 50TH ST W 54TH ST W 58TH ST W GLEASON RD70TH ST W 76TH ST W DEWEY HILL RD VALLEY VIEW RD VALLEY VIEW RD MINNESOTA DR78TH ST W / Engineering DeptJanuary 2020 Pedestrian Facilities Proposed FacilitiesExisting Facilities Existing Sidewalk Existing Park Pathway Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail New Primary Sidewalk New Secondary Sidewalk New Shared-Use Path Upgrade to Shared-Use Path Twin Loops Facility Existing Shared-Use Path Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail APPENDIX C City Comprehensive Plan Update – Bicycle Facilities Map æ ¹» æ æ æ¹»æ æ ¹º¹º ¹º ñ ñ ¹»æ æ æ ¹º ¹º æ ¹º æ æ ¹º ¹º æ æ ¹º ñ ¹» æ æ ñ æ æ æ ñ ñ ñ ?ÞA@ )y ?úA@ Mud Lake LakeEdina Mirror Lake Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Melody Lake LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake AldenPark VanValkenburgPark FoxMeadowPark HighlandsPark Todd Park Weber FieldPark KojetinPark BrowndalePark WooddaleParkWilliamsParkUtleyPark FrankTupaPark SherwoodPark ArdenPark YorkPark ChowenPark PamelaParkSt JohnsPark StrachauerPark RoslandPark BristolParkCorneliaPark ArnesonAcresPark LakeEdinaParkFred RichardsPark YorktownPark EdinboroughPark GardenPark MelodyLakePark TingdalePark CountrysidePark BredesenPark WalnutRidgePark KrahlHill Creek Valley Park HeightsPark NormandalePark McGuirePark LewisParkBraemar Park and Golf Course(Courtney Fields) Minnehaha Creek N ine Mile Creek Nine Mile Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadCityHall St Peters Lutheran Church & School FireStation Public Works &Park Maintenance CalvaryChurchPublicLibrary ConcordSchool EdinaCovenant CorneliaSchool ColonialChurch HighlandSchool CalvaryLutheran EdinaHighSchool Our Lady ofGrace Church& School SouthviewJr High CrossviewLutheran CountrysideSchool St Albans Episcopal Valley ViewJr High Creek Valley School NormandaleLutheran WooddaleChurch St PatricksCatholic New CityCovenantChurch NormandaleElementary St StephensEpiscopal EdinaCommunityCenter GoldenYearsMontessori CalvinChristianSchool GoodSamaritanMethodist EdinaMorningsideChurch ChristPresbyterianChurch ChapelHillsCongregtional Shepard of the HillsLutheran Edina Community Lutheran Church FireStationBlake RdVernon AveFrance Ave SXerxes Ave SCahill Rd70th St W Interlachen Blvd Maloney Ave 4 4th S t W 50th St W 54th St W 58th St W Gleason Rd70th St W 76th St W Dewey Hill Rd Valley View Rd Valley View Rd Minnesota Dr78th St W Wooddale AveTracy AveParklawn AveConcord AveBenton Ave Gle a s o n R dMalibu RdGreen Farms RdMcCauley Trl SMirror Lakes DrLincoln DrWashington AveDivision St Vernon AveGolf Ter Code AveWilryan AveNormandale RdWest Shore DrCornelia DrFrance Ave SYork Ave S77th St WOhms LnHilary Ln Olinger Blvd 66th St W Antrim Rd63rd St W Xerxes Ave S69th St W Bush Lake RdMetro Blvd66th St W 62nd St W Valley Ln Brookside Ave?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y 74th St W V alley V iew RdEngineering Dept.January 2020 / O:\Users\engineering\Projects\Bicycle_Facilities_Asbuilts.mxd Upgrade to Buffered Bike Lane Proposed Bicycle Facilities Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Neighborhood Slow Street Standard Bike Lane New Buffered Bike Lane New Shared Use Path Upgrade to Shared Use Path Twin Loops Facility Canadian Pacific Rail Regional Trail 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 ?ÞA@ )y ?úA@ Mud Lake LakeEdina Mirror Lake Lake Cornelia ArrowheadLake HighlandsLake IndianheadLake Melody Lake LakePamela HawkesLake Harvey Lake Centennial Lake AldenPark VanValkenburgPark FoxMeadowPark HighlandsPark Todd Park Weber FieldPark KojetinPark BrowndalePark WooddaleParkWilliamsParkUtleyPark FrankTupaPark SherwoodPark ArdenPark YorkPark ChowenPark PamelaParkSt JohnsPark StrachauerPark RoslandPark BristolParkCorneliaPark ArnesonAcresPark LakeEdinaParkFred RichardsGolf Course YorktownPark EdinboroughPark GardenPark MelodyLakePark TingdalePark CountrysidePark BredesenPark WalnutRidgePark KrahlHill Creek Valley Park HeightsPark NormandalePark McGuirePark LewisParkBraemar Park and Golf Course(Courtney Fields) Minnehaha Creek Ni ne M ile C re e k Nine Mile Creek Canadian Pacific RailroadCanadian Pacific RailroadCityHall St Peters Lutheran Church & School FireStation Public Works &Park Maintenance CalvaryChurchPublicLibrary ConcordSchool EdinaCovenant CorneliaSchool ColonialChurch HighlandSchool CalvaryLutheran EdinaHighSchool Our Lady ofGrace Church& School SouthviewJr High CrossviewLutheran CountrysideSchool St Albans Episcopal Valley ViewJr High Creek Valley School NormandaleLutheran WooddaleChurch St PatricksCatholic New CityCovenantChurch NormandaleElementary St StephensEpiscopal EdinaCommunityCenter GoldenYearsMontessori CalvinChristianSchool GoodSamaritanMethodist EdinaMorningsideChurch ChristPresbyterianChurch ChapelHillsCongregtional Shepard of the HillsLutheran Edina Community Lutheran Church FireStationBlake RdVernon AveFrance Ave SXerxes Ave SCahill Rd70th St W Interlachen Blvd Maloney Ave 4 4 th S t W 50th St W 54th St W 58th St W Gleason Rd70th St W 76th St W Dewey Hill Rd Valley View Rd Valley View Rd Minnesota Dr78th St W Wooddale AveTracy AveParklawn AveConcord AveBenton Ave Gle a s o n R dMalibu RdGreen Farms RdMcCauley Trl SMirror Lakes DrLincoln DrWashington AveDivision St Vernon AveGolf Ter Code AveWilryan AveNormandale RdWest Shore DrCornelia DrFrance Ave SYork Ave S77th St WOhms LnHilary Ln Olinger Blvd 66th St W Antrim Rd63rd St W Xerxes Ave S69th St W Bush Lake RdMetro Blvd66th St W 62nd St W Valley Ln Brookside Ave?úA@ ?ÞA@ )y 74th St W V alley View R dEngineering DeptMay 2018 / O:\Users\engineering\Projects\Bicycle_Facilities_Asbuilts.mxd Existing Bicycle Facilities Bike Lanes Bike Lanes-Shared Lane Markings Shared Lane Markings Bike Boulevards Nine Mile Creek Regional Trail Advisory Bike Lanes Green Shared Bike Lanes Signed Bike Routes Bike or Shared Use Paths APPENDIX D Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks 6320 5008 5020 5012 5113 6205 5109 309 6228 6547 5012 5109 402 300 308 300 517 500 6201 5117 5117 5017 5113 6321 604 5020 6405 5101 5016 64096413 6405 6408 6501 6400 304 6223 6404 5101 5024 5025 412 6528 6200 5021 5025 6217 6516 62336521 5016 6204 413 5020 525 6520 6201 5004 5005 5101 5000 5121 6519 5008 5009 308 5013 609 6229 609 4916 6300 6220 5004 421 421420 6225 5115 512 5000 6419 6328 5021 605 409 5017 412 6501 51086300 5105 6229 6417 6304306 309 5125 6214 5100 4900 412 304 413 417416 401 417 405 409 413 304 413 416 409 417 416 412 405 408 404 314 6501 401 605 315 301 008 309 305 309308 5011 305 317 408 516 301 316 400 301 315 301 524 311 311 520 505 409 532 408 413 4917 6301305 6300 305 300 405 6512 308 409 309 6424 501 505 6424 6212 315 6308509 4920 6224 6304 6220 509 6413 404 529 5021 501 5025 509 6224 5 301 6201 6308 404 504 01 4921 6521 500 4925 6409 404 305 6527 5111 309 6312313 417 315 6221 4901 6508 6519 6412 312 508 412 4929 421 6321 6424 4928 4924 4905 5116 513 417 510 5117 504 6405 63204904 545 6301 420 321 6424 6420 5108 5112 6401 6428 421 6501 6512 408 6421 513 613 6420 6425 500 6433 6404 521 416 4909 544 6416 6309 6429 631665116517 64166516 310 414 6509 541 6305 6400 6313 6216 6305630963136208 540 6408 6324 62286216517 533 6320 537 521 62286412306 6202 6408 300 PROJECT LIMITS B L A K E R DBLAKE RDCity of Edina City of Hopkins SPRUCE RD BELMORE LN MALONEY AVE WATERMAN AVE MENDELSSOHN LN INTERLACHEN BLVD INTERLACHEN BLVD LA K E RID G E R D SCRIVER RDOAK BEND LN/ Engineering Dept November 2021 Sewer Blocks and Watermain Breaks Blake Road Roadway ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMI N NESOTAINCORPORAT E D 1888 , e Legend Sewer Blockages Watermain Breaks APPENDIX E Street Lights and Signs 6320 5008 5020 5012 5113 6205 5109 309 6228 6547 5012 5109 402 300 308 300 517 500 6201 5117 5117 5017 5113 6321 604 5020 6405 5101 5016 64096413 6405 6408 6501 6400 304 6223 6404 5101 5024 5025 412 6528 6200 5021 5025 6217 6516 62336521 5016 6204 413 5020 525 6520 6201 5004 5005 5101 5000 5121 6519 5008 5009 308 5013 609 6229 609 4916 6300 6220 5004 421 421420 6225 5115 512 5000 6419 6328 5021 605 409 5017 412 6501 51086300 5105 6229 6417 6304306 309 5125 6214 5100 4900 412 304 413 417416 401 417 405 409 413 304 413 416 409 417 416 412 405 408 404 314 6501 401 605 315 301 008 309 305 309308 5011 305 317 408 516 301 316 400 301 315 301 524 311 311 520 505 409 532 408 413 4917 6301305 6300 305 300 405 6512 308 409 309 6424 501 505 6424 6212 315 6308509 4920 6224 6304 6220 509 6413 404 529 5021 501 306 5025 509 6224 5 301 6201 6308 404 504 01 4921 6521 500 4925 6409 404 305 6527 5111 309 6312313 417 315 6221 4901 6508 6519 6412 312 508 412 4929 421 6321 6424 4928 4924 4905 5116 513 417 510 5117 504 6405 63204904 545 6301 420 321 6424 6420 5108 300 5112 6401 6428 421 6501 6512 408 6421 513 613 6420 6425 500 6433 6404 521 416 4909 544 6416 6309 6429 631665116517 64166516 310 414 6509 541 6305 6400 6313 6216 6305630963136208 540 6408 6324 62286216517 533 6320 537 521 62286412306 6202 6408 PROJECT LIMITS B L A K E R DBLAKE RDCity of Edina City of Hopkins SPRUCE RD BELMORE LN MALONEY AVE WATERMAN AVE MENDELSSOHN LN INTERLACHEN BLVD INTERLACHEN BLVD LA K E RID G E R D SCRIVER RDOAK BEND LN/ Engineering Dept October 2021CITYOFEDINAMI N NESOTAINCORPORAT E D 1888 , e Existing Street Lights Blake Road Roadway Reconstruction 89:lbcdpfbcdpfbcdpf89:ybcdpf¨©1238bcdpf 89:l bcdpf¨© !"$ !"$!"$89:z !"$ !"$ ¨© ±² !"$ bcdpf !"$!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$!"$ 89:;½¾¿ !"$ !"$ !"$!"$ ÅÆÇÝÞßꨩ 1238bcdpfbcdpf bcdpfÝÞßêÅÆÇbcdpf bcdpf¨© bcdpf bcdpfbcdpf bcdpf 89:;½¾¿bcdpf89:;½¾¿ !"$89:{¨©89:;89:{ !"$ 1238 °±°±°±°±°±°±°±°±ª«¬ª«¬bcdpf bcdpf89:;½¾¿bcdpf¨© bcdpf89:E bcdpf¨©89:;½¾¿ !"$bcdpf 89:=bcdpf bcdpf!"$bcdpf¨© bcdpf 89:{!"$89:=bcdpf 89:Ebcdpfbcdpf bcdpf¨©bcdpf¨© !"$89:zbcdpf bcdpf !"$89:= 89:m89:m 89:z89:z 89:z89:{!"$ ±² !"$89:{89:{±² ±² 89:z ±² 89:{!"$ª«¬ 89:l 89:l bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpfbcdpf 123889:{ 89:z 89:z1238 bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpf bcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpfbcdpf 89:{ 89:{89:{ 89:lª«¬¯!"$ 6320 5008 5020 5012 5113 6205 5109 309 6228 6547 5012 5109 402 300 308 300 517 500 6201 5117 5117 5017 5113 6321 604 5020 6405 5101 5016 64096413 6405 6408 6501 6400 304 6223 6404 5101 5024 5025 412 6528 6200 5021 5025 6217 6516 62336521 5016 6204 413 5020 525 6520 6201 5004 5005 5101 5000 5121 6519 5008 5009 308 5013 609 6229 609 4916 6300 6220 5004 421 421420 6225 5115 512 5000 6419 6328 5021 605 409 5017 412 6501 51086300 5105 6229 6417 6304306 309 5125 6214 5100 4900 412 304 413 417416 401 417 405 409 413 304 413 416 409 417 416 412 405 408 404 314 6501 401 605 315 301 008 309 305 309308 5011 305 317 408 516 301 316 400 301 315 301 524 311 311 520 505 409 532 408 413 4917 6301305 6300 305 300 405 6512 308 409 309 6424 501 505 6424 6212 315 6308509 4920 6224 6304 6220 509 6413 404 529 5021 501 306 5025 509 6224 5 301 6201 6308 404 504 01 4921 6521 500 4925 6409 404 305 6527 5111 309 6312313 417 315 6221 4901 6508 6519 6412 312 508 412 4929 421 6321 6424 4928 4924 4905 5116 513 417 510 5117 504 6405 63204904 545 6301 420 321 6424 6420 5108 300 5112 6401 6428 421 6501 6512 408 6421 513 613 6420 6425 500 6433 6404 521 416 4909 544 6416 6309 6429 631665116517 64166516 310 414 6509 541 6305 6400 6313 6216 6305630963136208 540 6408 6324 62286216517 533 6320 537 521 62286412306 6202 6408 PROJECT LIMITS B L A K E R DBLAKE RDCity of Edina City of Hopkins SPRUCE RD BELMORE LN MALONEY AVE WATERMAN AVE MENDELSSOHN LN INTERLACHEN BLVD INTERLACHEN BLVD LA K E RID G E R D SCRIVER RDOAK BEND LN/ Engineering Dept October 2021 Existing Signs Blake Road Roadway ReconstructionCITYOFEDINAMI N NESOTAINCORPORAT E D 1888 , e APPENDIX F Living Streets Plan Living Streets Plan 2015 Safety Health Choice Economy 8 2. Living Streets Policy INTRODUCTION The Living Streets Policy was developed to provide the framework for a Living Streets Plan. The policy initially stood alone and included sections to guide the creation of the Living Street Plan. This revised policy is now an integral part of the Living Streets Plan. The Living Streets Policy ties directly to key community goals outlined in the City’s 2008 Comprehensive Plan. Those goals include safe walking, bicycling and driving; reduced storm water runoff, reduced energy consumption, and promoting health. The Living Streets Policy also compliments voluntary City initiatives such the “do.town” effort related to community health, Tree City USA and the Green Step Cities programs related to sustainability. In other cases, the Living Streets Policy will assist the City in meeting mandatory requirements set by other agencies. The Living Streets Policy is broken up into three parts: Vision, Principles and Implementation. The Policy is followed by a description of core services provided by the City of Edina that are related to or implemented in part through Living Streets. POLICY Living Streets balance the needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders in ways that promote safety and convenience, enhance community identity, create economic vitality, improve environmental sustainability, and provide meaningful opportunities for active living and better health. The Living Streets Policy defines Edina’s vision for Living Streets, the principles Living Streets will embody, and the plan that will guide implementation of their construction. LIVING STREETS VISION Edina is a place where ... • Transportation utilizing all modes is equally safe and accessible; • Residents and families regularly choose to walk or bike; • Streets enhance neighborhood character and community identity; • Streets are safe, inviting places that encourage human interaction and physical activity; • Public policy strives to promote sustainability through balanced infrastructure investments; • Environmental stewardship and reduced energy consumption are pursued in public and private sectors alike; and • Streets support vibrant commerce and add to the value of adjacent land uses. Mini Fact Expect cyclists on the road. Watch for cyclists on the road. Treat them as you would any slow-moving vehicle. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 9 LIVING STREETS PRINCIPLES Fifteen principles guide implementation of the Living Streets Policy in the areas of all users and all modes, connectivity, context sensitivity and sustainability. The City will incorporate these principles when planning for and designing the local transportation network and when making public and private land use decisions. All Users and All Modes Principle 1: Living Streets are high-quality transportation facilities that meet the needs of the most vulnerable users such as pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors and the disabled; and Principle 2: Living Streets provide access and mobility for all transportation modes while enhancing safety and convenience for all users. Connectivity Principle 3: The City designs, operates and maintains a transportation system that provides a highly connected network of streets that accommodate all modes of travel; Principle 4: The City seeks opportunities to overcome barriers to active transportation by preserving and repurposing existing rights-of-way and adding new rights- of-way to enhance connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit; Principle 5: The City prioritizes improvements to non-motorized connections to key destinations such as public facilities, public transit, the regional transportation network and commercial areas; Principle 6: The City will require new developments to provide interconnected street and sidewalk networks that connect to existing or planned streets or sidewalks on the perimeter of the development; and Principle 7: Projects will include consideration of the logical termini by mode. For example, the logical termini for a bike lane or sidewalk may extend beyond the traditional limits of a street construction or reconstruction project, in order to ensure multimodal connectivity and continuity. Context Sensitivity Principle 8: Living Streets are developed with input from stakeholders and designed to consider neighborhood character and promote a strong sense of place; Principle 9: Living Streets preserve and protect natural features such as waterways, urban forest, sensitive slopes and soils; Principle 10: Living Streets are designed and built with coordination between business and property owners along commercial corridors to develop vibrant commercial districts; Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 10 Principle 11: Living Streets coordinate with regional transit networks and regional authorities; and Principle 12: The City will consider the fiscal context of projects and potential financial impacts when implementing Living Streets at the project level. Sustainability Principle 13: Living Streets will improve the current and future quality of life of the public, Principle 14: Living Streets will reduce environmental impacts associated with the construction and operation of roadways; and Principle 15: The City will increase the life span and resilience of its infrastructure and will build infrastructure with consideration for lifecycle costs and ease of maintenance. LIVING STREETS IMPLEMENTATION The City of Edina will develop Living Streets in the regular course of business of maintaining, expanding or redeveloping the road network and will be guided by the Vision and Principles established above. Implementation will happen predominantly through the neighborhood street reconstruction program, but also though specific stand-alone stormwater utility, pedestrian, bicycle or safety projects. Project prioritization is not specifically part of the Living Streets Plan. Prioritization of projects takes place in the City’s Capital Improvement Program and Budget and is determined by the City Council with guidance from the Living Streets Vision and Principles. The City will actively promote and apply the Living Streets Policy and Plan by: • Applying the Living Streets Policy and Plan to all street projects, including those involving operations, maintenance, new construction, reconstruction, retrofits, repaving, rehabilitation or changes in the allocation of pavement space on an existing roadway. This also includes privately built roads, sidewalks, paths and trails. • Drawing on all sources of transportation funding and actively pursuing grants, cost-sharing opportunities and other new or special funding sources as applicable. • Through all City departments supporting the vision and principles outlined in this Plan in their work. • By acting as an advocate for Living Streets principles when a local transportation or land use decision is under the jurisdiction of another agency. Projects that implement Living Streets will be guided by pedestrian and cyclist network plans and roadway classifications and will consider the physical, social, ecologic, regulatory and economic context in a given project area. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 11 The project delivery system used to build Living Streets will: • Systematically engage Edina residents and project stakeholders to better inform project-level recommendations. • Keep Edina residents and project stakeholders informed about Living Streets and the range of services they help provide. • Follow minimum Living Streets design requirements and standards. • Manage construction impacts to residents and users of streets. Network The creation of a Living Streets network of road, pedestrian and bicycle facilities provides mobility, accessibility and access to people, places and spaces. The resulting interconnection of neighborhoods links people to goods and services and to one another, and increases quality of life for those who live in, work in, or visit the city. Existing and planned transportation networks are identified in the City of Edina Comprehensive Plan and other approved/adopted plans. Network plans include: • Roadway Network (Functional Classification, Jurisdictional Classification) • Sidewalk Facilities • Bicycle Facilities (Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan) • Active Routes to School Comprehensive Plan • Transit Service Network plans are approved by the City Council. In most cases, modification requires an amendment of the Comprehensive Plan. The expansion, creation and improvement of pedestrian and bicycle networks will be well planned and prioritized: • Expansion of existing networks and providing connections to key traffic generators or destinations provide immediate benefit to all network users and is a top priority. • Network connections serving vulnerable users such as children, seniors and the disabled are a top priority. • Network connections serving high-volume uses such as schools, retail destinations or regional public transit are a top priority. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 12 Context Contextual variety can either constrain or create opportunity in roadway and other infrastructure projects. The following are contexts that will be considered and will influence the planning, design and implementation of Living Streets. Exceptions Living Streets principles will be included in all street construction, reconstruction, repaving and rehabilitation projects, except under one or more of the conditions listed below. City staff will document proposed exceptions as part of a project proposal. • A project involves only ordinary maintenance activities designed to keep assets in serviceable condition, such as mowing, cleaning, sweeping, spot repair, concrete joint repair or pothole filling, or when interim measures are implemented on a temporary detour. Such maintenance activities, however, shall consider and meet the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. CONTEXTS OF LIVING STREETS Ecological Water resource, ponds, wetlands, lakes, streams Natural resouces, trees, and urban forest Air quality Climate Sun and shade Materials, waste, energy, sustainability Regulatory State Aid roadway Watershed rules Operational Maintenance operations Traffic control or functional constraints Project Type Public Neighborhood street reconstruction Neighborhood street reconstruction with major associated utility work State Aid street reconstruction Stand-alone sidewalk, bicycle or utility project Public partner lead State County Transit agency Parks district Private development Will remain private Future public Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 13 • The City exempts a project due to an excessively disproportionate cost of establishing a bikeway, walkway or transit enhancement as part of a project. • The City determines that the construction is not practically feasible or cost effective because of significant or adverse environmental impacts to waterways, flood plains, remnants or native vegetation, wetlands or other critical areas. • Available budget is constrained or project timing allows more efficient construction at a later date. Engagement Members of the public have an interest in understanding and providing input for public projects. Project recommendations will be developed with a transparent and defined level of public engagement. The public will have access to the decision-making process and decision makers via public meetings and other correspondence and will be provided the opportunity to give input throughout the process. Project reports will discuss how their input helped to influence recommendations and decisions. The City of Edina’s Living Streets will continue to engage and solicit public input as a vital component of the project implementation process. See Chapter 5 for a more detailed discussion regarding the purpose of and opportunities for public engagement. Design The guidelines contained in the Living Streets Plan will be used to direct the planning, funding, design, construction, operation and maintenance of new and modified streets, sidewalks, paths and trails. The guidelines allow for context-sensitive designs. The Design Guidelines (see Chapter 6): • Keep street pavement widths to the minimum necessary. • Provide well-designed pedestrian accommodation in the form of sidewalks or shared-use pathways on all arterial, collector and local connector streets. Sidewalks shall also be required where streets abut a public school, public building, community playfield or neighborhood park. Termini will be determined by context. • Provide frequent, convenient and safe street crossings. These may be at intersections designed to be pedestrian friendly, or at mid-block locations where needed and appropriate. • Provide bicycle accommodation on all primary bike routes. • Allocate right-of-way for boulevards. • Allocate right-of-way for parking only when necessary and not in conflict with Living Streets principles. • Consider streets as part of our natural ecosystem and incorporate landscaping, trees, rain gardens and other features to improve air and water quality. The Design Guidelines in this Plan will be incorporated into other City plans, manuals, rules, regulations and programs as appropriate. As new and better practices evolve, the City will update this Living Streets Plan. Minimum standards will guide how vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle networks interact and share public right of way. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 14 Benchmarks and Performance Measures The ability to measure the performance of a plan, as well as knowing that it is functioning as it is intended, is vitally important to overall success and the ability to sustain it. With this in mind, the City will monitor and measure its performance relative to the Living Streets Policy. Benchmarks that will demonstrate success include: Every street and neighborhood is a comfortable place for walking and bicycling. This does not mean that every street in the city will have walking and biking facilities. It means that each neighborhood will provide a network of these facilities such that walking and biking to and through neighborhoods is a comfortable experience. Every child can walk or bike to school or a park safely. It is essential that alternatives to driving to school or parks be provided to children and their caregivers. These alternatives – walking or bicycling – will be both safe and convenient modes of transportation. See the Edina Active Routes to School Plan for more information. Seniors, children, and disabled people can cross all streets safely and comfortably. Opportunities to cross all streets in Edina, including local, collectors and arterial streets, will be provided. These crossings will be safe and comfortable for all users, regardless of age or ability. An active way of life is available to all. Opportunities for active living should be made available to all members of the Edina community by connecting centers of activity via active, multimodal transportation. Each resident of and visitor to Edina will have the ability to lead an active way of life. There are zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries. Perhaps the ultimate safety benchmark is zero traffic fatalities or serious injuries. Modeled from the Vision Zero Initiative (www.visionzeroinitiative.com), an aspirational yet primary goal of Living Streets is to achieve this high level of safety on the City’s roadways. Reduce untreated street water flows into local waterways and reduce storm water volume. Cost-effective stormwater best management practices (BMPs) are strategically selected to go above and beyond regulatory requirements to provide for flood protection and clean water services through the use of infrastructure that retains, settles, filters, infiltrates, diverts or reduces the volume of stormwater that flows to local surface waters. Retail streets stay or become popular regional destinations. Part of Edina’s Living Streets vision is that “streets support vibrant commerce.” While most of the city’s streets are residential, Edina’s business districts are a vital part of the community. The benefits of Living Streets extend to retail streets as well, making them more attractive to businesses and consumers alike. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy 15 The City will draw on the following data to measure performance: • Number of crashes or transportation-related injuries reported to the Police Department. • Number and type of traffic safety complaints or requests. • Resident responses to transportation related questions in resident surveys. • Resident responses to post-project surveys. • The number of trips by walking, bicycling and transit (if applicable) as measured before and after the project. • Envision ratings from the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure. • Additional performance measures may be identified as this Policy is implemented. Mini Fact Motorists must stop behind all crosswalks. Living Streets Plan – 2. Living Streets Policy APPENDIX G Edina Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 Minutes City Of Edina, Minnesota Transportation Commission Public Works Multi-Purpose Room October 28, 2021 I. Call To Order Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call: Commissioners Ahler, McCarthy, Plumb-Smith, Johnson Late: Commissioners Kitui, Clark Absent: Commissioners Brown, Kane, Lewis, Richman Staff present: Transportation Planner Andrew Scipioni, Assistant City Engineer Aaron Ditzler, Project Engineer Charlie Gerk III. Approval Of Meeting Agenda Motion was made by Commissioner Plumb-Smith and seconded by Commissioner McCarthy to approve the agenda. Quorum was not reached. Motion failed. Commissioner Kitui arrived at 6:06. IV. Approval Of Meeting Minutes Motion was made by Commissioner McCarthy and seconded by Commissioner Ahler to approve the September 23, 2021 meeting minutes. All voted aye. Motion carried. V. Community Comment Paul Rosland with Suburban Waste Services stated that the Commission’s organized trash collection report indicates more impact than there actually would be, noting that there is minimal impact with regard to the environment, economy, quality of life or traffic. Rosland also noted that the intersection study cited in the report didn’t accurately account for recycling and organics trucks. Jason Vierkant with Vierkant Disposal testified that residents won’t get the quality of service with organized collection that they receive now. Vierkant also noted that there are significant impacts to garbage haulers when cities go to organized collection and that he almost lost his business in Bloomington after they recently switched. VI. Reports/Recommendations A. 2022 Roadway Reconstruction Projects Assistant City Engineer Aaron Ditzler and Project Engineer Charlie Gerk presenting the proposed 2022 roadway reconstruction projects for review and comment. Comments from Commissioners included; • Morningside D/E o Why wouldn’t the City consider extending the existing Grimes Ave sidewalk north to West 42nd St? Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 o Would the proposed bike boulevard have sharrows? o Support narrowing W 42nd St and Morningside Rd due to multiple speed complaints. • Blake Rd o East of the project area on Interlachen Blvd, would the bike lane improvements continue in the future? o Support the proposed 6’ bike lanes. o How will bikers move through the proposed roundabout? o Every time the City has added a roundabout, it has been a positive experience. o Where does the proposed shared-use path start? o Support the concrete bike lanes instead of asphalt. o Is it possible to include bollards on the bike lane for additional protection and separation? B. East Grandview Transportation Study. Staff presented the East Grandview Transportation Study for review and comment. Comments from Commissioners included; • What are the benefits of the proposed “dog bone” roundabout compared to the two mini roundabouts recommended at the intersection of Eden Ave and Grange Rd? • Would the proposed westbound left turn at W 50th St and Grange Rd include a dedicated signal cycle? This might be needed for the neighborhood traffic making U-turns to travel east. • Support the proposed pedestrian bridge over Highway 100. • The proposed shared-use path on Grange Rd might be unsafe if the freeway ramps remain. • Is there a way to provide temporary ped/bike facilities over the Eden and Vernon Ave bridges to connect to the proposed shared-use paths on the east side? • Recommend the City conduct a feasibility study on implementing bike lanes on Eden Ave. Commissioner Clark arrived at 6:59. C. Organized Trash Collection Final Report The Commission reviewed the final draft report for the organized trash collection initiative. Motion was made by Commissioner McCarthy and seconded by Commissioner Plumb- Smith to approve the organized trash collection report with the amended recommendation: “The Transportation Commission believes that there is sufficient evidence to support establishing organized trash collection in Edina and recommends that City Council create a plan to establish organized trash collection, including a communication plan to educate the community and solicit public input.” All voted aye. Motion carried. Commissioner Kanti Mahanty left at 7:32. Commissioner Clark left at 8:01. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 D. Traffic Safety Report of September 28, 2021 The Commission reviewed and commented on the Traffic Safety Report of September 28, 2021. E. 2021 Work Plan Updates • #1 Organized Trash Collection – Commission approved the final report. • #2 Street Funding Task Force – City will host a Town Talk on the recent changes to street funding. The virtual event will be Monday, November 1 from 7-8 pm, hosted by City Manager Scott Neal with presentation by Engineering Director Chad Millner and Ann Swenson, chair of the Street Funding Task Force. More information can be found on BetterTogetherEdina.org. • #3 CloverRide – New rack cards have arrived with updated route and schedule information. City will provide DARTS with a letter of support for federal grant to purchase two wheelchair- accessible transit vehicles. • #4 Traffic Safety Reports – Commission reviewed the September 28 report. • #5 Capital Improvement Projects – Sidewalk construction has begun on the roadway reconstruction projects. • #6 Traffic Impact Studies & TDM – Commission reviewed 7001 France study. Staff is expecting studies for projects at 7300 Bush Lake Rd and 4660 W 77th St. • #7 Metro Transit Connectivity – No update. F. Proposed 2022 Regular Meeting Dates Staff presented the proposed regular meeting dates for the 2022 calendar year. Motion was made by Commissioner Plumb-Smith and seconded by Commissioner Kitui to approve the proposed 2022 regular meeting dates. All voted aye. Motion carried. VII. Chair and Member Comments – Received. VIII. Staff Comments – Received. IX. Adjournment Motion was made by Commissioner McCarthy and seconded by Commissioner Plumb-Smith to adjourn the October 28, 2021 meeting at 8:25 p.m. All voted aye. Motion carried. Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: October 28, 2021 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION ATTENDANCE J F M A M J J A S O N D # of Mtgs Attendance % Meetings 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 NAME Ahler, Mindy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 100% Brown, Chris 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88% Johnson, Kirk 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10 100% Kane, Bocar 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90% Kitui, Janet 1 1 1 1 1 5 100% Lewis, Andy 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 88% McCarthy, Bruce 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 70% Plumb-Smith, Jill 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9 90% Richman, Lori 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 80% Clark, Anna (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 70% Kanti Mahanty, Stephen (s) 1 1 2 100% Lafferty, Peter 1 1 Resigned 2 N/A Scherer, Matthew Resigned 0 N/A Atri, Nihar (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 Term Expired 6 67% Khariwala, Anand (s) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Term Expired 7 78% APPENDIX H Neighborhood Informational Meeting Materials The CITYofEDINA2022 Neighborhood Roadway ReconstructionInformational Meeting The CITYofEDINAAgenda•Introductions•Why Reconstruct•Project Scopes•What You Can Expect•Funding Sources•Timeline•Communication•How to Prepare•Questionswww.EdinaMN.gov2-A The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov3-AEngineering - Design & Construction DivisionChad MillnerDirector of EngineeringAaron DitzlerAssistant City EngineerEvan AcostaGraduate EngineerEdinah MachaniEngineering TechnicianLiz MooreEngineering CoordinatorCharlie GerkProject EngineerTom HaatajaSr. Engineering TechnicianJon MooreSr. Engineering Technician The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov4-C2022 Projects Areas•Morningside D/E •-254 Properties•Blake Road (MSA) •- 62 properties The CITYofEDINA•Streets grouped into neighborhoods•- Maximizes economics of scale•- Extends pavement life•Proactive Pavement Management Program•Prioritized based on;•- Pavement condition•- Underground utility issues5-Cwww.EdinaMN.govWhy My Street? The CITYofEDINAWhy Reconstruct?•Previously reconstructed in the 1970s-1990s *•Utility issues to address beneath roadway•More cost-effective than other maintenance strategies (mill & overlay, seal coat)www.EdinaMN.gov6-A The CITYofEDINAExisting Conditions - Roadways•Pavement reaching end of useful life•Some streets have curb and gutter, some do not•Some properties already have concrete driveway aprons, some do notwww.EdinaMN.gov7-A The CITYofEDINAExisting Conditions - Utilities•Watermain- Loss in pipe wall thickness- Main and service breaks- Undersized mainswww.EdinaMN.gov8-C•Sanitary Sewer- Cracks, breaks, sags, etc.- Inflow and infiltration•Storm Sewer- Structure deficiencies- Undersized pipes- Curb and gutter failing The CITYofEDINA•Mailboxes•Irrigation systems and pet fences•Landscaping•Outwalks/stepsExisting Conditions – Right-of-Waywww.EdinaMN.gov9-C The CITYofEDINAWhat / Where is the ROW?•Surface and space above and below public roadways used for travel purposes and utilities•Typically, 60’ width•(MSA Streets 66’)•Property corners located during surveywww.EdinaMN.gov10-A The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements - Roadways•Replacement of curb & gutter (all or sections)•Subgrade corrections as needed•New roadbed and pavement surfacewww.EdinaMN.gov11-A The CITYofEDINALiving Streets Plan•Approved by City Council in 2015•Balances needs of motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders•Incorporates;•- Minimum roadway design elements•- Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Planwww.EdinaMN.gov12-C The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements - Driveways•Aprons will be replaced / installed to comply with City standards•Special driveway materials•Reimbursement Policywww.EdinaMN.gov13-A The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements - Utilities•May include localized watermain and service replacements•New fire hydrants and gate valves•May include localized sanitary sewer repairs and rehabilitation•Storm sewer upgradeswww.EdinaMN.gov14-A The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements – Sump Drain•Installed when feasible and warranted•Homeowners encouraged to connect to City Sump Drain•Notification will be given when connecting is available•Sump connection permit available thru City websitewww.EdinaMN.gov15-C The CITYofEDINA•Recommend inspecting private services prior to construction•Repairs/upgrades can be coordinated with street work•Associated costs can be added to special assessmentUtility Ownershipwww.EdinaMN.gov16-AResident Owned UtilitiesB –Water ServiceC & D – Sanitary Service The CITYofEDINAProposed Improvements –Ped / Bike•Based on Pedestrian and Bicyclist Master Plan•Final design evaluated based on network consistency and construction conflictswww.EdinaMN.gov17-C The CITYofEDINAPrivate Utilities•Gas, Electric, Telephone, Cable may upgrade or repair their utilities before construction begins•Potential City-required relocations•Goal: streamline projects and minimize neighborhood disturbance•Streetlight upgrades typically not included with projectwww.EdinaMN.gov18-A The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Dust, mud, noise, and vibrations•Localized flooding during rainfall•Occasional delays due to inclement weather•Residents will be asked to limit water use occasionally•Homes may be connected to temporary watermainwww.EdinaMN.gov19-A The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Construction materials stored temporarily in ROW•5-10 feet of disturbance behind back of curb•Construction equipment stored on streets•Tree removals as necessary (property owners notified)www.EdinaMN.gov20-C The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Driveways and roads will be periodically inaccessible•Driveways will be inaccessible for 7 days to allow driveways to curewww.EdinaMN.gov21-C The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•Items within the City’s right-of-way may be damaged•-You can remove plants and other landscape features before the project•- Irrigation and pet fences will repaired•Disturbed areas will be seededwww.EdinaMN.gov22-A The CITYofEDINAWhat You Can Expect•We will;•- Provide opportunities for input•- Keep you informed•- Do our best to minimize inconveniences•Our contractor will accommodate residents with special access needswww.EdinaMN.gov23-A The CITYofEDINACity Utility Funds•Collection of utility service charges paid to the City•Covers 100% of:•- Storm sewer •(curb and gutter, •driveway aprons, •sump drain pipe) •- Sanitary sewer•-Watermainwww.EdinaMN.gov24-C The CITYofEDINAPedestrian and Cyclist Safety (PACS) Fund•Revenue from Xcel and CenterPoint Energy franchise fees•Promotes non-motorized transportation throughout the City•Covers 100% of:•-Sidewalks /shared-use paths•- Bike lanes•-Associated signage and pavement markingswww.EdinaMN.gov25-C The CITYofEDINADo Taxes Cover Street Projects?•~22% of property taxes go to the City for expenses including Police, Fire, Parks, and Public Works•- Snowplowing•- Pothole repairs•- Other street maintenance (sealcoating, overlays, patch repairs)•Beginning in 2022, taxes will pay for a portion of street reconstructionwww.EdinaMN.gov26-A The CITYofEDINASpecial Assessments•Assigned to benefitting properties of public improvements•Covers portion of roadway costs•- Roadway and driveway removals•-Asphalt pavement•- Restoration•- Indirect Costs – engineering, finance, soil investigations, mailingswww.EdinaMN.gov27-A The CITYofEDINAResidential Equivalent Units•Assessments distributed based on REUs•- Factor used to compare properties to a single-family residence•Additional factors for commercial, industrial, and public-use propertieswww.EdinaMN.gov28-CScenario Land Use Class REU FactorA Single-Family Residential 1.0B Multi-Family Residential – Duplex 0.8C Multi-Family Residential – Apartment/Condos 0.5I Institutional – Places of Worship 0.2* The CITYofEDINAProject Details – Blake Road A, B and C•62 properties (36.13 REUs)•0.42 miles of road•Partial watermain, water services replacement•Full replacement/installation of curb & gutter•Roundabout at Interlachen Blvd•Two 6’ on street concrete bike lanes •5’ concrete walk south of Interlachen Blvd•8’-10’ asphalt path north of Interlachen Blvdwww.EdinaMN.gov29-A The CITYofEDINAProject Details – Morningside D & E•254 properties (248.04 REUs)•1.98 miles of road•Full replacement/installation of curb & gutter•Spot sidewalk repair•Localized watermain improvements•Watermain services•Substantial storm sewer improvementswww.EdinaMN.gov30-C The CITYofEDINAMorningside Flood Infrastructure Project•Improvements in 2022 and 2023•Separate but coordinated project with roadway reconstruction•https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningsidewww.EdinaMN.gov31-C The CITYofEDINARevised Roadway Cost Assessment - Local www.EdinaMN.gov32-ASample Assessment During TransitionConstruction Year% of Local Roadway Costs Assessed $10,000 $15,000 $20,0002020100%$10,000 $15,000 $20,000202178.90%$7,890 $11,835 $15,780202273.64%$7,364 $11,046 $14,728202368.38%$6,838 $10,257 $13,6762024-203563.12%-5.26%$6,312-$526 $9,468-$789 $12,624-$1,05220360% $0 $0 $0 The CITYofEDINARevised Roadway Cost Assessment - MSAwww.EdinaMN.gov33-ASample Assessment During TransitionConstruction Year% of MSA Roadway Costs Assessed $5,000 $7,500 $10,000202020%$5,000 $7,500 $10,000202115.78%$3,945 $5,918 $7,890202214.73%$3,682 $5,523 $7,364202313.68%$3,419 $5,129 $6,8382024-203512.62%-1.05%$3,156-$263 $4,734-$395 $6,312-$52620360% $0 $0 $0 The CITYofEDINAPreliminary Assessments*Residential equivalent unit (1 single-family home = 1 REU)www.EdinaMN.gov34-ANeighborhood% of Roadway Costs Assessed Estimated Assessment Range per REU*#of REUsSquareYards of PavingSquare Yards of Paving per REUMorningside D, E 73.64% $6,900 - $10,200 248.04 27,928 112.6Blake Road A, B, C14.73% $10,300 - $15,200 34.63 11,602 335.0 The CITYofEDINATypical Project Timelinewww.EdinaMN.gov35-AJuly –September2021 Engineering studies/estimates providedDecember 2021 Public hearingsJanuary – March 2022 Plan preparation and biddingApril – May 2022 Construction beginsOctober – November 2022 Construction concludesSpring 2023 Warranty workFall 2023 Final assessment hearing The CITYofEDINAAssessment Timingwww.EdinaMN.gov36-CInitial Public Hearings December 2021Project Constructed Summer 2022Final Assessment Hearing October 2023Assessment Filed with County November 2023Assessment on Tax Statement January 2024 The CITYofEDINAPayment Options•Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid interest charges•Pay min. 25% ; balance rolls to property taxes over 15 years •Roll entire amount to property taxes over 15 years•Defer payment if 65 years of age or older and meet specific income requirements•- Finance charges are 1% over City’s borrowing interest rate•- 2020 interest rate was 3.53%•-Assessing Department – 952-826-0365www.EdinaMN.gov37-C The CITYofEDINACommunicationwww.EdinaMN.gov38-A•Regular Mail-All meetings, public hearings, and questionnaires- Final assessment notices (one year after construction)•Door hangers and flyers -Time-sensitive information (water shut-offs, concrete, temporary inaccessibility)•Better Together Edina – City Website Project Page The CITYofEDINABetter Together Edina•Best way to stay informed•www.bettertogetheredina.org/blake-rd-abc•www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningside-d-e•Free, access to periodic updates on project progress and scheduleswww.EdinaMN.gov39-A The CITYofEDINAProviding Input•Questionnaires mailed to your home, weigh in on;•-Traffic/pedestrian issues•- Street drainage issues•- Streetlight upgrades•Public hearing in December 2021•- Opportunity for residents to voice comments and concernswww.EdinaMN.gov40-C The CITYofEDINAQuestionnaire Resultswww.EdinaMN.gov41-CNeighborhoodResponses Received to DateMorningside D & E26% (65 / 254)Blake Road A, B & C19% (9 / 48) The CITYofEDINAHow To Prepare•Complete project questionnaire•Begin financial planning•Coordinate home and yard improvement projects around street reconstruction schedule•Review Better Together Edina updates•Ask questions, stay informedwww.EdinaMN.gov42-A The CITYofEDINAEngineering Department7450 Metro BoulevardHours: 7:00 a.m. – 3:30 p.m.952-826-0371Contact Uswww.EdinaMN.gov43-ALiz MooreEngineering Coordinator952-826-0449LMoore@edinamn.govAaron DitzlerAssistant City Engineer952-826-0443ADitzler@edinamn.gov The CITYofEDINAQuestions?www.EdinaMN.gov44-A•Ask questions on Better Together Edina Q&A page•‐www.bettertogetheredina.org/blake‐rd‐abc•‐www.bettertogetheredina.org/morningside‐d‐e•Call or email The CITYofEDINAThank you for your time!www.EdinaMN.gov45-A APPENDIX I Resident Questionnaires Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey SURVEY RESPONSE REPORT 30 January 2019 - 15 August 2021 PROJECT NAME: Blake Road A, B, & C Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction SURVEY QUESTIONS Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 1 of 26 Q1 Does you property have drainage issues the City should know about? Examples: History of flooding/standing water, grading, b... 9 (100.0%) 9 (100.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) No Yes Question options Mandatory Question (9 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 2 of 26 Q3 How concerned are you with the speed of traffic in your neighborhood or on your street? 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 3 (33.3%) 3 (33.3%) Not Concerned Concerned Very Concerned Question options Optional question (9 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 3 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/12/2021 12:47 PM Blake and Belmore.- Speeding when motorist going to work and from. Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 07:32 PM Blake Road at Maloney. Cars are often speeding Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM Frequent cars going well over 30 mph in a 30 mph zone. This is on Blake Road South between Excelsior Blvd. (Hopkins) and Interlachen Blvd. -- a straight line of road. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:21 PM Residential neighborhood should not have cars traveling more than 35 or 40 mphl Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 10:42 AM speed Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:33 PM Coming around the sharp corner on Interlachen/Blake stretch of the road Screen Name Redacted 7/13/2021 09:04 PM Blake road is a straight shot and people like to speed through it Q4 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Optional question (7 response(s), 2 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 4 of 26 Q5 How concerned are you with the volume of traffic or number of vehicles in your neighborhood or on your street? 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 1 (11.1%) 1 (11.1%) Not Concerned Concerned Very Concerned Question options Optional question (9 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 5 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM Higher traffic volume = higher traffic noise. Volume is higher during morning and evening commutes, which is to be expected. Large trucks (semi-trailers, dump trucks and flatbeds) are a bigger issue, using Blake Road South as a short-cut conduit between Excelsior Blvd. and Hwy. 100. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:21 PM Volume is near reasonable limit. Would be very concerned if traffic continues to increase. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 10:42 AM blake to interlachen...big trucks Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:33 PM Interlachen/Blake intersection Q6 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Optional question (4 response(s), 5 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 6 of 26 Q7 How concerned are you with motorist behavior in your neighborhood? (Examples of poor motorist behavior include speeding, rolling through stop signs, failing to yield, and driving aggressively.) 3 (33.3%) 3 (33.3%) 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) Concerned Not Concerned Very Concerned Question options Mandatory Question (9 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 7 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/12/2021 12:47 PM Blake and Belmore.- Speeding when motorist going to work and from. Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 07:32 PM Blake Road at Maloney. Cars are often speeding and take the turn onto Maloney (usually going west) very fast. Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM Speeding (well in excess of posted 30 mph limit) and tailgating are frequent. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:21 PM We do see some vehicles over 40 mph Screen Name Redacted 7/13/2021 09:04 PM Blake and striver Q8 If concerned or very concerned, please enter the location(s) of concern and why you feel that way. Optional question (5 response(s), 4 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 8 of 26 Q9 In general, these behaviors impact you most when you are: 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) 5 (55.6%) 5 (55.6%) Driving Bicycling Walking, jogging, or running Question options Mandatory Question (9 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 9 of 26 Q10 Do you feel any intersection in your neighborhood is unsafe? 3 (33.3%) 3 (33.3%) 6 (66.7%) 6 (66.7%) Yes No Question options Mandatory Question (9 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 10 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:33 PM Area before and after Interlachen Blvd/Blake Intersection Screen Name Redacted 7/13/2021 09:04 PM blake and scriver needs a crosswalk Q11 Which intersection do you feel is unsafe? Optional question (2 response(s), 7 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 11 of 26 Q12 Which, if any, of the following factors contribute to your feeling that the intersection is unsafe? (select all that apply) 1 (25.0%) 1 (25.0%) 4 (100.0%) 4 (100.0%) 2 (50.0%) 2 (50.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Lack of traffic control (traffic signal, stop sign, yield sign)Issues with sight lines or clear view Drivers turning corner too fast Drivers failing to stop at stop sign Drivers failing to yield Street(s) too wide Insufficient lighting Other (please specify) Question options 1 2 3 4 5 Optional question (4 response(s), 5 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 12 of 26 Q13 In general, the intersection feels most unsafe when you are: 1 (16.7%) 1 (16.7%) 2 (33.3%) 2 (33.3%) 3 (50.0%) 3 (50.0%) Driving Bicycling Walking, jogging, or running Question options Optional question (6 response(s), 3 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 13 of 26 Q14 How frequently do you walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood? 4 (44.4%) 4 (44.4%) 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) 1 (11.1%) 1 (11.1%) 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month)Never Rarely (less than once per month) Question options Optional question (9 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 14 of 26 Q15 If you walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood, what are your primary reasons for doing so? (select all that apply) 7 (100.0%) 7 (100.0%) 1 (14.3%) 1 (14.3%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Health/exercise Travel to/from destination (such as store, coffee shop)Commute to/from work Access transit Other (please specify) Question options 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Optional question (7 response(s), 2 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 15 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 07:32 PM Additional crosswalks intersecting Blake Rd. Sidewalks would also be nice. Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM None. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 09:21 PM Not needed, already have a bike lane which is rarely used and adequate for walking as well as biking Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:33 PM Adding sidewalks on Interlachen/Blake in addition to the bike lane. Clear separation of the road and where pedestrian traffic would be. Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 02:02 PM Lack of a sidewalk on Blake Road between Interlachen and Lake Ridge Road makes walking/running very dangerous. Q16 If you don't walk, jog, or run in your neighborhood as often as you would like, what reconstruction improvement might increase your walking, jogging, or running? Please list all that you can think of. Optional question (5 response(s), 4 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 16 of 26 Q17 How frequently do you ride a bicycle in your neighborhood? 1 (11.1%) 1 (11.1%) 3 (33.3%) 3 (33.3%) 1 (11.1%) 1 (11.1%) 1 (11.1%) 1 (11.1%) 3 (33.3%) 3 (33.3%) Very frequently (daily or near daily)Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month) Rarely (less than once per month)Never Question options Optional question (9 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 17 of 26 Q18 If you ride a bicycle in your neighborhood, what are your primary reasons for doing so? (select all that apply) 5 (83.3%) 5 (83.3%) 2 (33.3%) 2 (33.3%) 1 (16.7%) 1 (16.7%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Health/exercise Travel to/from destination (such as store, coffee shop)Commute to/from work Access transit Other (please specify) Question options 1 2 3 4 5 6 Optional question (6 response(s), 3 skipped) Question type: Checkbox Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 18 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM None. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:21 PM Bike lanes in streets Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 09:21 PM Not needed, already have a bike lane Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 10:42 AM DO NOT MAKE MORE OR WIDER BIKE PATHS ON BLAKE ROAD!!!!!!! BIKE LANES ALREADY CONSUMED OUR VALUABLE PARKING. Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 02:02 PM Lack of a bike lane on Blake Road Q19 If you don't ride a bicycle in your neighborhood as often as you would like, what reconstruction improvement might increase your bicycle riding frequency? Please list all that you can think of. Optional question (5 response(s), 4 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 19 of 26 Q20 How frequently do you or a member of your household park on the street? 1 (11.1%) 1 (11.1%) 2 (22.2%) 2 (22.2%) 6 (66.7%) 6 (66.7%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Occasionally (1-4 times per month)Rarely (less than once per month)Never Very frequently (daily or near daily) Frequently (2-3 times per week) Question options Optional question (9 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 20 of 26 Q21 How frequently do visitors to your household park on the street? 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 2 (25.0%) 2 (25.0%) 1 (12.5%) 1 (12.5%) 4 (50.0%) 4 (50.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Frequently (2-3 times per week)Occasionally (1-4 times per month)Rarely (less than once per month)Never Very frequently (daily or near daily) Question options Optional question (8 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 21 of 26 Q22 How satisfied are you with the availability of on-street parking in your neighborhood? 3 (42.9%) 3 (42.9%) 4 (57.1%) 4 (57.1%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Question options Optional question (7 response(s), 2 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 22 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 07:32 PM The overnight parking restrictions for the Winter season are a little extreme / unnecessary. Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM Blake Road South is not a residential street in the usual sense of the term -- it is a thoroughfare or county road connecting Excelsior Blvd. to Interlachen Blvd. "Ownership" of Blake Road South has gone back and forth over the years between Edina and Hennepin County. With its high traffic volume, it very CLEARLY is not suitable for on-street parking on either side! (Note: Blake School eliminated parking along the shoulder of Blake Road South several years ago.) Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 07:32 PM I am on a corner facing Blake and see very frequent foot traffic crossing Blake, including by my own family on walks. Additional crosswalks would be nice. Sidewalks rounding the corner between Blake Rd and Interlachen would also be an improved safety measure. Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM More frequent Edina Police patrols along Blake Road South would help reduce speeding and tailgating. Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 09:21 PM Please don’t destroy beautiful trees for the sake of a sidewalk. If a sidewalk is deemed necessary, put it adjacent to the street to avoid excessively damaging the mature trees, including a century-old oak in my yard. Also, I have a very steep front yard due to previous installation of the bike lane. If a sidewalk is put in I would need a stone wall, similar to many others found throughout the city. Without the wall, my front yard would be unmowable or else the roots of my oak tree will be severely impacted, and probably die. Q23 Any additional comments about parking? Optional question (2 response(s), 7 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Q24 Please tell us anything else you would like us to know about existing traffic or street conditions in your neighborhood. Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 23 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 10:42 AM Most of us are very curious why there have been so many projects on Blake Road that happen year after year. Our driveway access has been built up so many times that the asphalt is higher than our driveways which deteriorates our driveways with what seems to be no accountability from the city/county to remediate. We are all very tired and vexed why these projects are unable to be combined into less projects that impose the massive inconvenience and waste of tax dollars to continually tear up infrastructure that repeats practically every year. Is it project mgmt? Funding? Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:33 PM Interlachen Blvd is bike friendly at some spots, but not all. I would not say it is pedestrian or truly bike friendly in the area surrounding the Interlachen Blvd/Blake intersection and around those two corners before and after where those roads intersect. Screen Name Redacted 7/13/2021 09:04 PM Excited about the sidewalk for my kids safety. Not excited about the proposed round-about. Traffic is only bad during peak rush hour. I feel a round about would only aid in people's ability to speed through the neighborhood. Optional question (6 response(s), 3 skipped) Question type: Essay Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 24 of 26 Q25 Do you favor improving streetlights in your neighborhood? (residential streetlights are funded by special assessment) 2 (25.0%) 2 (25.0%) 6 (75.0%) 6 (75.0%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) Yes No Other (please specify) Question options Optional question (8 response(s), 1 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 25 of 26 Screen Name Redacted 6/12/2021 12:47 PM Blake rd s Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 07:32 PM Blake Road Screen Name Redacted 6/13/2021 08:18 PM Blake Road South (Note: the northernmost part of BRS -- approx. 2 blocks -- is in Hopkins.) Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 03:21 PM Blake rd Screen Name Redacted 6/14/2021 09:21 PM Blake Rd S Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 10:42 AM blake r. s. Screen Name Redacted 6/15/2021 12:33 PM Interlachen Blvd Screen Name Redacted 6/21/2021 02:02 PM Scriver Road Screen Name Redacted 7/13/2021 09:04 PM scriver Q26 What is your street name? Mandatory Question (9 response(s)) Question type: Single Line Question Neighborhood Reconstruction Survey : Survey Report for 30 January 2019 to 15 August 2021 Page 26 of 26 APPENDIX J Correspondence from Residents From:Timothy Nowak To:Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: Estimated household cost Date:Monday, September 13, 2021 8:31:15 PM EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thank you for getting back. I appreciate that. Tim On Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 10:37 AM Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: Tim, We’re estimating a preliminary assessment range of $10,300 to $15,200 per REU at this time. Since your property is a corner lot with one street not in the project area, you will beassessed at 0.5 REU. So the preliminary assessment range is $5,150 to $7,600 for your specific property. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Timothy Nowak Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 9:40 AMTo: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov>Subject: Estimated household cost EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. My wife and I are inquiring to find out what the estimated cost per household will be tocomplete the project below. We reside at 316 Blake Rd S, 55343. Thank you Tim and Christine Nowak From:Aaron Ditzler To:"Nick Mattison" Cc:Nikki Mattison Bcc:Chad Millner Subject:RE: Blake Road Rebuild Date:Friday, October 15, 2021 2:31:22 PM Nick, We’ll reach out to you for some dates and times to meet regarding the design and your fence. Yes, your math looks good. Draft layout in CAD the measurement is between 9 and 12’ from the south end of the property to the north end. Hopefully you had a chance to look at the graphical illustration on the Better Together website. https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/blake-rd-abc/news_feed/blake-road-proposed-layout Because Blake Road is a state aid street, the walk will be maintained by City staff, including snow removal. Thank you. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-03927450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Nick Mattison Sent: Friday, October 15, 2021 10:46 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Nikki Mattison Subject: Re: Blake Road Rebuild EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Thanks so much for your responses Aaron, very helpful. We completed the survey and look forward to the larger discussions as well. We'd like to have you come out when convenient as I'm not sure how that retaining wall would apply to our property as our backyard is mostly at street level currently, unlike most of the others impacted by the plan. Is my math correct that you'll be taking the current 28' road and expanding the total width to ~46' (including the sidewalks, but not the green space) and that would be equally taken from the center of the road? Something like 8-10 feet in additional width from each side? One last question, who would be responsible for snow maintenance of this sidewalk? Thank You, Nick On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 10:24 AM Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@edinamn.gov> wrote: Nick, Thanks for your questions. See responses below in red. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer952-826-0443 | Fax 952-826-03927450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Nick Mattison Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2021 5:12 PM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Nikki Mattison Subject: Blake Road Rebuild EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Aaron, My wife and I (cc'ed here) moved to 5111 Scriver Road in May 2021, we just got the notice of the road rebuild on Blake occurring next year. Our address is not on Blake but our backyard is which would be impacted. I'm hoping you can confirm a couple things and answer some questions for us when you have a moment. We're supportive of the project to improve accessibility and safety of the area overall. 1. We had a fence built with guidance from the City of Edina of a 15' setback in the backyard. I see the plan is to have two 11' roadways, two 6 foot bike lanes, and possibly 10 feet of green area/sidewalk. What is the current width of the street? I'm assuming that this expansion will not infringe upon the setback stated to us. The existing street width is approximately 28 feet wide. Retaining walls within the 66 foot City right-of-way are anticipated along much of Blake Road between Scriver Road and Interlachen Boulevard. We will blend in new topsoil and seed between the top of the retaining wall and the existing ground surface. We hope this blended slope ties in within the City right-of-way, but temporary grading easements may be necessary. We can meet with you at your home to review your fence location and the estimated blended slope tie in. 2. I'm curious how 6 feet was decided for the bike lane widths? Interlachen Boulevard east of Blake Road is a designated bike route, does that road utilize 6 foot width on both sides? I believe the state of Minnesota allows for 5 or 6 feet to be used where traffic is < 30 mph. With a designated sidewalk decompressing pedestrian traffic unlike sections of Interlachen Boulevard, 6 feet doesn't seem necessary. 5 feet is allowed by MnDOT and is the minimum in Edina’s Living Streets Plan. 6 feet allows a bit more buffer between vehicles and pedestrian facilities. I don’t know the exact dimension of Interlachen Blvd bike lane, but that street has an already defined street width with little room for adjustment. 3. Will you be removing the sidewalk on the east side of Blake road North of Scriver and using that space to account for some of this widening? Having two sidewalks for less than a block is a poor use of space. We will replace the sidewalk on the east side of Blake Road between Scriver and Lake Ridge Roads to accommodate pedestrians on the east side of Blake Road. The sidewalk will not continue on the east side of Blake Road north of Lake Ridge Road. 4. Why is there a proposed green space between the sidewalk and the road for just this section? That's not how the sidewalk is constructed on all of Blake Road south of Scriver, or in any of the other areas on this project. We'd advocate to remove that. The City’s prefers 5’ green space for snow storage. However, the City will likely eliminate the green space to avoid lawn maintenance on the remote area along the back side of properties. The City standard walk width when adjacent to the concrete curb and gutter is 6’ minimum. 5. I read that Edina is changing the way that these types of projects are funded via removing Special Assessments. However, that change is phased in over 6 years, correct? Won't every property impacted by this project pay both ways then? If you're not the right person to discuss the tax aspects, I understand, please let me know who to discuss with. The Policy change has assessment phased over 16 years. Yes, you will pay by both assessment and taxes. Over the 16-year phasing, the cumulative amount paid to the city from a median-valued single-family home is estimated at $1,865. 6. Construction hours are no earlier than 7 and no later than 7 for this project, correct? Do you have an idea of when the project would be working on the area near us? The City’s working hours are 7 AM to 9 PM Monday through Friday and 8 AM to 7 PM on Saturday. No work is permitted on Sundays or holidays without permission from the City. Contractors historically work between 7 AM and 7 PM during the week. Again, we understand and support the safety impacts and need for this work, our number 1 priority is making sure the setback is correct and that there's a solid plan to use the space efficiently across all impacted properties. Thank You, Nick Mattison 4 Aaron Ditzler From:Aaron Ditzler Sent:Wednesday, November 24, 2021 11:17 AM To:'Daniel Hunt' Subject:Blake Road Improvements Daniel, Thanks for your questions. 1. Yes, there will be tree and vegetation removals associated with the improvements along Mirror Lakes. We'll look for locations to install new trees along the impacted Mirror Lakes area. 2. The difference between the elevation of the Blake Rd where it intersects Interlachen Blvd where Interlachen Blvd heads west will be similar to the existing. Less than 1 foot difference. 3. Steel sheet pile retaining walls will be installed along Mirror Lakes. A barrier will be attached to the top of the sheet pile walls. I replaced the three page aerial layout PDF this morning. Try again and let me know if it isn't working. Aaron Ditzler, Assistant City Engineer 952‐826‐0443 | Fax 952‐826‐0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 ADitzler@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. Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Daniel Hunt Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2021 9:32 AM To: Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Aaron, I have a few questions regarding the Blake Roadway reconstruction. My questions are as follows: 1. The ROWs along Mirror Lake are thick with trees and vegetation. Will any of that be thinned ou? 5 2. Do you know the difference between the elevation of the Blake Rd where it intersects Interlachen Blvd where Interlachn Blvd heads west? 3. What will be used for guard rails? Additionally, some of the data available yesterday on the BetterTogetherEdina web page is no longer available; specifically the overhead photos with the road improvements overlayed. Thank you, Daniel Hunt 43 Aaron Ditzler From:Scott Searl Sent:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 10:56 AM To:Chad Millner Cc:Scott H. Neal; Adam Driscoll; Steve Hanneman; Pete Barott; Aaron Ditzler Subject:Re: 500 Blake Rd RE: Property Assessment? EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Chad ‐ Thanks for your help. Just knowing there’s a $16,000 bill coming in 2023/2024 is very helpful for our planning purposes. Pastor Scott On Dec 1, 2021, at 7:52 AM, Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov> wrote: I realized there may be a question on how that was calculated. Church’s, commercial, retail and other non‐residential properties are calculated with a square footage factor. The SF is from the assessing department and the factor was based on number of trips from transportation guidance. The engineering study will show the actual calculations if your interested. The study will be available very soon. Thanks <image001.gif> Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952-826-0318 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Chad Millner Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 12:03 PM To: 'Scott Searl' Scott H. Neal <sneal@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Adam Driscoll Steve Hanneman Pete Barott Aaron Ditzler <ADitzler@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: 500 Blake Rd RE: Property Assessment? Pastor, 44 Thanks for the questions. The preliminary assessment calcs are just wrapping up. The church’s assessment is around $16,100 for the Blake Rd Project. If council approves the project and assessments in December, it will become a pending assessment. If everything goes as planned, we will construct in 2022, final out all the costs in summer 2023 and conduct the final assessment hearing October 2023. The assessments would be filed with Hennepin County November 2023 with the first payment due 2024 if you choose not to pay it off at the time of notice in 2023. Assessments can be spread out over 15‐ years with an interested rate 1% above what the City can borrow the money at. It is typically between 3‐ 4%. I hope that helps. Thanks, Chad <image001.gif> Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952-826-0318 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Scott Searl Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 11:18 AM To: Scott H. Neal <sneal@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov>; Adam Driscoll Steve Hanneman Pete Barott Subject: Re: Property Assessment? EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Scott ‐ Thank you for your quick response! I’ll look forward to understanding what our assessment might be and the timeline for making whatever payment is needed. Thanks! Pastor Scott On Nov 30, 2021, at 11:16 AM, Scott H. Neal <sneal@EdinaMN.gov> wrote: Hi Pastor Scott – Yes, I can see how this might be confusing. City governments cannot tax churches or other non‐profits. That is true. A special assessment, however, is not considered to be a “tax”. Cities may special assess churches and other non‐profits for infrastructure projects from which those institutions derive a “special” benefit. We use a formula to spread the project cost over the benefiting properties. The unit of measure is call an 45 REU, residential equivalency unit. I have copied the City Engineer on this reply so that he can share more technical information with you about this matter. Scott <image001.gif> Scott H. Neal, City Manager 952-826-0401 | Fax 952-826-0390 sneal@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Follow me on Twitter. From: Scott Searl Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:45 AM To: Scott H. Neal <sneal@EdinaMN.gov> Subject: Property Assessment? EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Scott ‐ Hope all is well with you and you had a good Thanksgiving. We’re wondering about this possible assessment. As a nonprofit is our property assessed and if so how do we determine what our possible assessment amount might be. Thanks ‐ Pastor Scott Pastor Scott 46 Aaron Ditzler From:Chad Millner Sent:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 12:14 PM To:'Nick Jude' Cc:Brent Frederick; Nick Mattison; Kirsten Frederick; Jane Feichtinger; Aaron Ditzler; Charles Gerk; Evan Acosta Subject:RE: Blake Rd Street Recon Meeting Thanks for the note. 1. 5‐ft sidewalk request: When the sidewalk is on the back of curb 6‐ft is the minimum width for two reasons. First our plow equipment is 5‐ft wide and needs some buffer so it doesn’t fall off the curb and second it provides a 1‐ ft buffer for pedestrians before the also fall of the curb. We create different style joints so someone with visual issues can feel that before stepping off. 2. A turn lane is not proposal. The yellow is the pavement needed to adjust the curb line into Scriver. It is adjusting the radius slightly because the location of the new curb to make sure it is a smooth transition from new to old. 3. Easement Areas: We do not anticipate any changes to the permanent easements with this project. If during final design an issue arises we will discuss with that property owner. We are just exercising the right to use the space that is available to the City. 4. The bike lanes are 6‐ft wide but that is right up to the curb face. We want to provide enough space between the vehicles lanes and curb for cyclists. Two bike lanes are needed because they are 1‐way or 1 in each direction. As we look at impacts near your property we may consider a small change in the width of the bike lanes. Thanks for the comments and notes. Please reach out with any other questions. Chad Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952-826-0318 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Nick Jude Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 8:39 PM To: Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov> Cc: Brent Frederick Nick Mattison Kirsten Frederick Jane Feichtinger Subject: Re: Blake Rd Street Recon Meeting EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Chad, Thanks for your time tonight. A couple of questions after reviewing the schematic with my wife. 47 We would request a 5 ft sidewalk in the portion of our backyard which would be consistent with the 5 ft walks everywhere else. Is there a reason this was proposed as 6 ft? The yellow turn lane looking portion on the corner of Blake and Scriver ‐ what is that showing? We would request there to be no vehicle turn lane or large radius turn into the neighborhood, reducing the impact to our yard. Does the Easement that the City of Edina currently has on our backyards change with any of this or are you simply exercising the right to that easement? I just want to make sure that the City's Easement doesn't encroach any closer to our house after this project. How wide are the bike lanes being proposed? Is there any way to do this project with one bike line ‐ reducing the impact to back yards? Thanks, Nick Jude On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 6:54 AM Chad Millner <cmillner@edinamn.gov> wrote: Can we do 5 pm tomorrow night, Tuesday, Nov. 30? I have another meeting at 6:30 so this date and time would work really well. Thanks Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952-826-0318 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. From: Brent Frederick Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2021 3:16 PM To: Nick Mattison Cc: Nick Jude Chad Millner <cmillner@EdinaMN.gov>; Kirsten Frederick Jane Feichtinger Subject: Re: Blake Rd Street Recon Meeting EXTERNAL EMAIL ALERT: This email originated from outside the City of Edina. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 49 Thanks, Nick Mattison Sent from my iPhone On Nov 26, 2021, at 6:28 PM, Nick Jude <wrote: Chad and Neighbors, With the hearing on this topic scheduled for Dec 13th, can we plan on meeting about this this coming week or early the following week? I would prefer to find a time that the Mattisons and Fredericks could also attend. I plan to attend the Dec 13th meeting in person. Thanks, Nick Jude On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 2:54 PM Brent Frederick wrote: Hi chad, I have cc’d everyone on this email to set up a day and time that works for everyone. Thanks for your help on this. On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 3:33 PM Chad Millner <cmillner@edinamn.gov> wrote: Brent, Thanks for checking in yesterday. If you send over contact information, I can reach out individually to your neighbors and set up individual meetings. Or I can do 1 visit with all of you. Whatever is easiest. 50 Thanks, Chad <image001.gif> Chad Millner, Director of Engineering 952-826-0318 | Fax 952-826-0392 7450 Metro Blvd. | Edina, MN 55439 cmillner@EdinaMN.gov | EdinaMN.gov Share your thoughts and ideas with the City online! Visit www.BetterTogetherEdina.org. ‐‐ Thanks, Brent Frederick APPENDIX K Blake Road Proposed Layout APPENDIX L Preliminary Assessment Roll BLAKE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA‐463 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PID OWNER HOUSE NO. STREET ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 1 3011721410009 MARY A LACH 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 ‐$ 2 3011721120037 VIL OF EDINA 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 ‐$ 3 3011721140056 J A SORTEBERG & C M KENNEDY 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 ‐$ 4 3011721140024 CITY OF EDINA 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 ‐$ 5 3011721140025 CITY OF EDINA 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 ‐$ 6 3011721410007 A T MITCHELL & R M MITCHELL 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 ‐$ 7 3011721140036 VILLAGE OF EDINA 24 Address Unassigned 0 ‐$ 8 3011721410042 CITY OF EDINA 24 ADDRESS UNASSIGNED 0 ‐$ 9 3011721120102 T A RUTHERFORD & J S BAXTER 300 BLAKE RD S 0.5 3,500.00$ 10 3011721110025 T R EVON & C A EVON 301 BLAKE RD S 0.67 4,690.00$ 11 3011721120039 T J & S R DILLON 308 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 12 3011721110026 L & D HERIAN 309 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 13 3011721110027 J DETERS & J DETERS 311 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 14 3011721120038 CITY OF EDINA 312 BLAKE RD S0‐$ 15 3011721110028 JOHN DETTERS/JENNIFER DETERS 315 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 16 3011721120036 CHRISTINE NOWAK 316 BLAKE RD S 0.5 3,500.00$ 17 3011721110030 ELIZABETH W EASTMAN 321 BLAKE RD S 0.67 4,690.00$ 18 3011721110060 MARK D SCHWARTZ 401 BLAKE RD S 0.67 4,690.00$ 19 3011721120054 PETER R HEMSTAD 402 BLAKE RD S 0.5 3,500.00$ 20 3011721120053 JOEL B SAMAHA & DOUGLAS KASA 404 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 21 3011721110061 R E KRENGEL & A V KRENGEL 405 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 22 3011721120052 RIVKAH WACHTER & R WACHTER 408 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 23 3011721110062 THOMAS J STEIN 409 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 24 3011721120051 JULIE KAPLAN & REED HART 412 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 25 3011721110063 HAYLE STERN 413 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 26 3011721120050 R & J FITZGERALD JT REV TR 416 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 27 3011721110064 C F STENNES ETAL 417 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 28 3011721110065 STEVEN M WARD 421 BLAKE RD S 0.67 4,690.00$ 29 3011721130001 SHEPHERD OF HLS LTH CH EDINA 500 BLAKE RD S 2.30 16,100.00$ 30 3011721140051 SAMUEL WELNA & JENNA WELNA 501 BLAKE RD S 0.67 4,690.00$ 31 3011721140028 ROLLAND C TOENGES ET AL TR 505 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 32 3011721140017 P M SIMPSON & M M SIMPSON 509 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 33 3011721140043 FRANK N DRAKE 513 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 34 3011721140044 J H & E M LORENTZ 517 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 35 3011721140045 BETH GRANT 521 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 36 3011721130078 KEVIN KOMADINA 604 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 37 3011721140007 MARC KENVILLE/SARAH KENVILLE 605 BLAKE RD S 0.5 3,500.00$ 38 3011721140057 GRANDE HOMES LLC 609 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 39 3011721410021 A T MITCHELL & R M MITCHELL 5020 BLAKE RD S 1 7,000.00$ 40 3011721410014 B R FREDERICK/K A FREDERICK 5108 BLAKE RD S 0.5 3,500.00$ 41 2911721320003 IRMGARD E FARAH 5125 BLAKE RD S 0.5 3,500.00$ 42 3011721140055 PETER M LINSTROTH REV TRUST 6212 INTERLACHEN BLVD 1 7,000.00$ 43 3011721140054 JOHN A SORTEBERG TRUST ET AL 6224 INTERLACHEN BLVD 1 7,000.00$ 44 3011721140060 D C HAMM & G L HAMM 6228 INTERLACHEN BLVD 1 7,000.00$ 45 3011721140040 RUTH Y OSTROM ETAL 6300 INTERLACHEN BLVD 1 7,000.00$ 46 3011721140041 ALISON & MATTHEW RUOHO 6304 INTERLACHEN BLVD 1 7,000.00$ 47 3011721140042 PATRICIA ANN ALBANI 6308 INTERLACHEN BLVD 1 7,000.00$ 48 2911721320005 MARY A LACH 5101 LAKE RIDGE RD 0.5 3,500.00$ 49 2911721320004 LEONARD T BRENNY 5100 LAKE RIDGE RD 0.5 3,500.00$ 50 3011721120049 QUALITY HME RESTORATIONS LLC 6408 MALONEY AVE 0.5 3,500.00$ 51 3011721130059 PHILLIP J DE LA VEGA ET AL 6401 MENDELSSOHN LA 0.5 3,500.00$ 52 3011721130049 SHEPHERD OF HLS LTH CH EDINA 6400 MENDELSSOHN LA 0 ‐$ 53 3011721410041 W A VOLLAND & K A VOLLAND 5000 OAK BEND LA 0.33 2,310.00$ 54 3011721410031 GEORGE E MAAS TRUSTEE 5001 OAK BEND LA 0 ‐$ 55 2911721320005 NICOLAI A LEWIS 5101 SCRIVER RD 0.5 3,500.00$ BLAKE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT NO. BA‐463 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL PID OWNER HOUSE NO. STREET ASSESSABLE REU ASSESSABLE AMOUNT 56 3011721410015 FSA PROPERTIES LLC 5111 SCRIVER RD 0.5 3,500.00$ 57 3011721410016 NICHOLAS JUDE & JANE JUDE 5117 SCRIVER RD 0.5 3,500.00$ 58 3011721140046 WILLIAM J PIERRO 6324 WATERMAN AVE 0.5 3,500.00$ Total 38.98 272,860.00$ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) SS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING NOTICE CITY OF EDINA ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified acting City Clerk of the City of Edina, Minnesota, hereby certify that on the following dates November 23, 2021, acting on behalf of said City, I deposited in the United States mail copies of the attached Notice of Public Hearing for Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction (Exhibit A), enclosed in sealed envelopes, with postage thereon duly prepaid, addressed to the persons at the addresses as shown on the mailing list (Exhibit B), attached to the original hereof, which list is on file in my office, said persons being those appearing on the records of the County Auditor as owners of the property listed opposite their respective names, as of a date 19 days prior to the date of the hearing; and that I also sent said notice to the following corporations at the indicated addresses whose property is exempt from taxation and is therefore not carried on the records of said County Auditor. NAME ADDRESS WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City this 23rd day of November, 2021. ________________________________ Sharon Allison, City Clerk 3011721110060 MARK SCHWARTZ 401 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721120102 THEODORE A RUTHERFORD & JENNIFER SALMON BAXTER 300 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721110025 TIMOTHY R EVON & COLLEEN A EVON 301 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721130001 SHEPHERD OF THE HILLS 500 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721130049 SHEPHERD OF THE HILLS 500 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721410014 BRENT R FREDERICK & KIRSTEN A FREDERICK 5108 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55436 3011721140041 ALISON & MATTHEW RUOHO 6304 INTERLACHEN BLVD EDINA MN 55436 3011721140040 RUTH Y OSTROM & DEAN T BECKER 6300 INTERLACHEN BLVD EDINA MN 55436 3011721410016 NICHOLAS M JUDE & JANE E JUDE 5117 SCRIVER RD EDINA MN 55436 3011721410021 ALEX T MITCHELL & RENEE M MITCHELL 5020 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55436 3011721110061 ROBERT E & AUDREY V KRENGEL 306 GARFIELD ST N BOX 274 ATWATER MN 56209 3011721110064 CHARLES F STENNES 417 BLAKE RD EDINA MN 55343 3011721110030 ELIZABETH W EASTMAN 321 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721140007 MARC & SARAH KENVILLE 605 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721120054 PETER R HEMSTAD 402 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721140045 BETH GRANT 521 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721120038 CITY OF EDINA 4801 50TH ST W EDINA MN 55424 3011721410031 AIKERS TRUST 5001 OAK BEND LA EDINA MN 55436 3011721140028 ROLLAND C TOENGES 505 BLAKE RD EDINA MN 55343 3011721140051 SAMUEL WELNA & JENNA WELNA 501 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721120053 JOEL B SAMAHA 404 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 2911721320005 MARY LACH 5101 LAKE RIDGE RD EDINA MN 55436 2911721320003 JACQUELINE & CHRISTOPHER LONGER 5125 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55436 3011721140017 PETER M SIMPSON 509 BLAKE RD EDINA MN 55343 3011721130078 KEVIN KOMADINA 604 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721120036 CHRISTINE NOWAK 316 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721140060 DAVID C HAMM 6228 INTERLACHEN BLVD EDINA MN 55436 3011721120039 SARAH ROGERS DILLON 308 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721140043 FRANK N DRAKE 4812 FRANCE AVE S EDINA MN 55410 3011721110063 HAYLE STERN 413 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721120052 JOSHUA ARRINGTON 408 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721410041 WAYNE A & KATHLEEN A VOLLAND 2605 TARPON RD NAPLES FL 34102 3011721110027 JOHN & JENNIFER DETERS 311 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 2911721320004 LEONARD T BRENNY 4721 155TH LA N W RAMSEY MN 55303 3011721120051 JULIE KAPLAN & REED HART 412 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721110026 LON & DEBRA K HERIAN 309 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721130059 LUCAS & ERIC CHURCH 6401 MENDELSSOHN LANE EDINA MN 55343 3011721110028 DERECK MATTSON & LAURA FUGLEBERG 315 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721120050 ROGER & JOYCE FITZGERALD 416 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721140057 MODENA LLC, ATTN: JOSH WERT 2221 DWIGHT LA MINNETONKA MN 55305 3011721120049 QUALITY HOME RESTORATNS LLC 117 INTERLACHEN RD HOPKINS MN 55343 3011721140042 PATRICIA ANN ALBANI 6308 INTERLACHEN BLVD EDINA MN 55436 3011721410020 NICOLAI LEWIS 5101 SCRIVER ROAD EDINA MN 55436 3011721110065 STEVEN M WARD 4732 PLEASANT AVE S MINNEAPOLIS MN 55419 3011721140046 WILLIAM J PIERRO 6324 WATERMAN AVE EDINA MN 55343 3011721410015 NICHOLAS & NICOLE MATTISON 5111 SCRIVER RD EDINA MN 55436 3011721110062 THOMAS J STEIN 409 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721140044 JOHN & EILEEN LORENTZ 517 BLAKE RD S EDINA MN 55343 3011721140055 PETER LINSTROTH 10137 INDIAN RIDGE DR RENO NV 89511 3011721140054 JOHN SORTEBERG 6224 INTERLACHEN BLVD EDINA MN 55436 November 24, 2021 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-463 BLAKE ROAD NEIGHBORHOOD ROADWAY RECONSTRUCTION The Edina City Council will meet at Edina City Hall on Monday, Dec. 13, 2021, at 6:00 p.m., to consider the public hearing on roadway improvements for Blake Road Neighborhood Roadway Reconstruction. This hearing is being conducted under the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429. This hearing has been called as a recommendation from staff. The proposed project would be constructed in the summer of 2022 with the assessment hearing occurring in the fall of 2022. The estimated cost is $272,860.00 and is funded by special assessment. The estimated cost per assessable lot is $7,000.00 per residential equivalent unit. The assessment can be divided over a fifteen-year period with interest accumulating on the unpaid balance. The area proposed to be assessed the cost of the proposed improvement includes the following: 300 to 5125 Blake Road South, 6212 to 6308 Interlachen Boulevard, 5100 to 5101 Lake Ridge Road, 6408 Maloney Avenue, 6400 to 6401 Mendelssohn Lane, 5000 Oak Bend Lane, 5101, 5111 and 5117 Scriver Road, 6324 Waterman Avenue Your receipt of this notice is an indication that property whose ownership is listed to you is among those properties which are considered to be benefited by the improvement. The City Council can authorize the proposed project immediately upon the close of the hearing. Staff’s recommendations to City Council are: • Roundabout at Interlachen Boulevard, and new asphalt pavement on all streets. • Blake Road reconstructed to 34-feet wide with no parking on either side of the street • New concrete curb and gutter on all streets, including two 6-foot on-street bike lanes on each side of the street • New 8-foot asphalt shared use path on the west side of Blake Road north of Interlachen Boulevard • New 6-foot concrete sidewalk on the west side of Blake Road south of Interlachen Boulevard • Partial replacement of watermain and water services; full replacement of hydrants and valves • Spot repairs of the sanitary sewer main • Storm sewer improvements to resolve local drainages issues and installation of sump drains where feasible The Engineering Study will be available online as part of the Dec. 13 City Council meeting agenda at http://bit.ly/2y3wCOo; under Meeting Type select City Council Meeting, click Search and you will see the Dec. 13 Agenda. Due to a low survey response rate, a neighborhood wide in person Q&A meeting will not occur. To comment, you may: • Post questions online at https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/blake-rd-abc for review by City Council and Engineering • Write to City of Edina, Attention Engineering, 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina, MN 55439. • Watch or attend public hearing to offer comments, leave a voicemail in advance, or submit your comments online. Ways to participate are included in this mailing. How to Participate in a Public Hearing HOW TO PARTICIPATE: Public hearing input can be provided in a variety of ways to the City Council. Options 1 & 2 are available now: 1) Complete the Public Hearing Comment Form online at: https://www.bettertogetheredina.org/public-hearings 2) Leave a voicemail with your feedback. (952-826-0377) Options 3 & 4 are available the night of the public hearing meetings: 3) Watch the meeting and call in to provide testimony. a. Edina TV (Comcast Channels 813 or 16) b. Facebook.com/EdinaMN c. EdinaMN.gov/LiveMeetings • City Council: Call in to provide live testimony at the September 9th meeting, 1-800-374- 0221. The Conference ID 4628128. 4) Attend the meetings to provide testimony, City Hall Council Chambers, 4801 W. 50th S DEADLINES: The City Council is scheduled to make a decision at its December 21 meeting. Deadline for comments via voicemail or BetterTogetherEdina.org is Noon, Wednesday, December 15. FURTHER INFORMATION: City of Edina Engineering Department, 7450 Metro Boulevard, Edina, MN 55439, 952-826-0371 C:\Plots\Blake Road Intersection Memo.docx701 XENIA AVENUE S | SUITE 300 | MINNEAPOLIS, MN | 55416 | 763.541.4800 | WSBENG.COMMemorandum To: Chad Millner, PE From: Andrew Plowman, PE Date: 12/15/2021 Re: Blake Road at Interlachen Boulevard Intersection Analysis The purpose of this memorandum is to discuss the intersection alternatives considered, operational analysis, and the reasons for the recommendation to provide a mini-roundabout at the intersection of Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard. Blake Road is a two-lane Major Collector roadway. Blake Road intersects major road Trunk Highway (TH) 7 to the north. Blake Road serves as a north-south route for Edina and Hopkins. Blake Road provides access to local roads and businesses within Edina and Hopkins. Interlachen Boulevard is a two-lane Major Collector roadway on the east leg at the intersection with Blake Road. Interlachen Boulevard serves as an east-west route through Edina. Interlachen Boulevard provides access to local roadways and housing developments throughout Edina. The intersection of Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard is currently controlled by a through stop. A summary of the characteristics of Blake Road and Interlachen Road at the study intersection follows: Blake Road at the study intersection: Eastbound/Northbound Alignment 30 mph speed limit West leg o 1 shared thru/right turn lane o 7,900 ADT (2015 MnDOT) South Leg o 1 shared left/right turn lane o 3,400 ADT (2016 MnDOT) Interlachen Boulevard at the study intersection: Westbound Alignment 30 mph speed limit East leg o 1 shared left/thru lane o 9,100 ADT (2016 MnDOT) Traffic turning movement counts at the intersection of Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard were collected on February 18, 2021. Since the counts were collected during the COVID 19 Pandemic, results were factored based on counts that were conducted in 2016. A summary of the design peak AM and PM counts are found below. Although traffic volumes are still somewhat lower than pre-pandemic levels, traffic analysis around the Twin Cities metro area is showing that volumes are within approximately 90% of the pre-pandemic volumes and often closer during the peak hours. Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard Intersection Analysis 12/15/2021 Page 2 C:\Plots\Blake Road Intersection Memo.docx Alternatives Considered An all-way stop option, signal option, and a mini-roundabout option were analyzed as part of this report. Below is a summary of the operational analysis of each option considered, in addition to the no-build condition. 2021 No-Build Alternative The traffic operations analysis shows that the intersection currently operates at an acceptable level of service B in the AM peak hour and level of service C in the PM peak hour. The northbound approach has a failing LOS in the AM and PM peak hour. There are queuing issues in the northbound approach, traffic backs up into the intersection just south of Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard. Left Through Right Left Through Right NB 51 (F)0 (A)38 (E)99 (F)0 (A)74 (F) WB 7 (A)5 (A)0 (A)12 (B)9 (A)0 (A) EB 0 (A)2 (A)2 (A)0 (A)4 (A)3 (A) * Delay measured in seconds per vehicle Intersection ControlLocation Approach Intersection Delay* (LOS) Intersection Delay* (LOS) PM Peak Movement Delay* (LOS) AM Peak Movement Delay* (LOS)Thru-StopBlake Rd & Interlachen Blvd 13 (B)23 (C) Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard Intersection Analysis 12/15/2021 Page 3 C:\Plots\Blake Road Intersection Memo.docx 2021 All-Way Stop Option 2041 All-Way Stop Option With the 2041 volumes and proposed geometry, the intersection will operate with an overall LOS C during the AM peak hour and an overall LOS F during the PM peak hour. Nearly all movements are failing in the PM peak hour. In the PM peak hour there are major queuing issues with the worst queue being around 1400 feet in the eastbound approach. 2041 Signal Option With the 2041 volumes and the proposed geometry, which includes EB thru and right turn lanes, WB thru and left turn lanes and northbound left and right turn lanes, the intersection will operate with an overall LOS A during the AM peak hour and an overall LOS B during the PM peak hour. All movements operate at a LOS B or better. The westbound left turn and eastbound right turn movements have small queuing issues. Left Through Right Left Through Right NB 11 (B)0 (A)5 (A)12 (B)0 (A)6 (A) WB 9 (A)7 (A)0 (A)17 (B)10 (B)0 (A) EB 0 (A)11 (B)4 (A)0 (A)17 (B)7 (A)SignalizedBlake Rd & Interlachen Blvd 8 (A)12 (B) Intersection ControlLocation Approach Intersection Delay* (LOS) Intersection Delay* (LOS) PM Peak Movement Delay* (LOS) AM Peak Movement Delay* (LOS) * Delay measured in seconds per vehicle Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard Intersection Analysis 12/15/2021 Page 4 C:\Plots\Blake Road Intersection Memo.docx 2041 Mini-Roundabout Option With the 2041 volumes and the proposed geometry, the intersection will operate with an overall LOS A during the AM and PM peak hour. All movements operate at a LOS A. There are minor queuing issues in the northbound approach. Both the signal option and mini-roundabout options operate at acceptable levels of service. The all-way stop and side-street stop (no-build) options do not work at an acceptable level of service and were not considered as long backups can lead to safety issues related to motorists taking chances based on long delays and issues with pedestrian and vehicle interaction. Summary of Options Below is a summary of the main factors why a mini-roundabout is recommended as the chosen alternative over a signalized intersection: Smaller overall footprint/right of way impact: The signalized option would require additional turn lanes, which would require approximately 6 additional feet, for 250’-300’ from the intersection, as compared to the mini-roundabout. The mini-roundabout is slightly more impactful on the north side and the corners of the intersection, but the overall impact of a signal is significantly more impactful in total area. Lower Cost: The cost of a signalized intersection would add approximately $200,000 to the project over that of a mini-roundabout. In addition to the added pavement, height of retaining walls and earthwork, the cost of placing a signal system would place the cost significantly higher than that of a mini-roundabout intersection. Traffic Calming/Speed Reduction: The mini-roundabout, although not having a central island, promotes traffic calming and speed reduction through the inclusion of splitter islands and curbed central island. The design speed through the mini-roundabout is 15 mph. The signalized intersection would help the overall traffic operations but would not create a slower corridor along Blake Road and Interlachen Boulevard. For the reasons listed above, we recommend the mini-roundabout alternative. Although mini- roundabouts are smaller than typical roundabouts they have been used throughout the state since 2015 and have performed well, especially in areas with limited large trucks which is the condition on Blake Road. One of the key differences between a mini-roundabout and standard roundabout is how each accomplishes speed reduction. A standard roundabout relies heavily on the presence and noticeability of the central island. With a prominent central island, motorists are given the visual que to lower their speed. At a mini-roundabout, the speed reduction is accomplished through longer and curvilinear splitter islands, accompanied by narrowing of the lanes. The spitter islands provide the feeling of entering a narrow corridor and drivers will trend to lower speeds. NB 4 (A)7 (A) WB 8 (A)5 (A) EB 3 (A)5 (A) * Delay measured in seconds per vehicle Approach Delay* (LOS) Intersection Delay* (LOS)RoundaboutBlake Rd & Interlachen Blvd 5 (A)5 (A) Intersection PM Peak ControlLocation Approach AM Peak Approach Delay* (LOS) Intersection Delay* (LOS) The CITYofEDINABlake Road Roadway ReconstructionBA-463Public Improvement Hearings December 13, 2021Evan Acosta, Graduate EngineerChad Millner, Director of Engineering The CITYofEDINA•58 properties •1.0 mile of road www.EdinaMN.gov2Project Details The CITYofEDINA•Blake – Green•Interlachen – Orange•Land Bridge – Redwww.EdinaMN.gov3Project Details The CITYofEDINA•Cast iron pipes 6”-12”•Moderate breaks north of Interlachen Blvd•Some original fire hydrants•(not current City standard)•Gate valves nearing end of useful lifewww.EdinaMN.gov4Existing Watermain Condition The CITYofEDINA•Replace all gate valves and upgrade hydrants to City standard•Replace portions of existing main and associated water services •Verify appropriate hydrant spacing and add hydrants if needed to meet public safety standards•Add watermain and services between Waterman and Interlachenwww.EdinaMN.gov5Proposed Watermain Improvements The CITYofEDINA•Clay Pipe in fair condition•Inflow and infiltration (I&I) occurring in system•Localized sanitary sewer pipe defects•- Root intrusion and encrustation account for majority of problemswww.EdinaMN.gov6Existing Sanitary Sewer Condition The CITYofEDINAProposed Sanitary Sewer Improvements•Install cured-in-place pipe liners & spot repairs to reduce I&I•Replace manhole castings and ringswww.EdinaMN.gov7 The CITYofEDINAExisting Storm Sewer Condition•Some concrete curb and gutter•Corrugated metal, reinforced concrete, and PVC pipeswww.EdinaMN.gov8 The CITYofEDINAProposed Storm Sewer Improvements•Concrete Curb and Gutter•Structure replacements (where needed)•Sediment structures (where feasible)•Install sump drain pipe(where feasible)www.EdinaMN.gov9 The CITYofEDINA•Streets originally constructed between 1937 and 1945•Some Maintenance •Street widths vary between 30’ and 36’•PCI of 25 (scale 0-100)•Primarily silty and clayey sand base materialwww.EdinaMN.gov10Existing Roadway Condition The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov11Existing Roadway Condition•AADT 3,279 to 9,758South BlakeThru Interlachen / Blake•85% Speeds – 19.6 to 34.2 mph•Long vehicle queues at South Leg•Mixture and lack of pedestrian and bicycle facilities The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov12Proposed Roadway•Narrow vehicle lanes – slow traffic•On street bike lanes – concrete•8-ft to 12-ft Shared Use Path•6-ft Sidewalk – south end The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov13Proposed Roadway•Roundabout at Interlachen / Blake Intersection•Continue with existing parking restrictions•No upgrades to street lighting, except at roundabout The CITYofEDINAProposed Roadwaywww.EdinaMN.gov14 The CITYofEDINAProposed Roadwaywww.EdinaMN.gov15•Pedestrian Improvements•Twin Loops•Sheet Piling•Creates Space•Supports Road•Protects Road•Limits Erosion The CITYofEDINAProposed Roadway•Phasing Recommended•Extensive permitting process•CenterPoint Energy Beltline Projectwww.EdinaMN.gov16https://reganindustrial.com/ The CITYofEDINAExisting Right-of-Way Conditions•Landscaping features•Trees – Concern of Residentswww.EdinaMN.gov17•Irrigation systems & pet fences The CITYofEDINAExisting Right-of-Way Conditions•Easements – need at roundabout•MSA Variance – 20 & 25 mph curve in lieu of 30 mph (Dec. 16)•Edina Entrance Sign Similar to 66thand YorkWest side of Blake just north of Sprucewww.EdinaMN.gov18 The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov19Item Subtotal Total Funding SourceRoadway $ 9,097,000 MSAAssessments $ 272,000 AssessmentsSidewalks $ 497,000 MSA / PACSSanitary Sewer $ 233,200 City Utility FundsWatermain $ 1,050,000 City Utility FundsStorm Sewer $ 1,003,200 MSA / City Utility FundsTotal Project: $ 12,152,400•Engineering, clerical and finance costs, contingency includedEstimated Project Costs The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov20•Assigned to benefitting properties of public improvements per State Statute 429•Cover portion of roadway costs•- Roadway and driveway removals•-Gravel base•-Asphalt pavement•- Restoration – landscaping, seeding, etc.•- Indirect Costs – engineering, finance, soil investigations, mailingsSpecial Assessments The CITYofEDINAwww.EdinaMN.gov21•58 properties (38.98 REUs)•- 1 REU per single-family home•- previously assessed properties•- 0.5 REU for corner properties•Subtract subcut and retaining walls•Assess 14.7% of the remaining costs•$272,860 / 38.98 REUs = $7,000 per REUEstimated Assessments The CITYofEDINA•Final assessment amount will be set one year after project completion (Fall 2023)•- Pay entire amount upon receiving bill to avoid future interest charges•- Pay 25%; balance rolls to property taxes over 15 years•- Roll entire amount to property taxes over 15 years•- Defer payment if 65 years of age or older and meet specific income requirementswww.EdinaMN.gov22-CAssessment Payment Options The CITYofEDINAProject Schedulewww.EdinaMN.gov23Neighborhood Open House (all 2021/2022 projects) September 26, 2019 Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation (all 2022 and Future projects) March 11, 2021 Neighborhood Informational Video Presentation (all 2022 projects) October 2021 ETC Engineering Study Review October 28, 2021 Receive Engineering Study December 13, 2021 Open Public Improvement Hearing December 13, 2021 Close Public Improvement Hearing December 21, 2021 Public Improvement Hearing Council Decision December 21, 2021 Bid Opening March/April 2022 Award Contract/Begin Construction Spring 2022 Complete Construction Fall 2022 Final Assessment Hearing October 2023 The CITYofEDINARecommendationwww.EdinaMN.gov24•Staff believes this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure•Motion to close public hearing at noon on Weds, Dec. 15 and continue action to the Dec. 21 City Council Meeting. The CITYofEDINAQuestions? www.EdinaMN.gov25Thanks for your time! The CITYofEDINABlake Road Roadway ReconstructionBA-463Public Hearing Follow-UpDecember 21, 2021 The CITYofEDINA•Live Public Hearing Dec. 136 comments•Better Together Edina until Dec. 1512 comments•Variety of Options to Participate•Comments SummaryProtect the mature treesMinimizing construction impactsReduce the width of the 8’ shared use pathChange the shared use path material from asphalt to concrete2Public Engagement Summarywww.EdinaMN.gov The CITYofEDINARetaining Wall Optionswww.EdinaMN.gov3•Sheet Pile – allowed per MSA standards•Cast-in-Place – allowed per MSA standards•Solder Pile Wall – allowed per MSA standards•Prefabricated Modular Block Wall – NOT ALLOWED•Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Wall – NOT ALLOWED•Soil Nail Wall – NOT ALLOWED•Gabion / Reinforced Soil Slope Wall – NOT ALLOWED The CITYofEDINARetaining Wall Options –Steel Sheet Pilewww.EdinaMN.gov4•Estimated Project Cost - $3.3M The CITYofEDINARetaining Wall Options –Cast-in-Place Concretewww.EdinaMN.gov5•Estimated Cost = $7.14M The CITYofEDINARetaining Wall Options –Soldier Pile Wallwww.EdinaMN.gov6•Estimated Project Cost - $6M The CITYofEDINARoundabout –West 70thStreet & Valley View Roadwww.EdinaMN.gov7 The CITYofEDINARoundabout –Tracy Avenue & Valley View Roadwww.EdinaMN.gov8 The CITYofEDINARoundabout –Valley View Road & Braemar Boulevardwww.EdinaMN.gov9 The CITYofEDINAIntersection Analysiswww.EdinaMN.gov10•Existing Intersection – 1 stop sign on south legLeft Through Right Left Through RightNB51 (F)0 (A)38 (E)99 (F)0 (A)74 (F)WB7 (A) 5 (A) 0 (A) 12 (B) 9 (A) 0 (A)EB0 (A) 2 (A) 2 (A) 0 (A) 4 (A) 3 (A)* Delay measured in seconds per vehicleIntersectionControlLocation ApproachIntersectionDelay* (LOS)IntersectionDelay* (LOS)PM PeakMovement Delay* (LOS)AM PeakMovement Delay* (LOS)Thru‐StopBlake Rd & Interlachen Blvd 13 (B) 23 (C) The CITYofEDINAIntersection Analysiswww.EdinaMN.gov11•All-way stop (2041) The CITYofEDINAIntersection Analysiswww.EdinaMN.gov12•Traffic Signal (2041)Left Through Right Left Through RightNB11 (B) 0 (A) 5 (A) 12 (B) 0 (A) 6 (A)WB9 (A) 7 (A) 0 (A) 17 (B) 10 (B) 0 (A)EB0 (A) 11 (B) 4 (A) 0 (A) 17 (B) 7 (A)SignalizedBlake Rd & Interlachen Blvd 8 (A) 12 (B)IntersectionControlLocation ApproachIntersectionDelay* (LOS)IntersectionDelay* (LOS)PM PeakMovement Delay* (LOS)AM PeakMovement Delay* (LOS)* Delay measured in seconds per vehicle The CITYofEDINAIntersection Analysiswww.EdinaMN.gov13•Roundabout (2041)NB4 (A) 7 (A)WB8 (A) 5 (A)EB3 (A) 5 (A)* Delay measured in seconds per vehicleApproachDelay* (LOS)IntersectionDelay* (LOS)RoundaboutBlake Rd & Interlachen Blvd5 (A)5 (A)Intersection PM PeakControlLocation ApproachAM PeakApproachDelay* (LOS)IntersectionDelay* (LOS) The CITYofEDINAIntersection Analysiswww.EdinaMN.gov14 The CITYofEDINAIntersection Analysiswww.EdinaMN.gov15Recommend Roundabout•Uses less space compared to traffic signal (need more easements)•Less expense compared to traffic signal•Traffic calming with longer, curvilinear splitter islands•Narrower lanes•Roundabout creates pedestrian refuge islands•Pedestrian's only need to cross one direction of traffic at a time The CITYofEDINARecommendation Conditionswww.EdinaMN.gov16•Approve Roundabout•Approve Steel Sheet Pile Retaining Wall•Approve 8-feet wide Shared Use Path (Life Cycle Decision)Concrete or Asphalt•Approve 5-ft bike lanes instead of 6-ft on street bike lanes•Staff will continue to work with residents to protect trees•If needed based on City Forester option about tree health, would consider narrowing shared use path. The CITYofEDINARecommendationwww.EdinaMN.gov17•Staff believes this project is feasible, cost effective and necessary to improve the public infrastructure•Shared Use Path•- Requires a minimum of 3 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass •Approve Resolution No. 2021-122•-Authorize Blake Road Roadway Reconstruction (Improvement No. BA-463)•- Projects with special assessments requires a minimum of 4 out of 5 Council votes in favor to pass for staff-initiated projects Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: X.A. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Minutes From:Perry Vetter, Parks & Recreation Director Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: Parks & Recreation Commission Oct. 12, 2021 Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Information only. INTRODUCTION: Receive minutes of the Parks & Recreation Commission from Oct. 12, 2021. ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes: Parks & Recreation Commission Oct. 12, 2021 Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: 12/14/2021 Minutes City of Edina, Minnesota Edina Parks & Recreation Commission Braemar Golf Course October 12, 2021 7:00 p.m. I. Call to Order Chair Ites called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. II. Roll Call Answering roll call were Commissioners Doscotch, Haas, Ites, McAwley, Miller, Nelson and Student Commissioner Jha Commissioner Willette arrived at 7:09 p.m. Absent: Commissioners Good, Strother and Student Commissioner Presthus. Staff present: Staff Liaison Perry Vetter, Assistant Director Parks & Natural Resources Tom Swenson, Assistant Director Recreation & Facilities Tracy Petersen, Edinborough Park and Edina Aquatic Center General Manager Patty McGrath, Economic Development Manager Bill Neuendorf and Administrative Coordinator Janet Canton III. Approval of Meeting Agenda Motion made by McAwley to approve the meeting agenda. Motion seconded by Nelson. Motion carried. IV. Approval of Meeting Minutes Motion made by Nelson to approve the Sept. 14, 2021minutes. Motion seconded by Doscotch. Motion carried. V. Community Comment None VI. Reports/Recommendations A. Edina Aquatic Center Update General Manager McGrath gave an update on the 2021 Aquatic Center season. She noted revenue in concession sales exceeded prior years. Weather, with the exception of the air quality due to wildfires, was favorable for most of the summer which added to the consistency to the numbers. There were a lot of first-time visitors. She reviewed the incidents that happened at the center. Commissioners asked questions of General Manager McGrath regarding rescue incidents and attendance. B. Eden/Willson TIF District: Grange Hall and Cahill School in Tupa Park Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: 12/14/2021 Bill Neuendorf, Economic Development Manager, gave an introduction of the proposed Eden/Willson TIF District and noted that Grange Hall and Cahill School in Tupa Park are included within the proposed boundaries. Neuendorf explained that City staff is reaching out to the County and School District, Planning Commission as well as the general public regarding the proposed TIF District. Staff has also met with the Heritage Preservation Commission and the Edina Historical Society to solicit their input regarding the potential for impact to the historic buildings. Neuendorf noted that there have been multiple studies over the years to relocate these historic structures to a more appropriate site. He noted that a lack of funding was one of the key reasons why no action has been taken regarding these studies. If the TIF District is approved, Neuendorf indicated that funding may be available to relocate these historic buildings and redevelop the Tupa Park site for private development, if that is determined to be the preferred direction. The commissioners asked questions of Neuendorf and gave input on the potential relocation of the historic buildings and potential redevelopment of the park. Commissioners indicated mixed opinions about the best location for the historic buildings and inquired whether any funds from selling the land could be earmarked for improvements to other parks. Commissioners indicated a concern with giving up park space because one of the parks goals is to keep park space. Another concern is with the ongoing deferred maintenance of the existing buildings and existing park as well as the lack of crosswalks and pedestrian crossings near the park. Commissioners did not think it would be a very desirable location for a public park if it would be decided to relocate the historic buildings. There was discussion about a possible round-about near the park and commissioners were in favor of a round-about if needed. Neuendorf thanked the Commission for the input and questions presented to him. C. 2021 Work Plan Updates Updates were given on the following initiatives. Initiative #1 – Review and comment on proposed plan to identify barriers for participation and reach communities of color through different modes and feedback. Staff Liaison Vetter indicated initial questions and feedback were received. Initiative #2 – Create presentation to share information about Parks & Recreation facilities, services, and systems with up to six community groups. No new information. Initiative #3 – Report and provide recommendations on alternative funding sources for park related improvements including parks, facilities, and enterprise upgrades. No new updates past the bonding proposal for Braemar Ice Arena. Initiative #4 Study and report on options to categorize underutilized park amenities/areas and identify park amenity needs. Commissioner Doscotch updated the commission on rank categorization Draft Minutes☐ Approved Minutes☒ Approved Date: 12/14/2021 factors on Tactic 2.2.1 that might impact or help determine underutilized amenities versus needs. An updated spreadsheet was sent out to the work group. Initiative #5 – Study and report evaluating options for determining benchmarks (park amenities, operations, service areas) the commission started studying in 2020. No updates. VII. Chair and Member Comments A. 2022 Submitted Work Plan Commissioner Ites gave an update on 2022 Work Plan from the work session with the City Council. VIII. Staff Comments Staff Liaison Vetter updated the commission on the following items: Braemar Arena Sports Dome update Buckthorn Dump Upcoming festivals and events IX. Adjournment Motion made by Nelson to adjourn the Oct. 12, 2021 meeting at 8:22 p.m. Motion seconded by Willette. Motion carried. Date: December 21, 2021 Agenda Item #: X.B. To:Mayor and City Council Item Type: Minutes From:Grace Hancock, Sustainability Manager Item Activity: Subject:Minutes: Energy & Environment Commission November 18, 2021 Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: Information only. INTRODUCTION: Receive the attached minutes of the Energy and Environment Commission for November 18, 2021. ATTACHMENTS: Description Minutes: Energy & Environment Commission, Nov. 18, 2021 Agenda Energy and Environment Commission City Of Edina, Minnesota Braemar Golf Course - Hoyt & Blanchard Room Braemar Golf Course: 6364 John Harris Dr, Edina, MN 55439. Hoyt and Blanchard Room is downstairs from the main floor. Thursday, November 18, 2021 7:00 PM I.Call To Order Vice Chair Horan called the meeting to order at 7:04 PM II.Roll Call Answering roll call were Vice Chair Horan, Commissioners Dakane, Lanzas, Lukens, Tessman, Student Commissioners Rawat and Shumway Absent were Chair Martinez, Commissioners Hovanec and Haugen III.Approval Of Meeting Agenda Meeting Agenda was approved Motion by Ukasha Dakane to approve meeting agenda. Seconded by Bayardo Lanzas. Motion Carried. IV.Approval Of Meeting Minutes Meeting Minutes were approved Motion by Tom Tessman to approve meeting minutes. Seconded by Cory Lukens. Motion Carried. A.Minutes: Energy and Environment Commission October 14, 2021 V.Community Comment No Community Comment was received During "Community Comment," the Board/Commission will invite residents to share relevant issues or concerns. Individuals must limit their comments to three minutes. The Chair may limit the number of speakers on the same issue in the interest of time and topic. Generally speaking, items that are elsewhere on tonight's agenda may not be addressed during Community Comment. Individuals should not expect the Chair or Board/Commission Members to respond to their comments tonight. Instead, the Board/Commission might refer the matter to staff for consideration at a future meeting. VI.Reports/Recommendations A.2021 WP Initiative #2: To-Go Packaging EEC received an update on this initiative. Commissioners requested that the City post on social media to promote the passage of the To-Go Packaging Ordinance. B.2021 WP Initiative #5: Green Business Recognition Program EEC received an update on this initiative. VII.Chair And Member Comments EEC agreed to request a presentation from the Stop Over Salting community group at their December meeting. Commissioners requested a presentation on tree management from the City Forester in 2022. Commissioners asked about alternatives to potable water used to water lawns and golf courses in Edina. VIII.Staff Comments Staff reported that the Sustainable Buildings Policy was approved by City Council at their November 16th meeting, related to EEC's work plan item #4 Staff reported that Commission re-appointments and recruitments are underway for adult commissioners Staff reported that City Council will approve the Commission's work plan at their December 7th regular meeting Staff reported that City Council will receive the Climate Action Plan and the ETC's Organized Trash Collection report at their December 7th regular meeting, related to EEC's work plan items #1 and 7 IX.Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 7:31pm. Motion by Cory Lukens to adjourn. Seconded by Bayardo Lanzas. 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: December 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 Information CITY OF EDINA 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 www.edinamn.gov ACTION REQUESTED: None; information only. INTRODUCTION: Date Time Meeting/Event Location Tues, Dec 21 5:30 p.m.Legislative Agenda Community Room 7:00 p.m.City Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers Fri, Dec 24 Christmas observed – City Hall closed Fri, Dec 31 New Year’s observed – City Hall closed Tues, Jan 4 5:30 p.m.Joint Session with Legislative Delegation Community Room 7:00 p.m.City Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers Thurs, Jan 6 7:30 a.m.Housing & Redevelopment Authority Council Chambers Mon, Jan 17 Martin Luther King Jr. Day – City Hall Closed Wed, Jan 19 5:30 p.m.TBD Community Room 7:00 p.m.City Council Regular Meeting Council Chambers