The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1983-09-19_COUNCIL MEETINGAGENDA EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING SEPTEMBER 19, 1983 ROLLCALL EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION - Gilbert Peterson MINUTES of Regular Council Meeting of September 12, 1983, approved as submitted or corrected by motion of , seconded by I. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Analysis of Assessment by City Manager. Spectators heard. Action of Council by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. 1. Watermain Improvement No. WM -346 - Gleason Ct. from Gleason Rd. to Vernon Ct. 2. Grading Improvement No. C -137 - Gleason Ct. in Gleason Ct. Addn. 3. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -361 - Gleason Ct. in Gleason Ct. Addn. 4. Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S -169 - Gleason Ct. in Gleason Ct. Addn. 5. Watermain Improvement No. WM -347 - Nob Hill Rd. in Oak Ridge of Edina Addn. 6. Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S -170 - Nob Hill Dr. & Easement Line to Pond in Oak Ridge of Edina 7. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -362 - Easement Line from Danen's Dr. to Nob Hill Dr. and Nob Hill Dr. in Oak Ridge of Edina 8. Grading Improvement No. C -138 - Nob Hill Dr. in Oak Ridge of Edina Addn. 9. Watermain Improvement No. WM -348 - Parklawn Av. from York Av. to 668 ft. West 10. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -363 - Parklawn Av. from 150 ft. West of York Av. to 420 ft. West of York Avenue 11. Street Lighting Improvement No. L -22 - Parklawn Av. from York Av. to 670 ft. West 12. Grading Improvement No. C -139 - Parklawn Av. from York Av. to 668 ft. West 13. Street Improvement No. BA -253 - Parklawn Av. from York Av. to 668 ft. West 14. Grading and Graveling Improvement No. C -136 - W. Highwood Dr. in Emerald Woods Addn. 15. Street Improvement No. BA -252 - W. Highwood Dr. in Emerald Woods Addn. 16. Street Improvement No. BA -248 - Grove St. from Johnson Dr. to MN &S Railroad 17. Street Improvement-No. BA -250 - Dewey Hill Rd. from Cahill Rd. Westerly to Delaney Blvd. 18. Street Improvement No. BA -251 - Fox Meadow Lane and Evanswood Lane in Oak Ponds of Interlachen Addn. 19. Street Improvement No. BA -255 - Cahill Rd. from Amundson Av. to 300 ft + South 20. Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S. -171 - West 52nd Street from Halifax Av. to 377 ft. East 21. Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -365 - Sewer extension for 6610 and 6620 Normandale Rd. 22. Street Lighting Improvement No. L -23 - Knoll Dr. from Schaefer Rd. to Parkwood Rd. 23. Parking Lot Improvement No. P -13 - Edina Community Center at Southview Lane and Highway 100 24. Sidewalk Improvement No. S -31 - Colonial Way from Olinger Blvd. to 206 ft. West of the East line of Lot 1, Blk 2, Colonial Church of Edina First Addition (West side only) 25. Aquatic Weed Improvement No. AQ -83 - Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond Area 26. Maintanance Improvement No. M -83 - 50th Street and France Av. Business Dist. 27. Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC -6 _ 4362 Vernon Avenue 28. Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC -7 - 6932 Valley View Road 29. Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC -8 - 4003 Sunnyside Road II. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT Presentation by City Engineer. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Watermain Extension Improvement No. P -WM -351 5400, 5406 and 5.408 York Avenue So. - 100% Petition by Owner Edina City Council Agenda September 19, 1983 Page Two III. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planning Department. Spectators heard. First Reading of Zoning Ordinance requires offering of Ordinance only. 4/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass Second Reading or if Second Reading should be waived. Lot Divisions, Flood Plain Permits, Plats, Appeals from Administrative or Board of Appeals and Ad -. justments decisions require action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote to pass. A. Johnson Building Company - Property generally described as Lots 1 and 2, Auditors Subdivision 172 1. Second Reading - Ordinance No. 811 -A171 R -1 Single Family Residence District to PRD -2 Planned Residence District 2. Preliminary Plat Approval - Edina Mills (4600 France Avenue) B. Braemar Associates /Klodt Construction Company - Overall Development Plan Amendment for PRD -3 Planned Residential District - Generally located west of Cahill Road and north of West 78th Street C. Johnson Building Company - Rezoning Request from C -2 Commercial District to PRD -5 Planned Residential District - 5212 Vernon Avenue D. Preliminary Plat Approval 1. Peterson Replat of Lot 3, Block 1, Indian Hills - Generally located north of Indian Hills Road and West of Dakota Trail E. Rezoning Request from PID Planned Industrial District to PC -2, Planned Commercial District and Preliminary Plat Approval of Glaser's Addition to Edina - Generally located north of Radisson Hotel and west of Highway 100 IV. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS V. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS '1 A. Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of 9/13/83 B. 1984 Budget Hearing Dates C. Bredesen Park Development D. Staff /Council Governmental Liaison Assignments E. Release of Protective Covenants - Gleason Court F. Study Committee /Alternative Methods of Delivering Services G. Special Concerns of Mayor and Council H. Post Agenda and Managers Miscellaneous Items VI. ORDINANCES A. Second Reading 1. Ordinance No. 1120 -A2 - Amending the Cable Television Franchise Ordinance to Permit Change of Subscriber Rates VII. FINANCE A. Claims Paid: Motion of , seconded by , for payment of the following Claims as per Pre -List: General'Fund $113,560.89, Park Fund $3,113.68, Art Fund $610.45, Swimming Pool $1,492.27, Golf Course $15,503.79, Recreation $6,803.89, Gun Range $366.56, Water $35,589.36, Sewer Rental $2,522.96, Liquor Fund $79,089.96, Construction $211,607.12, Total $470,260.93; and for Confirmation of the following claims: General Fund $50,313.19, Gun Range $398.00, Liquor Fund $207,495.81, Total $258,207.00 !~ f c� f'm. lt...epA`4.3 W r of DINA 4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 612 - 927 -8861 RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The.City has given notice of hearings as required by law on the proposed assess- ment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to, and at such hearings held on September 19, 1983, has considered all oral and written objections presented against the levy of such assessments. 2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the City Clerk for the following improvements: Watermain Improvements Nos. WM -347, WM -347 and WM -348 Sanitary Sewer Improvements Nos. SS -361, SS -362, SS -363 and SS -365 Storm Sewer Improvement Nos. ST.S -169, ST.S -170 and ST.S -171 Grading Improvement Nos. C -137, C -137, C -138 and C -139 -- Street Improvements Nos. BA -248, BA -250, BA -251, BA -252, BA -253 and BA -255 Street Lighting Improvement Nos. L -22 and L -23 Sidewalk Improvement No. S -31 Parking Improvement No. P -13 Maintenance Improvement No. M -83 Aquatic Weed Improvement No. AQ -83 Sanitary Sewer House Connections Nos. HC -6, HC -7 and HC -8 does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvements upon the lot, tract or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said assessments are herebv adopted and confirmed -as the proper assessments on account of said respective improvements to be spread against the benefited lots, parcels and tracts of land described therein. 3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first of said installments, together with interest at a rate of 711% per annum for all Sanitary Sewer House Connections and.1111% per annum for all remaining improvements, on the entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1984, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1984. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: Name of Improvement ` WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -346 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -137 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -361 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -169 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -347 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -170 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -362 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -138 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -348 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -363 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -22 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -139 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -253 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -136 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -252 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -248 Number of Installments 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 3 Years 10,Years 10 Years r STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -250 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -251 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -255 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -171 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -365 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -23 PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT NO. P -13 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S -31 AQUATIC WEED IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ -83 MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -83 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -6 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -7 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -8 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 1 Year 1 Year 6 Years 6 Years 6 Years 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a copy of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessments with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution. 5. The Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may be payable by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the owner of any right -of -way as. required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subdivision 4, and if any such assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer shall arrange—for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said section. ADOPTED this 19th day of September, 1983. 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 September 19, 1983, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 10th day of October, 1983. '\ -2- -Ax",� _;�- o City Clerk u l MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL SEPTEMBER 19, 1983 Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Mayor Courtney. MINUTES of the Regular Council Meeting of September 12, 1983, were approved as submitted by motion of Member Schmidt, seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDUCTED ON NUMEROUS ASSESSMENTS. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Due notice having been given, public hearings were conducted and action taken as herein- after recorded on the following proposed assessments: 1. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -346 Location: Gleason Court from Gleason Rd to Vernon Court 2. GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -137 Location: Gleason Court-in Gleason.Court Addition 3. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -361 Location: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition 4. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -169 Location: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition Improvements listed under 1, 2, 3 and 4 above affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Watermain Improvement No. WM -346 showing total construction cost of $42,357.28, proposed to be assessed against 14 assessable lots at $3,025.52 each, against esti- mated assessment of $3,576.66 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improve- ment No. C -137 was given as total construction cost of $29,684.20, proposed to be assessed against 14 assessable lots at $2,120.30 each, against estimated assessment of $2,095.56 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -361 was given as total construction cost of $27,905.64, proposed to be assessed against.14 assessable lots at $1,993.26 each, against estimated assessment of $2,839.54 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S -169, was given as total construction cost of.$20,722.66, proposed to be assessed against 14 assessable lots at $1,480.19 each, against estimated assessment of $1,596.89 per lot. Mr. Hoffman advised that the improvements were constructed pursuant to Deve- loper's Agreement. No objections were heard and no written objections to the pro- posed assessments were received prior hereto. (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 5. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -347 Location: Nob Hill Road in Oak Ridge of Edina Addition 6. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -170 Location: Nob Hill Drive and easement line to pond in Oak Ridge of Edina 7. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -362 Location: Easement line from Danen's Drive to Nob Hill Drive in Oak Ridge of Edina 8. GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -138 Location: Nob Hill Drive in Oak Ridge of Edina Addition Improvements listed under 5, 6, 7 and 8 above affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Watermain Improvement No. WM -347 showing total construction cost of $18,948.20, proposed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $1,894.82 each, against estimated assessment of $1,283.48 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S -170 was given as total construction cost of $15,487.30, pro- posed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $1,548.73 each, against estimated assessment of $1,543.16 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improve- ment No. SS -362 was given as total construction cost of $57,064.40, proposed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $5,706.44 each, against estimated assessment of $5,725.36 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improvement No. C -138 was given as total construction cost of $12,288.69, proposed to be assessed against 9 assessable lots at $1,365.41 each, against estimated assessment of $1,397.46 per lot. Mr. Hoffman stated that the improvements were constructed pursuant to Deve- loper's Agreement. No objections were'heard and no written objections to the pro- posed assessments were received prior hereto. (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 9. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -348 Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West 10. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -363 Location: Parklawn Avenue from 150 feet West of York Avenue to 420 feet West of York Avenue 11. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -22 Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 670 feet West 12. GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -139 Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West 9/19/83 13. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -253 Location: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West Improvements listed under 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Watermain Improvement No. WM -348 showing total construction cost of $20,511.04, proposed to be assessed against 2 assessable lots at $10,255.52 each, against esti- mated assessment of $9,452.79 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -363 was given as total construction cost of $10,653.68, proposed to be assessed against 2 assessable lots at $5,326.84 each, against estimated assess- ment of $4,817.98 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Street Lighting Improvement No. L -22 was given as total construction cost of $9,420.27, proposed to be assessed against 842.6 assessable feet at $11.18 per foot against estimated assessment of $13.34 per foot. Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improvement No. C -139 was given as total construction cost of $14,821.33, proposed to be assessed against 842.6 assessable feet at $17.59 per foot against estimated assessment of $12.56 per foot. Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA -253 was given as total construc- tion cost of $55,653.73, proposed to be assessed against 842.6 assessable feet at $66.05 per foot against estimated assessment of $118.49 per foot. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessments were received prior hereto. (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 14. GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -136 Location: West Highwood Drive in Emerald Woods Addition 15. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -252 Location: West Highwood Drive in Emerald Woods Addition Improvements listed under 14 and 15 affecting the same properties, public hearing was conducted concurrently. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Grading Improvement No. C -136 showing total construction cost of $10,238.08, proposed to be assessed against 8 assessable lots at $1,279.76 each,::.against : estimated_assessment -of $1,520.6.5 per lot. Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA -252 was given as total construction cost of $22,394.88, proposed to be assessed against 8 assessable lots at $2,799.36 each, against estimated assessment of $2,215.04 per lot. Mr. Hoff- man advised that the grading improvement was constructed pursuant to Developer's Agreement. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assess- ments were received prior hereto. (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 16. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -248 Location: Grove Street from Johnson Drive to MN &S Railaroad Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA -248 showing total construction cost of $76,946.39, proposed to be assessed against 1,761.19 assess- able feet at $43.69 per foot against estimated assessment of $37.69 per foot. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were- received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 17. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -250 Location: Dewey Hill Road from Cahill Road Westerly to Delaney Boulevard Mr.. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA -250 showing total construction cost of $12,024.32: proposed to be assessed against 364.4 assess- able feet at $33.00 per foot against estimated assessment of $33.00 per foot. Mr. Hoffman explained that State Aid funds of $152,217.40 were allocated to this project. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assess- ments were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 18. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO.-BA-251 Location: Fox Meadow Lane and Evanswood Lane in Oak Ponds of Interlachen Addn. Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA -251 showing total construction cost of $38,181.00, proposed to be assessed against 11 assessable lots at $3,471.00 each, against estimated assessment of $4,076.23 per lot. No object- ions were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 19. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -255 Location: Cahill Road from Amundson Avenue to 300 feet + South Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Improvement No. BA -255 showing total construction cost of $46,443.38, proposed to be assessed against 580.76 assess- able feet at $79.97 per foot against estimated assessment of $73.83 per foot. Mr. Hoff- man advised that a letter had been received from Henry Hyatt, of Crossroads Develop- ment Corporation, regarding the proposed assessment against the Oak Glen property in which he requested, that the special assessment be paid from Community Development funds inasmuch as the Oak Glen project is a low and moderate income rental development. The special assessment would result in a financial burden to the residents of Oak Glen since it must eventually be passed to the residents in the form of higher rents. It was suggested by Mr. Hoffman that the matter be continued to the next meeting so that staff could review the cost figures for this construction project. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Bredesen, continuing the hearing until October 3, 1983, so that the cost figures could be reviewed. 20. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -171 Location: West 52nd Street from'Halifax Avenue to 377 feet east 9/19/83 Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S -171, showing total construction cost of $38,151.75, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot at $32,622.00 against estimated assessment of $51,752.33 minus $7,500.00 (City's share for street portion of the project). No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment was received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 21. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -365 Location: Sewer extension for 6610 and 6620 Normandale Road Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS -365 showing total construction cost of $12,327.70, proposed to be assessed against two assessable lots at $6,163.85 each, against estimated assessment of $6,048.24 per lot. Mr. Hoffman advised that the property owners had petitioned for construc- tion of the project.' No objections were heard and no written objections to the pro- posed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 22. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -23 Location: Knoll Drive from Schaefer Road to Parkwood Road Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street Lighting Improvement No. L -23, showing total construction cost of $1,898.80, proposed to be assessed against 10 assessable lots at $189.88 each, against estimated assessment of $240.09 per lot. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 23. PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT NO. P -13 Location: Edina Community Center at South View Lane and Highway 100 Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Parking Lot Improvement No. P -13, showing total construction cost of $110,031.54, proposed to be assessed against the Edina School District No. 273 at $84,838.55, with the City's participation at $25,192.99. Mr. Hoffman explained that the City's share consisted of engineer- ing, clerical and interest costs. In response to a question from the audience as to why the City was participating in the cost of the project, Member Turner recalled that when this project was proposed and the City was asked to participate, the Human Relations Commission (HRC) was asked to look at the Community Center's uses. A study made by the HRC had determined that the facility was being used by a broad range of people from the community in addition to the tenants and also, that a number of the City's Park and Recreation programs.are held.there. This was the.rationale for the City's participation in the project. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 24. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S -31 Location: Colonial Way from Olinger Blvd to 206 feet West of the East line of Lot 1, Block 2, Colonial Church of Edina First Addition. (West side only.) Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sidewalk Improvement No. S -31 showing total construction cost of $21,576.90, proposed to be assessed against one lot at $21,576.90 against estimated assessment of $21,583.99. Mr. Hoffman advised that this project was petitioned for by Colonial Church. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 25. AQUATIC WEED IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ -83 Location: Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond Area Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Aquatic Weed Improvement No. AQ =83,, showing total construction cost of $6,749.94, proposed to be assessed against 63 assessable lots at $107.14 per lot against estimated assessment of $109.38 per lot. Mr. Hoffman presented a graphic outlining the- special assessment district-which showed the benefitted properties. Mr. Hughes advised that he had received a letter from Rodney D. Hardy, 4506 Browndale Avenue, requesting that the City consider providing more permanent access points for the weed removal to avoid cutting up Browndale Park. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 26. MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -83 Location: 50th Street and France Avenue Business District Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Maintenance Improvement No. M -83, showing total assessment cost of $31,504.27, proposed to be assessed against 289,030 assessable square feet at $0.109 per square foot against estimated assess- ment of $0.10 per square foot. No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied.by Resolution later in Minutes.) 27. SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -6 Location: 4362 Vernon Avenue South Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC -6 showing total assessable cost at $2,600.00, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot. No objections were heard and none had been received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 9/19/83 28. SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -7 Location: 6932 Valley View Road Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC -7 showing total assessable cost at $2,355.30, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot. No objections were heard and none had been received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) 29. SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -8 Location: 4003 Sunnyside Road Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Sanitary Sewer House Connection No. HC -8 showing total assessable cost at $4,074.30, proposed to be assessed against one assessable lot. No objections were heard and none had been received prior -- hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.) Following presentation of Analysis of Assessments, Member Schmidt offered the fol- lowing resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City has given notice of hearings as required by law on the proposed assess- ment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to, and at such hearings held on September 19, 1983, has considered all oral and written objections presented against the levy of such assessments. 2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the City Clerk for the following improvements: Watermain Improvements Nos. WM -347, WM -347 and WM -348 Sanitary Sewer Improvements Nos. SS -361, SS -362, SS -363 and SS -365 Storm Sewer Improvement Nos. ST.S -169, ST.S -170 and ST.S -171 Grading Improvement Nos. C -137, C -137, C -138 and C -139 Street Improvements Nos. BA -248, BA -250, BA -251, BA -252, BA7253 and BA -255 Street Lighting Improvement Nos. L -22 and L -23 Sidewalk Improvement No. S -31 Parking Improvement No. P -13 Maintenance Improvement No. M -83 Aquatic Weed Improvement No. AQ -83 Sanitary Sewer House Connections Nos. HC -6, HC -7 and HC -8 does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvements upon the lot, tract or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said assessments are herebv adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments on account of said respective improvements to be spread against the benefited lots, parcels and tracts of land described therein. 3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first of said installments, together with interest at a rate of 7z% per annum for all Sanitary Sewer House Connections and 1111% per annum for all remaining improvements, on the entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1984, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1984. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: Name of Improvement WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -346 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -137 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -361 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -169 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -347 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -170 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -362 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -138 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -348 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -363 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -22, GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -139 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -253 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -136 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -252 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -248 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -250 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -251 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -255 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -171 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -365 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -23 PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT NO. P -13 SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 -31 AQUATIC WEED IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ -83 MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -83 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -6 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -7 SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -8 Number of Installments 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 3 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 1 Year 1 Year 6 Years 6 Years 6 Years 9/19/83 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a copy of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessments with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution. 5. The Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may be payable by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the owner of any right -of -way as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subdivision 4, and if any such assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer shall arrange for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said section. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. A 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 September 19, 1983, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 10th day of October, 1983. /Il City Clerk RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. The City has given notice of hearings as required by law on the proposed assess- ment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to, and at such hearings held on September 19, 1983, has considered all oral and written objections presented against the levy of such assessments. 2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the City Clerk for the following improvements: Watermain Improvements Nos. WM -347, WM -347 and WM -348 Sanitary Sewer Improvements Nos. SS -361, SS -362, SS -363 and SS -365 Storm Sewer Improvement Nos. ST.S -169, ST.S -170 and ST.S -171 Grading Improvement Nos. C -137, C -137, C -138 and C -139 Street Improvements Nos. BA -248, BA -250, BA -251, BA -252, BA -253 and BA -255 Street Lighting Improvement Nos. L -22 and L -23 Sidewalk Improvement No. S -31 Parking Improvement No. P -13 Maintenance Improvement No. M -83 Aquatic Weed Improvement No. AQ -83 Sanitary Sewer House Connections Nos. HC -6, HC -7 and HC -8 does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvements upon the lot, tract or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said assessments are herebv adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments on account of said respective improvements to be spread against the benefited lots, parcels and tracts of land described therein. 3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first of said installments, together with interest at a rate of 7z7. per annum for all Sanitary Sewer House Connections and 1112% per annum for all remaining improvements, on the entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1984, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1984. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: Name of Improvement WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -346 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -137 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -361 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -169 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -347 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -170 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -362 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -138 WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -348 SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -363 STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -22 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -139 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -253 GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -136 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -252 STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -248 Number of Installments 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 3 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 10 Years 3 Years 10 Years 10 Years STREET IMPROVEMENT N0. BA -250 10 Years STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -251 10 Years STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -255 10 Years —' STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -171 10 Years SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -365 10 Years STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -23 10 Years PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT NO. P -13 10 Years SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S -31 10 Years AQUATIC WEED IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ -83 1 Year MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -83 1 Year SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -6 6 Years SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -7 6 Years SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -8 6 Years 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a copy of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessments with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution. 5. The Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may be payable by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the owner of any right -of -way as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subdivision 4, and if any such assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer shall arrange for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said section. ADOPTED this 19th day of September, Z988. 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 September 19, 1983, and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 10th day of October, 1983. City Clerk -2- ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT r; LEVY NO. 9007 COUNTY NO. %7 -346 FOR: WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. 346. LOCATION: Gleason Court from Gleason Road to Vernon Court. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation CONTRACT AMOUNT: 33,331.06 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL ll %: 3,666.42 $ 36,997.48 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 50.00 $ 37,047.48 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 11i% From: June 21, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 455 days at $11.67 per day $ 5,309.80 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 42,357.28 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 14 lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT.- $3,576.66 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $3,025.52 PER ASSESSABLE LOT' ASSESSABLE COST: $ 42,357.28 COUNTY CHARGE: 14 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 2.10 $ 42,359.38 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PA)9\BLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. 11 ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9010 COUNTY NO. C137 FOR: GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -137. LOCATION: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation CONTRACT M40UN`I': $ 23, 321.10 ENGIrMU NG AND CLERICAL 12% 2,798.53 $ ,26,119.63 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 1;n _nn .? Zn,iny.ns CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 11Zs From: July 19, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 426 days.at $8.25 per day 3,514.57 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 29,684.20 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 14 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,095.56 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,120.30'.PER ASSESSABLE LOT. ASSESSABLE COST: $ 29,684.20 COUNTY CHARGE: 14 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 2.10 $ 29, 686.30) TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRT YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT llzo OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. 0 ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9012 COUNTY NO. S361 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -361. LOCATION: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 21,557.53 ENGINEERING AMID CLERICAL 12 %: 2,586.90 $ 24,144.43 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: L4,I/V.43 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 1112% From: May 17, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 489 days at $7.62 per day. $ 3,726.21 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 27,905.64 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 14 lots. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,839.54 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,993.26 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 27,905.64 COUNTY CHARGE: 14 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 2.10 $ 27,907.74 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 113-2% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. in ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: STORM SEWER IMPROVIIMERT 110. ST.5 -169. LOCATION: Gleason Court in Gleason Court Addition. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation. CONTRACT AMOUNT: E[QG1 UDMUM AND CLERICAL 12%: PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 11�% From: June 21, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 455 days at $5.71 per day. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSABLE UNITS: 14 lots LEVY NO. 9014 COUNTY NO. X169 $ 16,151.49 1,938.18 $ 18,089.67 -? - Lb,1L4 . b / $. 2,597.99 $ 20,722.66 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,596.89 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,480.19 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 20,722.66 COUNTY CHARGE: 14 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 2.10 .? LU, /L4. /b TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR's INTEREST FIGURED AT 11-% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794. 0 /S— / 6, Qo ? ' 0 ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9008 COUNTY NO. M47 FOR: WATEPPAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. W4-347. LOCATION: Nob Hill Road in Oak Ridge or Edina Addition. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 14,887.18 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12% 1,785.26 $ 16,662.44 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES 35.00 $ 16,707.44 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ ll�% From: July 19, 1982 'Th: September 19, 1983 426 days at $5.26 per day. $ 2,240.76 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 18,948.20 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 10 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,283.48 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,894.82 PER'ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 18,948.20 COUNTY CAE: 10 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.50 $ 18, 949.70 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT ll,% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. 0 ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9015 COUNTY NO. X170 FOR: STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S -170. LOCATION: Nob Hill Drive and easement line to pond in Oak Ridge of Edina. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 12,161.20 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 1 459 34 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: $ 13,620.54 13,bbb.b4 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: July 19, 1982 Tb: September 19, 1983 426 days at $4.30 per day. $ 1,831.76 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 15,487.30 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 10 Lots. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,543.16 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT' - $1,548.73 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 15,487.30 COUNTY CHAFGE: 10 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.50 $ 15,488.80 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PAMUKE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S =PMT FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9013 COUNTY NO. S362 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -362. LOCATION: Easement line from Danen's Drive to Nob Hill Drive and Nob Hill Drive in Oak Ridge of Edina. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 45,258.83 ENGINEERING AMID CLERICAL ll o: 4 978 47 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: $ 50,237.30 75.00 $ 50,312.30 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: July 19, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 426 days at $15.85 per day $ 6,752.10 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 57,064.40 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 10 lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $5,725.36 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $5,706.44 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 57,064.40 COUN'T'Y CHARGE: 10 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.50 5/,Ub5.90 To BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S EIIEREST FIGURED AT ll -o OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9011 COUNTY NO. C -138 FOR: GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -138 LOCATION: Nob Hill Drive in Oak Ridge of Edina Addition. CONTRACTOR: Q.R.S. Corporation CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 9,513.32 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 14 %: 1,331.86 $10,845.18 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $10,880.18 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: August 16, 1982 Tb: September 19, 1983 399 days at $3.43 per day. $ 1,408.51 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,288.69 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 9 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,397.46 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1;365.41 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $12,288.69 COUNTY CHA M: 9 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.35 $11, 29U. M TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1986. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9016 COUNTY NO. W -348 FOR: WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM -348. LOCATION: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West. CONTRACTOR: G. L. Contracting Company CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 16,237.30 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12%: 1,948.48 $ 18,185.78 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $ 18,220.78 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 111% From: August 16, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 399 days at $5.74 per day. $ 2,290.26 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 20,511.04 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 2 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $ 9,452.79 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $10,255.52 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 20,511.04 COUNTY CHARGE: None (to be paid prior to certification) TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9017 COUNTY NO. 5 -363 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -363 LOCATION: Parklawn Avenue from 150 feet West of York Avenue to 420 feet West of York Avenue. CONTRACTOR: G. L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 1121% From: August 16, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 399 days at $2.98 per day. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . ASSESSABLE UNITS: 2 Lots $ 8,428.28 1,011.39 $ 9,439.67 25.00 $ 9,464.67 1,189.01 . . . . . . . . . . . $10,653.68 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $4,817.98 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $5,326.84 ASSESSABLE COST: $10,653.68 COUNTY CHARGE: None (to be paid prior to certification) TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 1121% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9026 COUNTY NO. L -22 FOR: STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-22. LOCATION: Parklawn Avenue from York Avenue to 670 feet West. CONTRACTOR: Bury S Carlson, Inc. (part of St. Imp. No. BA -253). CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 6,279.00 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: 627.90 $ 6,906.90 CLAIM NO. 200735 - Frey.Engineering: 1,520.00 $ 8,426.90 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 25.00 $ 8,451.90 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: September 20, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 365 days at $2.66 per day. $ 968,37 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 9,420.27 ASSESSABLE'UNITS: 842.6 ASSESSABLE FEET. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $13.34 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $11.18 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 9,420.27 COUNTY CHARGE: 2 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $ 9,421.27 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9025 COUNTY NO. C -139 FOR: GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -139. LOCATION: Parklawn.Avenue from York Avenue to 668 feet West. CONTRACTOR: G. L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 11,627.61 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 140: 1,627.87 S 13,255.48 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 1S,Z90.46 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ llZo From: September 20, 1982 -To: September -19, 1982 365 days at $4.19 per day. $ 1,530.85 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 14,821.33 ASSESSABLE UNITS - 842.6 ASSESSABLE FEET. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $12.56 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $17.59 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 14,821.33 COUNTY CHARGE: 2 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $ 14,822.33 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. ' FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT ]I-f'% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9023 COUNTY NO. B -253 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -253. LOCATION: Parklawn.Avenue from York Avenue to 688 feet West. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 51,614.20 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: 5 161.43 LESS COST OF STREET LIGHTING NO. L -22: PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 1112% From: September 20, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 365 days at $15.73 per day. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . ASSESSABLE UNITS: 842.6 ASSESSABLE FEET $ 56,775.63 6,906.go $ 49,868.73 50.00 $ 49,918.73 r $ 5,735.00 $ 55,653.73 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $118.49 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $ 66.05 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 55,653.73 COUNTY CHARGE: 2 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel. 1.00 $ 55,654.73 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -136 LOCATION: West Highwood Drive in Emerald Woods Addition. CONTRACTOR: Sandmark Construction, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 140: PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: LEVY NO. 9009 COUNTY NO. C -136 $ 7,513.53 1,051.89 $ 8,565.42 25.00 $ 8,590.42 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: January 18, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 608 days at $2.71 per day $ 1,647.66 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 10,238.08 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 8 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $1,520.65 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $1,279.76 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 10,238.08 COUNTY CHARGE:. 8 Parcels @ $0.15 each parcel 1.20 $ 10,239.28 TO BE SPREAD OVER 3 YEARS-- 1984 THRU 1986 FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9022 COUNTY NO. B -252 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -252. LOCATION: West Highwood Drive in Emerald Woods Addition. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 17,457.63 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 2,094.91 $ 19,552.54 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 'AS_on CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 111% From: June 21, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 455 days at $6.17 per day. 2,807.34 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 22,394.88 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 8 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $2,215.04 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,799.36 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 22,394.88 COUNTY CHARGE: 8 Parcels @ 0.50 each parcel 4.00 $ 22,398.88 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -248. LEVY NO. 9019 COUNTY NO. B -248 LOCATION: Grove Street from Johnson Drive to Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railroad. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 58,586.69 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: 5,858.67 $ 64,445.36 LESS SEWER REPAIR WORK (Sewer Fund) 2,250.16 LESS WATER & SEWER SERVICES (5 lots - Pending Smaby Add'n) 5,333.46 $ 56,861.74 #096037 Braun Engineering 619.19 #105701 Dennis Miller (right of way easement) 4,300.00 #200701 Bulldog Contracting 3,960.00 $ 65,740.93' PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 75.00 .� _.._._. -< ._. $ :65,815.•93 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: May 17, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 11 ►3o '16 489 days at $20.73 per day. $ 1•A}0:}S TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . b \\ 7G q HG- 3�C ASSESSABLE UNITS - 1,761.19 ASSESSABLE FEET. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $37.69 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $43.69 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $76,956.08 COUNTY CHARGE: 14 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 7.00 $ 76,963.08 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993• FIRST YEAR PA -YABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9019 COUNTY NO. B -248 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -248. LOCATION: Grove Street from Johnson Drive to Minneapolis, Northfield and Southern Railroad. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 58,586.69 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: 5,858.67 $ 64,445.36 LESS SEWER REPAIR WORK (Sewer Fund) 2,250.1.6 LESS WATER & SEWER SERVICES (5 lots - Pending Smaby Add'n) 5,333.46 $ 56,861.74 #096037 Braun Engineering 619.19 #105701 Dennis Miller (right of way easement) 4,300.00 #200701 Bulldog Contracting 3,960.00 $ 65,740.93 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 75.00 $ 65,815.93 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 1112% From: May 17, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 489 days at $20.73 per day. $ 10,140.15 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 76,956.08 ASSESSABLE UNITS - 1,761.19 ASSESSABLE FEET.. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $37.69 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $43.69 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 76,956.08 COUNTY CHARGE: 14 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 7.00 $ 76,963.08 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993• FIRST YEAR PA -YABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -250. LEVY NO. 9020 COUNTY NO. B -250 LOCATION: Dewey Hill from Cahill Road Westerly to Delaney Boulevard. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: Barr Engineering - Engineering State of Minnesota - Treasurer Permit Braun Engineering - Testing Chris Hoffman - Northern States Power- Connect underground service G.L. Contracting - Contract work LESS AMOUNT TO BE PAID BY STATE AID PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: May 17, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 489 days at $3.28 per day. TOTAL CO.NSTRU.C,T I ON .COST: ASSESSABLE UNITS: 364.4 ASSESSABLE FEET. $ 142,524.23 14,252.42 $ 156,776.65 483.90 15.00 3,006.13 12.00 2,160.00 150.00 $ 162,603.68 $ 152,217.40 $ 10,386.28 35.00 $ 10,421.28 $ 1,603.92 $ l - , 1,2 O�1f. 32 ESTIMATED ASSESSMEMT - $33.00 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $33.00 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 12,025.20 COUNTY CHARGE: (2)Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $ 12,026.20 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST.YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL .N 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9020 COUNTY NO. B -250 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -250. LOCATION: Dewey Hill from Cahill Road Westerly to Delaney Boulevard. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 142,524.23 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: 14 252 42 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: May 17, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 489 days at $3.28 per day. $ 1,603.92 .. TOTAL CO.NSTRUC.TION .CO.S.T: e $ 12,025.20/ ASSESSABLE UNITS: 364.4 ASSESSABLE FEET. ESTIMATED ASSESSMEMT - $33.00 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $33.00 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 12,025.20 COUNTY' CHARGE: 2 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $ 12,026.20 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. ,FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN-1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. $ 156,776.65 Barr Engineering - Engineering 483.90 State of Minnesota - Treasurer Permit 15.00 Braun Engineering - Testing 3,006.13 Chris Hoffman - 12.00 Northern States Power- Connect underground service 2,160.00 G.L. Contracting - Contract work 150.00 $ 162,603.68 LESS AMOUNT TO BE PAID BY STATE AID $ 152,217.40 $ 10,386.28 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES 35.00 $ 10,421.28 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: May 17, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 489 days at $3.28 per day. $ 1,603.92 .. TOTAL CO.NSTRUC.TION .CO.S.T: e $ 12,025.20/ ASSESSABLE UNITS: 364.4 ASSESSABLE FEET. ESTIMATED ASSESSMEMT - $33.00 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $33.00 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 12,025.20 COUNTY' CHARGE: 2 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $ 12,026.20 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. ,FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN-1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9021 COUNTY NO. B -251 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -251. LOCATION: Fox Meadow Lane and Evanswood Lane in Oak Ponds of Interlachen Addition. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 30,313.12 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: 3,031.32 $ 33,344.44 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES J 33,354.44 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 1121% From: June 21, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 455 days at $10.52 per day. 4,786.56 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: $ 38,181.00 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 11 Lots. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $4,076.23 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $3,471.00 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 38,181.00 COUNTY CHARGE: 11 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 4;,50 $ 38,185.50 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993• FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 1121% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. r ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT Coy -j -�, I o — 3 — g3 LEVY NO. 9024 COUNTY NO. B -255 FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA -255. LOCATION: Cahill Road from Amundson Avenue to 300 feet + South. CONTRACTOR: Bury & Carlson, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 37,461.53 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10 %: 3,746.15 $ 41,207.68 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 50.00 $ 41,257.68 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ llzi From: August 16, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 399 days at $13.00 per day. $ 5,185.70 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 46,443.38 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 580.76 ASSESSABLE FEET. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $73.83 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT PROPOSED ADDESSMENT - $79.97 PER ASSESSABLE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 46,443.38 COUNTY CHARGE: 4 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 2.00 $ 46,445.38 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X' 1.2794 YEARS. Crossroads Development Corporation September 14, 1983 Mr. Gordon Hughes Dept. of Planning City Hall 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 (C(alply Re: Oak Glen, Street Improvements #BA -255 Proposed Special Assessment Dear Mr. Hughes: In accordance with the attached notice, it is my understanding that the City is planning to assess the Oak Glen development the full proposed assessment of $79.97 per assessable foot, a total of $15,000 +. Due to the low and moderate income characteristics of this rental development, together with rent and return on equity ( "cash flow ") restrictions of our Federally- insured mortgage, we hereby request that the proposed speci,al assessment be paid from Federal Community Development funds available to the City. This action would be consistent with the City's initial purchase of the site along with other assistance provided from local and Federal resources. The special assessment would result in a financial burden to the residents of Oak Glen since it must eventually be passed to the residents in the form of higher rents. This is contrary to our mutual goal of keeping the rents at levels affordable to low and moderate income people. We look forward to your favorable response to this request. Your understanding will be appreciated. Sincerely,. 11/7 Henry Hyatt General Partner, Crossroads of Edina, HH /wtb cc: C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor of Edina Marcella M. Daehn, City Clerk Suite 2020 228 N. LaSalle Street Chicago, Illinois 60601 Telephone (312) 726-0083 ANAYLSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9030 COUNTY NO. X -171 FOR: STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST. S -171: LOCATION: West 52nd Street from Halifax Avenue to 377 feet East. CONTRACTOR: G. L. Contracting, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 31,294.62 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 11 %: 3 442 41 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: November 15, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 307 days at $10.96 per day TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . LESS CITY OF EDINA SHARE , $ 34,737.03 50.00 $ 34,787.03 $ 3,364.72 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 38,151-75 $38,151.75 $51,752.33 x $7,500.00 $ 5,529.75 TOTAL ASSESSABLE COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 32,622.00 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1 Lot ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $51,752.33 minus $7,500.00 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $32,622.00 ASSESSABLE COST: $ 32,622.00 COUNTY CHARGE 1 Parcel @ $0.50 each parcel .50 $ 32,622.50 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S a INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9018 COUNTY NO. S -365 FOR: SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS -365. LOCATION: Sewer extension for 6610 and 6620 Normandale Road. CONTRACTOR: Kirkwold Construction Company. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 9,746.57 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12 %: 1,169.59 $10,916.16 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 35.00 $10,951.16 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: August 16, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 399 days at $3.45 per day. $ 1,376.54 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $12,327.70 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 2 Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $6,048.24 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $6,163.85 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $12,327.70 COUNTY CHARGE: 2 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 $12,328.70 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9027 COUNTY NO. L -23 FOR STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -23. LOCATION: Knoll Drive from Schaefer Road to Parkwood Road. Claim No. 157712 - Green Acres Sprinkler (contract work) $ 144.44 Work Order No. 870 - Repair underground sprinkler 121.99 Northern States Power Company - Contract Amount 1,312.00 1,578.43 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12%: 189.41 1,767.84 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 $ 1,782.84 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 11Z% From: February 23, 1983 To: September 19, 1983 207 days at $0.56 per day 115.96 $ 1,898.8o ASSESSABLE UNITS - 10 Assessable Lots ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $240.09 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $189.88 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $1,898.80 COUNTY CHARGE: 10 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 5.00 $1,903.80 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 1112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9028 COUNTY NO. P -13 FOR: PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT NO. P -13. LOCATION: Edina Community Center at Southview Lane and Highway 100. CONTRACTOR: Blacktop Services. $ 81,593.29 Green Acres Sprinkler Company 3,245.26 �orre- $ 84,838.55 Work done by City of Edina (face account) 3,429.44 $ 88,267.99 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 12%: 10,592.16 $ 98,860.15 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 7r nn yu,y35.15 CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 111% From: August 23, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 392 days at $27.81 per day. 11,096.39 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $110,031.54 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 2 Lots PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $ 84,838.55 (School District) $ 25,192.99 (City of Edina) ASSESSABLE COST: $110,031.54 COUNTY CHARGE: 2 Parcels @ $0.50 each parcel 1.00 X110,032.54 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEARS'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9029 COUNTY NO. S -31 FOR: SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S -31. LOCATION: Colonial Way from Olinger Blvd. to 206 feet West of the East line of Lot 1, Block 2, Colonial Church of Edina First Addition. (West side only). CONTRACTOR: Doc Blanchard Enterprises, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 17,392.67 ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL 10%. 1 739 27 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: CAPITALIZED INTEREST @ 112% From: August 16, 1982 To: September 19, 1983 399 days at $6.04 per day. TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1 Lot , $ 19,131.94 35.00 $ 19,166.94 $ 2,409.96 . . . . . . . $ 21,576:90 ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $21,583.99 PER ASSESSABLE LOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $21,576.90 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 21,576.90 COUNTY CHARGE: 1 Parcel @ $0.50 each parcel .50 $ 21,577.40 TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1993. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRT YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9003 COUN'T'Y NO. AQ-83 LOCATION: Minnehaha Creek Mill Pond Area. CONTRACTOR: Midwest Aqua Care. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 8,250.00 LESS CITY SHARE: 1,500.06 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 6,749.94 63 ASSESSABLE UNITS - ,62'Lots. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $109.38 PER ASSESSABLE LOT 107.1 PROPOSED ASSESSMENT ER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 6,749.94 63 COUNTY CHARGE: —62- Parcels @ $0.05 each parcel 3. $ 6,752-W $ TO BE SPREAD OVER 1 YEAR - 1984. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 1120 OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. vL �Ca� w ae TrI ST. � I OUR LADY OF GRACE CATHOLIC SCHC ■ �� `ice - „, , . IINNNIIII_ am Yr Y EDINA PUBLIC WORKS CENTER � I OUR LADY OF GRACE CATHOLIC SCHC ■ �� `ice - „, , . IINNNIIII_ am B ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9000 COUNTY NO. M -83 FOR: MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -83. LOCATION: 50th Street and France Avenue Business District. PAYROLL: Ed Loncello $ 19,654.00 Public Works Crew 1,545.06 Extra Summer Help 3,752.80 $ 24,951.86 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES: Mileage (Loncello) $ 229.08 Professional Services 250.00 Repairs 299.61 778.69 COMMODITIES: Defoamer 1,806,75 Tile Maintenance 914.64 Lumber 560.06 Seed Plantings and Trees 435.50 Repa i r Parts 243.90 General Supplies 999.12 Street Light - Standards 762.50 5,722.47 $ 31,453.02 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES AND OTHER :. 51.25 TOTAL ASSESSMENT COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 31,504.27 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 289,030 Square Feet ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT - $0.10 PER ASSESSABLE SQUARE FOOT PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $0.109 PER ASSESSABLE SQUARE FOOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 31,504.27 COUNTY CHARGE: 29 Parcels•@ $0.05 each parcel 1.45 $ 31.,505.72 TO BE SPREAD OVER 1 YEAR - 1984. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 1112% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794'YEARS. ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9005 COUNTY NO. HC -6 FOR: SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -6. LOCATION: 4362 Vernon Avenue South. CONTRACTOR: Raymond E. Haeg Plumbing. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $2,585.00 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST: $2,600.00 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1 Tot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT - $2,600.00 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $2,600.00 COUNTY CHARGE: 1 Parcel @ $0.30 each parcel .30 X2,600.30 TO BE SPREAD OVER 6 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1989. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 7h% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. 7 ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9006 COUNTY NO. HC -7 FOR: SANITARY SEVER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -7 LOCATION: 6932 Valley View Road. CONTRACTOR: Plumbing & Heating Repair, Inc. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $ 2,340.00 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 2,355.00 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1 Lot. PROPOSED ASSFSSNENT - $2,355.00 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $ 2,355.00 COUNTY CHARGE: 1 Parcel @ $0.30 each parcel .30 $ 2,355.30 TO BE SPREAD OVER 6 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1989. FIRST YEAR PAYABLE- 19= TAXES -DUE z.IN =1984. FIRST YEAR'S INTEREST FIGURED AT 72% OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL x 1.2794 YEARS. 7 ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT LEVY NO. 9140 COUNTY NO. F IC- 8 FOR: SANITARY SEWER HOUSE CONNECTION NO. HC -8. LOCATION: 4003 Sunnyside Road. CONTRACTOR: Raymond E. Haeg Plumbing. CONTRACT AMOUNT: $4,059.00 PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 15.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4,074.00 ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1 Lot PROPOSED ASSESSMENT` - $4,074.00 PER ASSESSABLE LOT ASSESSABLE COST: $4,074.00 COUNTY CHARGE: 1 Parcel @ $0.30 each parcel .30 $4,074.30 TO BE SPREAD OVER 6 YEARS - 1984 THRU 1989. FIRST YEAR PA)MBLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1984. FIRST YEAR'S IlV'I'MEST FIGURED AT 712A OF TOTAL PRINCIPAL X 1.2794 YEARS. September 14, 1983 ESTIMATE OF COST'_ A CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. P -WM -351 LOCATION: York Avenue West 54th St. to 200' South to serve #5400; #5406, & #5408 York ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION: $4,832.83 (Includes Engineering, Clerical, & Interest HEARING DATE: September 19, 1983 NUMBER OF ASSESSABLE LOTS: 3 ESTIMATED COST PER ASSESSABLE LOT: $1,610.94 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT LOT BLOCK ADDITION PINS NO. 1& N. 2 of 2 2 Seely's First Addition 20- 028 -24 -21 -0029 to Hawthorne Park 3 & S. 2 of 2 2 20- 028 -24 -21 -0030 4 2 20- 028 -24 -21 -0031 SUB - TOTAL: 3,905.00'- UNIT QUANTITY MATERIAL PRICE TOTAL 110 L.F. 12" Copper Watermain @ $12.00 $1,320.00 90 L.F. 1" Copper House Service @ 8.00 720.00 1 Each, 1z" Tap into 6" D.I.P. (Includes Saddle & Corporation Cock) @ 300.00 300.00 1 Each, 12" x 1" Tee @ 50.00 50.00 1 Each, 11i" x 1" x 1" Wye @ 75.00 75.00 3 Each, 1" Curb Stops & Boxes @ 60.00 180.00 55 Tons, Class 2 Gravel @ 8.00 440.00 100 C.Y. Excavation (V.M.) @ 5.00 500.00 30 S.Y. Sod with 4" Black Dirt @ 4.00 120.00 1 Bituminous Repair @ Lump Sum 200.00 SUB - TOTAL: 3,905.00'- Page 2 of 2 Pages Estimate of Cost City of Edina Improvement No. P -WM -351 SUB - TOTAL: ADD 10% ENGINEERING AND 2% CLERICAL: ADD 10.5% CAPITALIZED INTEREST: ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF CONSTRUCTION: Prepared By Checked Francs J. Hoffman P.E. Director of Public Works d City Engineer $3,905.00 $ 468.60 4,373.60 $ 459.23 4,832.83 vp 54c70C (��5�� 541 0 (o Yvr� -So 5408 Yoyg-Sc)j I 7S�S-370� -Sg J —r7,4 N U M B E R Z -82 -5 Johnson Bldg. Co., R -1 Single Family Residence District to PRD -2 Planned Residence District. 4600 France Avenue S -83 -11 Preliminary Plat Approval of Edina Mills L O C A T 10 N Generally located west of France Avenue and south of 46th Street extended. REQUEST EDINA PLANNING p D E, ARTV1ENT 'A II. OLD BUSINESS: Z -83 -5 Johnson Building Co., R -1 Single Family District F 3 3 to PRD -2 Planned Residential District. $� S -83 -11 Preliminary Plat Approval of Edina Mills Mr. Gordon Hughes reported that the Commission and the Council considered preliminary plan for this property last spring. The Council granted preliminary rezoning approval to PRD -2 for a seven unit townhouse plan on February 28, 1983. -The proponents have now returned with an overall development plan and are requesting final rezoning approval. The preliminary plat of the property has also been submitted. The overall development plan includes a site plan, landscape plan, grading plan and utility layout, and building elevations are required by Ordinance. Mr. Hughes expressed two concerns which must be addressed prior to recommending final approval. First, the utility plans which have been submitted do not adequately address storm water drainage. Staff believes that the potential for a drainage problem does exist and have asked the proponents to respond with a drainage plan. Such a plan, just recently submitted, is being studied by Staff. Secondly, the proposed landscaping plan relies heavily on retaining existing trees on the site. However, it is difficult to identify the trees which are being retained as to type, location and size and Staff requests the landscape plan be revised to show this information , Upon resolution of these problems, final rezoning approval should be conditioned upon final platting, subdivision dedication, and approval of sewer and water plans by the City of Minneapolis which will serve this project with these utilities. Mr. Bob Johnson and Mr. Mike Klein of Johnson Building Co were present. Mr. David Runyan wondered what the necessity of an island was for the northerly curb cut. Mr. Klein explained that they were attempting to save two or three trees. He asked if there was a specific formula for the guest parking for townhouses. Mr. Hughes stated that for apartments, 3/4 outside stall is required. For townhouses,'however, there is no steadfast rule, but Staff generally requests guest stall to be located in front of each garage stall and also encourage some other surface parking be provided John Skagerberg moved for approval of the overall development plan and preliminary plat subject to Staff's recommendations. David Runyan seconded the motion. All were in favor; the motion carried. 7. COM-P01UNITY DE`lSLOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 31, 1983 Z -83 -5 Johnson Building Co., R -1 Single Family District to PRD -2 Planned Residential District. S -83 -11 Preliminary Plat Approval of Edina Mills Refer to: Attached Overall Development Plan and Preliminary Plat Generally located: West of France and south of 46th Street extended. The Commission and Council considered preliminary plans for this property last spring. The Council granted preliminary rezoning approval to PRD -2 for a seven unit townhouse plan on February 28, 1983. The proponents have now returned with an overall development plan and are requesting final rezoning approval. A preliminary plat of the property has also been submitted. The overall development plan includes a site plan, landscape plan, grading plan and utility layout, and building elevations as required by Ordinance. Recommendation: Staff believes the proponents have prepared an overall development plan which will result in an attractive townhouse development. At this writing, Staff has two concerns which must be addressed prior to recommending final approval. First, the utility plans which have been submitted do not adequately address storm water drainage. You may recall that several residents abutting the project's westerly lot line expressed a concern that increased drainage would be directed to their properties. Vie believe that the potential for a drainage problem does exist and have asked the proponents to respond with a drainage plan. At this writing, such a plan has not been received. Secondly, the proposed landscaping plan relies heavily on retaining existing trees on the site. However, it is difficult to identify the trees which are being retained as to type, location and size. We ask that the landscape plan be revised to show this information. Assuming resolution of the above problems, final rezoning approval should be conditioned upon final platting, subdivision dedication, and approval of sewer and water plans by the City of Minneapolis which will serve this project with these utilities. - - - - -- Via,— ,--- ;- .= ► -�,—.. _ ,. —__r� w { OW•2. 124 PO IL . I 1 h Site Quantities I —" U" 8 rs0a R .a Total Site (1.14 ac) 49810 sq fL 100% RACkv Pads 13,560 sa tt. 272% _ Pavement 10932 sp tL 21.9% a* an 1.803 .4 R Gpon Space 25,318 sy IL 50.9% " _ - [` • .i% heoor Parkry Stalls 14 Tandem Parkeg Stalls 14 , U", 1 r,eoa .o M1 Other Pankiq Stalls 3 I • - -- �� t Total Stets 31 or 4A Per (lit ALL \CIlf-Ullal VA0641 t* A t'6 -A" '• I • IIW .I.�I70 .o R / I —` - ^�� 1 11.11 I,IG].0 M1 . I Nwn 1 � , 1 0 10 ao .0 80 1 11W a ;0a.o M1 s.w /- w• 1 Site Plan * * 1 EDINA MILLS for Johnson Building Company Edna. t lanasola 1�\ EDINA MILLS for Johnson Building Company. E&ik Mrmsola • L--j IoW . //.R • IAaf 11w RR Law q R ;. y awz Iws asrL 11 �r�l1w /ND.ipR ' 1 1 1 1 1 DWI I �• AO' b �' :'uw ctAapR Cfin6 Plan !1 F. N4 fJyf fl� (+ U"% !MW N At 91�ro '.. >' - • F �1 1 1 7 • }. •�l 'f 1 I 1 1 EDINA MILLS for Johnson Building Company. E&ik Mrmsola a PLANT LIST C N OtY 8.1-1 N. TREES g-I 711— 11 f7777777-7,777—)z L. :SHRUBS 1."j FL • trw • 9-11111 qu cc F&-,gp MX"WA LM A 7.126 .0 IL • ftuucfrl cV-v w, fa•, t -rotm,) L*W & 1,10.1 p OL 1w, untN tyE iD P.6 tzwlp !f 10. so LOW C 2,006 S..M 11 to, Landscape Plan • 0• ri M� 6� rmt ivT "wof I -Ullf IW4 �1 EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION Yb •�.� — rl SOUTH ELEVATION n WEST ELEVATION EDINA MILLS for Johnson Building Company :i E&ia. Wmsota N 0 10 20 40 80 Seale 1" 20, n Preliminary Utility Plan 'i Mod S S��AY1 n r I M� I� IA4i _I _ n I I I I I p q f t" a - n - i b� u e s 1 s e e • e _� / \ 1 1 1 Unit A 2,128 .sq. It. 1 e 1 I Unit B 1,803 sq. ft. I I � 1 1 1 Unit BR 1,803 sq. It. I I e Unit B 1,803 sq. It. v 1 — Y 1 1 e Unit A 2, 128 sq. R. e • Unit B 1,803 sq. ft. (1 ♦ � 1 I e 1 e 1 Unit C 2,088 sq. /t. I 9001 1 1 'i Mod S S��AY1 n r I M� I� IA4i _I _ n I I I I I p q f t" a - n - i b� 'VI4.4Y. 4^IjYR'91r1�'. U4- i Preliminary Plat I I ' I N 69' lr' So'vJ I II -- -- - - - - -- 1 �PUTI memai r-) I I - -,17• ---- - - - - -1 BLOCK 1 0 I�'jPp sF I IL 5 I� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5513e {. I Iiy I VfM fy eHl/Yl RI I I " 537'S sY, I I .0 I I I �jI I I 209.41' 559'17vY, f1 I.� -41 i I 1 5tY� cF. 3 brl D 4 BLOCK 1 0 I�'jPp sF I IL 5 I� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5513e {. I Iiy I VfM fy eHl/Yl RI I I " 537'S sY, I I .0 I I I �jI I I 209.41' 559'17vY, f1 I.� -41 PLANT LIST ' Con.rcrr fu.* (31Y. 501•rkel NWO suer tI =..._ 11+.1.111• TREES - nr MI1: ♦ Mw Ilw.l: t' SHRUBS 00 �. Orl, - 1.nr R'r •11et: 110 417 ,1117111. 1117711 . 10 - Ir• +1, 7f:.esf . (wn11 1117: I:wll' ' • lewrw::111.. Q' - r... I.i •:., 11 1.171111: ln:11M eA . � m,: •:r re•:.ruue U r:u.lua rnmm. '. .V 11 rrN' • •I��ar��c N� �. w( PIC • .. '•11..: •� a ,t Ilew•17 qel.: '••r' u {., ♦•'. , `r--_ 1 -A •' WYMte fLtC W [! R+lot0 .(: fav Fuf {4t • m%H1' a rbt6 tC7.YXRD L Yt 1llc.,�.'C7. NL[.rtfW to (N '(0107.) i- - , "4. /Yr ; R I. A MIL r ` L• !- .r •. •1.114 O M4LQ 1, 1•. +: T i 11, . r. 1 f ` I toll . Ott1OX%V POCAL r) 111!.1 �L tp'01•� • . ` �, i ; 1 .1• ' �• 1,� 1 • 1 ; ,,�' _ L a ;� 'r! .1• r�'I 1 OYAX LaoJ y 1r•j1l • �� \ �1 ,� 1 LMP.ai1t- KlnlrlGl MuA. t•w W'JOr•111• f•Iw1♦ 1 , � 4,: r�• -.(.� ll (f7•; •f ' 1 `1 .l 1 '. 1 1Rt4 W.K.H K6 10 LE ts✓.t••Tty mr 1'' ' ' �} - .; 1 •1 •.y 7 , . I • . •,o.. •:Orr r -u'ttl 'ML:C 1lGC+ HiI,W' K '+w- •rrsrt.ea'rR0 ro. 4 to » 40 A j;- la,n 0- Ir.tcS SHOW .a:+x.+R 1Ktr ' �'. Ilk. -•� -� 1 .� `i. 1 .. 1 "1 errtf= tmidscape Plan e %i+r111b VIM" 1aa -0 awl 7 q 4b / %r�rI1Y /.tOrNO114r111146 S rI111r1{I - ' �•r 1 r•i { A b d t'afYJf11L 914DryMh L [1t4►IN . r 7 f `. , - f 1 i � �'r � ' �• • T ° - • 1111 +� -r , �'' EDINA MILLS for Johnson Building Company Edina, Il msola 00 •I��ar��c N� �. {., ♦•'. , `r--_ 1 -A •' WYMte fLtC W [! R+lot0 .(: fav Fuf {4t • m%H1' a rbt6 tC7.YXRD L Yt 1llc.,�.'C7. NL[.rtfW to (N '(0107.) i- - , "4. /Yr ; R I. A MIL r ` L• !- .r •. •1.114 O M4LQ 1, 1•. +: T i 11, . r. 1 f ` I toll . Ott1OX%V POCAL r) 111!.1 �L tp'01•� • . ` �, i ; 1 .1• ' �• 1,� 1 • 1 ; ,,�' _ L a ;� 'r! .1• r�'I 1 OYAX LaoJ y 1r•j1l • �� \ �1 ,� 1 LMP.ai1t- KlnlrlGl MuA. t•w W'JOr•111• f•Iw1♦ 1 , � 4,: r�• -.(.� ll (f7•; •f ' 1 `1 .l 1 '. 1 1Rt4 W.K.H K6 10 LE ts✓.t••Tty mr 1'' ' ' �} - .; 1 •1 •.y 7 , . I • . •,o.. •:Orr r -u'ttl 'ML:C 1lGC+ HiI,W' K '+w- •rrsrt.ea'rR0 ro. 4 to » 40 A j;- la,n 0- Ir.tcS SHOW .a:+x.+R 1Ktr ' �'. Ilk. -•� -� 1 .� `i. 1 .. 1 "1 errtf= tmidscape Plan e %i+r111b VIM" 1aa -0 awl 7 q 4b / %r�rI1Y /.tOrNO114r111146 S rI111r1{I - ' �•r 1 r•i { A b d t'afYJf11L 914DryMh L [1t4►IN . r 7 f `. , - f 1 i � �'r � ' �• • T ° - • 1111 +� -r , �'' EDINA MILLS for Johnson Building Company Edina, Il msola Ob r H N w f � V I t� O a ao -1 e o 19. .��: ,....: ,; �•. 1. M t N_ REQUEST Nt �IBF-R : Z-79-lo Braemar Associates LOCATIO Generally located west of Cahill Road and north of Vi- 78th Street. - REQUEST: R -1 Sir,ryle Famil Dwelling to �� `1 PRD -3 Planned Residential District. Revised Ovef <all elan anprnv,l amendment � •�in•.r. ,f�,nnirt�• r��• rrr rrrr• ^ � 1 I r t 1 —L1 _F 4 a Z -79 -10 Klodt Construction Co.; PRD -3 Plan Amendment Mr. Hughes noted that the Commission and Council reviewed and approved a plan amendment for the easterly one -half of this property earlier this year. This amendment proposed the construction of two condominium buildings containing 54 units. The plan amendment also proposed a substantial reduction in the size of the units. He explained that the proponents are now requesting a plan amendment for the westerly one -half of the site. This amendment proposed the construction of 29 townhouse units which would replace the three condominium buildings containing 35 units as originally approved. In order to maintain the original overall density for the site, the proponents are suggesting that the condominium buildings on the easterly one -half should be increased from 54 units to 60 units. The plan for the westerly one -half shows five townhouse buildings which would be served by two driveways from Delaney Boulevard. Enclosed parking and surface parking are provided according to ordinance requirements. The plan complies with the setback requirements except for balconies which project into the required 35 foot setback from the north property line. The proponents have also submitted floor plans, elevation drawings landscape plans, grading and utility plan in support of the requested amendment. Mr. Hughes stated that the building footprint and exterior appearance of the two condominium buildings on the easterly one -half of the site remains unchanged. However, the Page three V, size of the individual units has been decreased substantially. Mr. Hughes noted that the proposed townhouse plan represents a reasonable use of the westerly portion of the site. Such a use is complementary with the condominium development to the east and may provide a more desireable transition to low density uses to the west. As noted earlier, the project complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance with the exception of the balcony setbacks on the north. Staff cannot find a reasons for a varaince from the setback requirement and suggest that the northerly buildin,g-be modified to comply with the ordinance. The easterly portion of the site is unchanged since the Commission and Council approval last spring with the exception of the unit count and size. Staff again wishes to point_ out that some of these units provide a minimum of floor area. This is unusual for a condominium project in Edina. However the proposal responds to the Comprehensive Plan's goal of providing small unit sizes for the modest cost housing opportunities. Staff recommends approval of the requested plan amendment conditioned upon: 1. The submission of more complete utility plans. 2. A developer's agreement covering the utilities in the townhouse development. 3. The revision of the-final plat of the property to reflect a townhouse subdivision of the westerly one —half of site. 4. A slight modification of the access drives to the townhouses to provide a larger turning radius for emergency vehicles. (This will not affect the placement of the buildings.) 5. The size classification for shademaster locust should be increase to 2 1/2 inches. Mr. Paul.Klodt, Klodt Construction Co., was present.- Mr. Nieland and Mr. Haglund, his associates, were also present. Mrs. Mary McDonald wondered if it would be a problem for the balonies to comply with the setback. It was noted that there would be no problem complying. John Palmer moved for approval of the amendment to the overall development plan. Len Ring seconded the motion. All were in favor; the motion carried. III. NEW BUSINESS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 31, 1983 Z -79 -10 . Klodt Construction Co. PRD -3 Plan Amendment Refer to: Revised Overall Development Plan; March 2, 1983 Staff Report Generally Located: Northwest Quadrant of Cahill Road and West 78th Street The Commission and Council reviewed and approved a plan amendment for the easterly one -half of this property earlier this year. This amendment proposed the construction of two condominium buildings containing 54 units. The plan amendment also proposed a substantial reduction in the size of the units. The proponents are now requesting a plan amendment for the westerly one -half of the site. This amendment proposes the construction of 29 townhouse units which would replace the three condominium buildings containing 35 units as originally approved, In order to maintain the original overall density for the site, the proponents are suggesting that the condominium buildings on the eaterly one -half should be increased from 54 units to 60 units. The plan for the westerly one -half shows five townhouse buildings which would be served by two driveways from Delaney Boulevard. Enclosed parking and surface parking are provided according to ordinance requirements. The plan complies with setback requirements except for balconies which project into the required 35 foot set- back from the north property line. The proponents have also submitted floor plans, elevation drawings landscape plans, grading, and utility plans in support of the requested amendment. The building footprint and exterior appearance of the two condominium buildings on the easterly one -half of the site remain unchanged. However, the size of the individual units has been decreased substantially. The following table compares the unit sizes and count of the present proposal with the plan approved last March: Present Proposal March Proposal No. of Units Size IJo. of Units Size Efficiency 6 525 sq. ft. 0 - 1 bedroom 30 760 -820 sq. ft. 24 835 2 bedroom 24 1080 -1180 sq. ft. 30 1100 -1200 Of particular note are the efficiency units measuring 525 square feet and the one bedroom units which measure 760 square feet. According to our measurements, the efficiency units measure 504 square feet and the one bedrooms measure 750 square feet. These units are at the absolute minimum floor area required by the zoning ordinance. c, .L Community Development and Planning Commission August 31, 1983, - Klodt Construction Co. Page two Recommendation We believe that the proposed townhouse plan represents a reasonable use of the westerly portion of the site. Such use is complementary with the condominium development to the east and may provide a more desireable transition to low density uses to the west. As noted earlier, the project complies with the requirements of the zoning ordinance with the exception of the balcony setbacks on the north. We frankly cannot find a reason for a variance from the setback requirement and therefore, suggest that the northerly building be modified to comply with the ordinance. The easterly portion of the site is unchanged since the Commission and Council approval last spring with the exception of the unit count and size. Staff a4ain wishes to point out that some of these units provide a minimum of floor area. This is unusual for a condominium project in Edina. However, the proposal responds to the Comprehensive Plan's goal of providing small unit sizes for modest cost housing opportunities. Staff recommends approval of the requested plan amendment conditioned upon: 1. The submission of more complete utility plans. 2. A developer's agreement covering the utilities in the townhouse development. 3. The revision of the final plat of the property to reflect a townhouse subdivision of the westerly one -half of the site. 4. A slight modification of the access drives to the townhouses to provide a. larger turning radius for emergency vehicles. (This will not affect the placement of the buildings.) 5. The size classification for shademaster locust should be increase to 22 inches. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT MARCH 2, 1983 Z -79 -10 Braemar Associates / Klodt Construction Co. Generally located west of Cahill Road and north of West 78th Street Refer to: Revised overall development plan; October 1, 1980, Staff report The Commission and Council granted final rezoning approval to PRD -3 for the subject property approximately two years ago. At that time, an eight building condominium project containing 89 units was approved. This project included excess right -of -way from land acquired for Delaney Boulevard. Construction of the condominium project has never commenced. The property owners have nowjoined forces with Klodt Construction Company who proposes to develop the east half of the site. Klodt desires to modify the overall development plan to reflect a considerable reduction in the unit sizes as compared to the earlier plan. The revised plans illustrate two condominium buildings containing a total of 54 dwelling units. These two buildings will take the place of five condominium buildings (also containing 54 units) which were proposed by the earlier plans. The present site plan illustrates considerably less building coverage than the earlier plan due to the substantial decrease in unit sizes. (The present units are less than one half the floor area of the prior condominiums.) Underbuilding and surface parking are proposed in numbers which conform to our ordinance. As with the earlier plan, a 15 foot parking setback from Cahill Road is proposed which is below the required setback of 35 feet. All other setbacks are consistent with our requirements. The proponents have also submitted schematic floor plans and elevation drawings in support of their plan amendment. Landscape plans , grading plans, utility plans, and so forth have not been submitted at this time. The proponents are not suggesting significant changes to the original plan for the west half of the site. Three condominium buildings containing - 36 extremely large units continue to be shown. (It should be noted that the approved plans show . 35 units in these buildings rather than 36.) The site plan illustrates a slight re- alignment of these buildings to the north and east in order to provide a more generous spacing between the buildings. A revised subdivision has not been submitted for the property.. It is our understanding that such a plat would divide the property in half and therefore two totally separate condominium associations would be created. 1\ Community Development and Planning Commission March 2, 1983 _ Page two Recommendation: We were very supportive of the prior proposal for the site. Thus, it is difficult for us to be enthusiastic about a plan which in essence, separates the site into two distinct projects which are very different in terms of their style and market. However, we acknowledge that the site is somewhat unique in terms of its surrounding land uses which lead to a more modestly priced unit for the easterly portion of the site and a luxury class unit for the westerly portion. Also, the site has excellent access which does not hinder the establishment of separate projects. We believe the site plan proposes a desireable placement of the two condominium buildings and their accessory parking. The ponding area in the center of the site is retained as originally shown and should provide an excellent amenity for the project. As noted earlier, the building coverage of the new proposal is considerably reduced which will contribute to a feeling of openess on the site. Our only requested modification to the site plan is that the parking setback from Cahill should be increased to 20 feet which is more consistent with parking setbacks in other areas. We would ask that additional work should be undertaken on the elevation plans of the building. We are particulary concerned with the proposed roof line of the building, especially the shed roofs which are shown in various locations. As noted earlier, landscape plans, grading plans, etc., which usually are submitted in cases such as this have not been provided. Such drawings should be provided for review prior to approval of the plan amendment by the Council. Subject to the above modifications and comments, Staff recommends approval of the plan amendment conditioned upon: I. The elimination of one dwelling unit from the project in order to make the density consistent with the earlier approval and 2. submission of a revised subdivision for the site. t C _ 1 N U M B E R Z -83 -7 Johnson Building Co. L O C A T 10 N 5212 Vernon Avenue; Lots 1, 2, 3, E 12, Block 1, Grandview Plateau Generally located west of Vernon Avenue and south of W. 52nd Street. R E Q U E S T C_2, Commerical District to PRD -5, Planned Residential District EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT Page four Z -83 -7 Johnson Building Co., 5212 Vernon Avenue South Lots 1, 2, 3, and 12, Block 1 Grandview Plateau C -2 Commerical District to PRD -5, Planned Residential District Mr. Hughes reported that the subject property measures 3.3 acres in area and is the present site of the Biltmore Motel, which contains 80 guest rooms and a restaurant with a capacity of about 100 seats. The property is presently zoned C -2, Commerical District. Adjoining the property to the west are six double bungalows. Across the street to the north is a double bungalow and a four unit building. Across the street to the south is a 50 unit apartment building. Across the street to the east is Jerry's shopping area. The proponents are requesting a rezoning to PRD -5 Planned Residential District to contruct an 84 unit condominium building on the site which equates to 24 units per acre. The proposed building is four stories above an underbuilding parking garage which is partly above and partly below grade. Approximately 1.4 underbuilding parking spaces and .5 surface spaces per dwelling unit are proposed. The project appears to conform to the setback requirements of the Ordinance with the exception of the surface parking in the front yard setback. Mr. Hughes stated that the proponents are also requesting the vacation of a portion of the right of way adjacent to Vernon Avenue, which was originally provided for a service drive but never constructed... This would add about 9,000 square feet to the site. The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for Mixed Uses. The Plan defines Mixed Uses as development containing office, multiple residential and accessory commerical uses. The Plan also encourages the reuse of commercial buildings for multiple residential purposes particularly within the Grandview commerical area. Mr. Hughes believes that the reuse of this property for multi- family housing is highly desirable and conforms with the direction of the Comprehensive Plan. The high density residential development is appropriate because: 1. The site adjoins a minor arterial roadway; 2. The site is in close proximity to shopping and other related services; 3. The development represents a reuse of a potentially high density, commerical property. However, the basic question to be addressed is the precise density and height which should be permitted. The Comprehensive Plan notes that the height and density should be based on proximity.to low density uses and transportation capacities. Page five Mr. Hughes reported that the proposed development will generate approximately 570 trips per day assuming 8 trips per unit per day. This generation will not impact the level of service of Vernon Avenue, however it could lead to signalization at the instersection of Vernon and the projection driveway and Link Road. He noted that the present C -2 zoning would most likely generate a larger traffic count. Mr. Hughes pointed out a change in the proposed plans to allow an exit out onto Vernon instead of 53rd Street by Johnson Building Co. in an attempt to satisify requests from concerned neighbors. However,.this attempt could possibly increase the traffic onto 53rd and other residential streets by those travelers trying to head north to Interlachen Boulevard. The Staff felt the four story height was appropriate for this development, but felt the lot coverage would be improved if reduced to 25% from the 28% as proposed. This could be achieved by reducing the unit sizes. Another possibility, would be to consider a five story element. With these modifications, Mr. Hughes recommended preliminary rezoning approval conditioned upon an acceptable overall development plan and final plat. Mr. Bob Johnson and Mr. Mike Klein were present to answer questions. Mr. Gordon Johnson wondered if there would be a curb cut in the center isle to allow the northbound exiters onto Vernon Mr. Hughes noted that the travelers would have to first head south into the left turn lane and make a "U" turn on 53rd or possibily take a left onto Eden Avenue if there are heading to Highway 100. Mr. John Skagerberg wonder was the distance was from the exit to 53rd Street was. Mr. Klein answer 50 feet. He also noted that the exit onto Vernon would first have to be approved by Hennepin County. Mr. Klein stated that if over, the lot coverage would be brought down to 25% by reducing the building size. Mr. John Bailey pointed out that there would be added traffic problems because of the alreadyJcongested Jerry's area. Mr. Hughes suggested that this would be lessened by a traffic signal. Mr. Fran Hoffman, City Engineer, noted that it was not likely that Hennepin County would allow a curb.cut onto Vernon. He felt a traffic signal might be likely. Dolores Nelson, 5132 William Avenue, wondered if there Page six have been any other proposals for this location. Mr. Hughes answered there have been none within the last ten years. Ms. Nelson did not feel this was a very good buffer. She thought perhaps townhouses or fourplexes which could be more appropriate. Mr. Wallace Johnson, 5338 Sherwood Rd., felt that the building itself did not matter. He was concerned with the snow removal and traffic problem which would be hazardous to the neighborhood children. Mrs. Jeffery Anderson, 5124 William Avenue, stated that the Jerry's traffic was too much, and would come directly into the residential area. John Skagerberg wondered what the present Biltmore traffic was like. It was noted that the traffic is somewhat light at the present time.. Mrs. Anderson wondered how many guest parking spaces are allowed for the proposed project. Mr. Hughes reported 48 surface stalls and 120 garage stalls, which complies with the City's requirements. One of the neighbors mentioned that at a neighborhood meeting between Johnson Building Co., and themselves, a plan to have the -inside traffic circle exit from the main entrance had been discussed. What was the status of this plan? Mr. Klein replied that it has been eliminated because of the limited inside space they were working with. Mrs. Anderson stated she would prefer the traffic inside the project rather than on the residential streets. Mrs. Mary McDonald wonder how often 53rd Street was presently used. Mr. Phil Johnson, 5140 Bedford Avenue, explained that they used it less and less because of the traffic delay when attempting to get onto Vernon. Mr. Runyan noted that the signalization would help that and Bill Lewis commented that it would still cause a large backup. Mr. Bob Johnson noted that the neighborhood meeting was an attempt to receive feed back from the neighbors. He is willing to comply with the neighbors and the City however they can. Mr. Jeff Elaysky, 5104 William Avenue, reported that he only found out about the meeting on the very day. He felt this did not display a sincere concern for the neighbors. He foresaw the proposed project only as an aggravation to an already serious traffic problem and stated that there were too many units proposed. Mr. Ron Cohen, 5213 Ridgewood Drive, president of Page seven Ridgewood Hills Association, requested that the City or the proponents evaluate the traffic intersections and report to the neighbors the effects the new project would have. Mr. George Frey, 5222 Grandview Lane, stated that people cannot stop progress. He noted that he uses 53rd Street frequently. Mr. Harry Stanko, 5101 Bedford Avenue, had no objections to the building itself, but objected to the increasing traffic problem. Mr. Bob Bryant, 5101 William, wondered if 53rd Street could be closed off. Mr. Hoffman thought a traffic light would be installed at that intersection. Mr. Bryant noted that this.would not stop the traffic.from coming into the residential area. Mr. Frey suggested a stop sign be placed on Grandview going south. Ms. Ellen Olson, 5108 William Avenue, thought they would be seeing alot of traffic coming through the alleys. She was concerned for the safety of the neighborhood's children. Mr. Bryant asked if only one exit was possible. Discussion ensued regarding a traffic study of the neighborhood. Mrs. McDonald commented that there was a time factor involved because the property was for sale, a commercial project could purchase it and building without addressing the Planning Commission. Mr. Palmer noted that the present plans could be approved subject to such a study. He, therefore, moved for approval of the preliminary rezoning conditioned upon resolution of the traffic concerns through —out the project. John Skagerberg seconded the motion. Mr. Palmer recommended the City hire a traffic consultant. Mr. Bailey suggested that the whole area on a larger scale should be analyized. However, upon discussion it was decided to focus on the proposed project area. All were in favor of the motion; the motion carried. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 31, 1983 Z -83 -7 Johnson Building Co., 5212 Vernon Avenue S; Lots 1, 2, 3, E 12, Block 1, Grandview Plateau. C -2 Commerical District to PRD -5, Planned Residential District Refer to: Attached Preliminary Development Plan Generally Located: West of Vernon Avenue and south of 411. 52nd Street. The subject property measures a 3.3 acres in area and is the present site of the Biltmore Motel, which contains 80 guest rooms and a restaurant with a capacity of about 100 seats. The property is presently zoned C -2, Commercial District. Adjoining the property to the west are six double bungalows. Across the street to the north is a double bungalow and a four unit building. Across the street to the south is a 60 unit apartment building (24 units /acre). Across the street to the east is Jerry's shopping area. C The proponents are requesting a rezoning to PRD -5, Planned Residential District to construct an 84 unit condominium building on the site ::hich equates tb 24 units per acre. The proposed building is four stories above an underbuilding parking garage which is partly above and partly below grade. Approximately 1.4 under - building parking spaces and .6 surface spaces per dwelling unit are proposed . From a preliminary standpoint, the project appears to conform to the setback requirements of the Ordinance with the exception of the surface parking in the front yard setback. In connection with the rezoning,. the proponents are also requesting the vacation of a portion of the right of way adjacent to Vernon Avenue. This right of way was orginally provided for a service drive which was never constructed. This vacation adds about 9,000 square feet to the site. The Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for riixed Uses. The Plan defines Mixed Uses as developments containing office, multiple residential, and accessory commerical uses. The Plan also encourages the reuse of commerical buildings for multiple residential purposes particularly within the Grandview commerical area. Recommendation Staff believes that the reuse of this property for multi - family housing is highly desirable and conforms with the direction of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff also believes that a high density residential development (i.e. 12+ units /acre) is appropriate because: —1:" The site adjoins a minor arterial roadway 2. The site is in close proximity to shopping and= other related services 3. The development represents a reuse of a potentially high density, commerical property. Community Development and Planning Commission August 31, 1983, - Johnson Building Co. pare two Assuming agreement with a high density residential development of the site, the basic question which must be addressed at this time (i:e. preliminary approval) is the precise density and height which should be permitted. The Comprehensive Plan notes that the height and density should be based on proximity to low density uses and transportation capactities. From a traffic standpoint, the proposed development will generate approximately 670 trips per day assuming 8 trips per unit per day. Such a traffic generation will not impact the level of service of Vernon Avenue. However, it may result in demands to sionalize the intersection of Vernon, the project's driveway and Link Road. An office building (which would be allowed under present zonina) containing a floor area of 50, 000 square feet would generate 700 trips daily assuming 14 trips per 1, 000 square feet. A multi- tenant retail building (also allowed under present zoning) would generate 1,500 trips per day assuming 30 trips Der 1,000 square feet. It should be noted that the hypothetical 50,000 square foot buildings represent a conservative development in our view. The Zoning Ordinance permits a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 for C -2 properties. Thus, theoretically, a building containing more than 200,000 square feet of floor area would be permitted. Although this is highly unlikely because of parking requirements, we believe a 50, 000 square foot building coulc be reasonably expected. Building height and the overall mass of the project are more difficult to evaluate. A comparison with surrounding land uses as well, as potential developments under the present C -2 zoning is appropriate. As noted earlier, this site is separated from R -1 uses by R -2 and R -3 developments. The Comprehensive Plan states that such transition. uses should be provided for high density development. The proposed height of four ( stories is identical to that of Interlachen Court Apartments which is across the street to the south. However, it should be noted that due to the elevation of the subject propert; as well as the roof form, the proposed condominium will appear somewhat taller than Interlachen Court. Under the present C -2 zoning of the property, a maximum building height of four stories would be allowed. Although a four story retail building on the site would be unlikely, a four story office building is a reasonable expectation. Based upon these comparisons, we believe the proposed four story height is appropriate. We are concerned with the overall mass of the building. Although the proposed setback from the west property line is substantially more than the existing motel (i.e. 40 feet vs. 15 feet) the project's west elevation may appear somewhat imposing due to its length and unvarying height. Also, the lot coverage of the proposed building is 28% compared with 25% which is the maximum cited for R -5 developments. In our view, the overall . mass of the project would be much improved by reducing the lot coverage to 250. Such a reduction could be achieved by reducing unit sizes or the number of units although it is our opinion that the requested density is proper. The Commission and Council may also consider allowing a five story element to reduce the building's lot coverage. With the modifications noted above, we would recommend preliminary rezoning approval conditioned upon an acceptable overall development plan and final plat. 40 FT. Z N a c p� N 4 v a N 0 SITE PLAN COMMERCIAL �FRN 2 ON 4,- t 0 • EDINA HOUSING EDINA. MINNESOTA PROJECT DATA ZONING: C2 (PROPOSED REZONING TO R5) LOT AREA: 3.5 ACRES (ORIGINAL SURVEY 3.289A PLUS VACATED VERNON AVE. ROW .211A) FAR: 1.1 (MAX 1.2) BUILDING HEIGHT: 40 FT. SETBACKS: 40 FT. EA. SIDE UNITS: 28 2BR PLUS DEN (1850 SO. FT. EA.) 55 i8R PLUS DEN (1550 SO. FT. EA.) _ 1 2BR (CARETAKER) (1850 SO. FT. 1 84 TOTAL PARKING: 120 ENCLOSED (1.43:1) 48 SURFACE 188 TOTAL SPACES (2:1) z r O FT. SETBACK D �• W F N M 3 l {j1 a. b V_ C vi 4- L 5 z a i i e. s 0 D u Z C Z V/ j 7 f 00 O N T O W N = Q i a Z O0 t a = �, l fig ��. , �l p I u.l R ti f II�RiI , It? 4Y . 4 aR l `� � .i I f �G► � V s �. s �y '* ,i �i �!i :�4 c. /„ r ,_ It t+! iA I 1:s4•7 r Y;3` +1'' , I.� f L Ir _ �r �n� $4 • ,SA.t�ii f al�� ..+ 1� il�i�nR! d�t�'`4. ?M ''YH EAST ELEVATION b ! b a V C �L N 0. cs fig Q�n } _ s _ C9 O V u Z = N o D m o Q or O W _ 01 = Q= a Z° W n W 29=- September 19, 1983 12:05 Mrs. John Weston - 6516 Indian Hills Rd. Strongly opposed to subdivision. Went through similar situation in Rolling Greens 4 - 5 years previously with a Dr. Sponsel. Sued the Dr. and won the case. Indian Hills Neighborhood Assoc. may have ruling against dividing property up. Has notified the Lake Arrowhead President. Others may have concern: t . ., -L 1 -1 L C C kA iiYYiidd MAP I1F -D L N U M B E R S -83 -9 Peterson LOCATION REQUEST Lot 3, Block 1, Indian Hills Addition Generally located north of Indian Hills Road and west of Dakota Trail PLANNING EDINA ©E,R"i"MEN S-83 -9 Peterson Replat of Lot 3, Block 1, Indian Hills Mr. Hughes stated the subject property measures 92,200 square feet in area and is zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District. Approximately 29,000 square feet of this property is located within the bed of Arrowhead Lake. The property is developed with a single family dwelling which is centrally located on the lot. The proponent is requesting a subdivision of the property to create one new buildable lot which would be located westerly of the existing dwelling. The new lot would measure about 19,000 square feet in area (exclusive of water) and about 90 feet in width. The proposed lot line is located 10 feet from the northwesterly corner of the existing dwelling. Due to the height of this dwelling, it appears that this setback would have to be increased to conform with ordinance requirements. This would result in a decrease in the proposed width of the new lot. The Commission may recall that a subdivision of a lot located approximately 700 feet west of the subject property was considered about four years ago. This subdivision, entitled Pat Moore's 1st Addition was denied by the City Council. Mr. Hughes noted the subdivision exhibits the same characteristics which led the City Council to a denial of Pat Moore's 1st Addition in 1979. Although the new lot exceeds the mininium requirements of the zoning Ordinance, this neighborhood should not be subject to minimum standards. He noted some reasons for which the Council denied Pat Moore's 1st Addition which also applied to the proposed subdivision: Indian Hills Road clearly forms a logical dividing line in the vicinity of the Subject Property between large lot subdivisions to the north and subdivisions with relatively small lots to the south. Property owners in the vicinity of the Subject Property should have the right to rely upon the existing plat of the area and should rightly presume that any modification or replatting of said plat will be suitable and compatible with surrounding properties. The approval of the Proposed Subdivision could establish a precendent encouraging the replatting of lots in areas adjoining the Subject Property which would adversely alter the character and symmetry of the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Hughes noted in closing that a Rd., had telephoned him and were unable to in favor of the subdivision request. Mr. and Mrs. Carlander, 6800 Indian Hills attend the meeting. However, they were Mrs. Peterson spoke to the Commission. She explained that she and her husband had lived in their home for the last 36 years. Subdivision proceedings had begun earlier this year by her husband, however, he passed away in July and she was continuing the process herself. She noted the strong emotional ties to the house and the neighborhood and commented that the subdivision would allow a new home in which she would live, while her son would occupy the present dwelling. Mrs. Peterson reported that she had spoken with the surrounding neighbors: 16 people are in favor of the plans and 4 people do not approve, but will not oppose the Petersons. She pointed out that it was a unique neighborhood with homes facing in many different directions. She felt due to the lot size, this additional home would not be extremely noticeable. She closed in saying if the subdivision were approved she would be happy to work with the City in order to make the house plans compatible with the City's requirements. Mr. Mark Peterson made the following comments in answer to the Staff report: 1. Although much of the property is located under water, it is not unlike all the surrounding properties. 2. It was indicated that the proposed lot was 19,000 square feet, however, including the part that is underwater it is closer to 30,000 square feet, which is how other lots are measured. 3. The lot line was drawn by the surveyor and would be willing to move it if the Commission requested so. 4. The Pat Moore's 1st Addition was not a similar case. It was a much smaller lot of only 15,000 square feet and there were 8 people in opposition of the proposal at the time. He noted that the Moore's were subdividing and selling for profit. He was interested in his mother's emotional health and her desire to stay in the neighborhood. The present dwelling was too large in size and financial responsibility for her. Therefore, each case should be viewed on its own facts. 5. The symmetry of the neighborhood would not be altered -from their standpoint. There will be no trees removed and the house will be built into the side of the hill. The lot is the second or third largest in the neighborhood and there is plenty of room for subdivision. They was no indication of problems with the surrounding neighbors. Mr. Peterson offered exhibits of support letters from the neighbors along with a list of those people that were contacted. He noted that there were no objections. Mr. Brian Peterson commented on the "close- knit" neighborhood. He noted that in growing up in the neighborhood, the surrounding openness was always appreciated by his family. The family had no intention of sacrificing this. He assured the Commission that the new home would fit well within the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Richard Smith, 6600 Mohawk Trail, noted that he was a builder and developer. He signed the letter of approval but wanted to note some areas of concern to be considered. The new home would completely block the Smith's view of the lake, especially due to the elevation on the lot. If the home were built into the hill, there should be no problem. Another curb cut may not necessarily be appropriate on a street with many blind corners and sometimes fast traffic. Also, because of the setback from the water, there is a very limited space to work with. These points should all be considered. Mr. Orrin Haugen, 6612 Indian Hills Dr. commented that the subdivision should be approved because it would not be..inconsistent with the manner in which the rest of the neighborhood has been developed. He felt it was a gradual slope and the home would fit nicely. He challenged any traffic problem because of speeding vehicles. Mr. Hughes asked Mr. Haugen if he believed the neighborhood's attitudes were changing to allow subdivisions of these larger parcel or if this was a unique situation. Mr. Haugen felt that this was a unique situation due to the size of the lot and the manner in which it would be located. Upon Mr. Gordon Johnson's questioning, Mrs. Peterson assured that they were willing to work with Mr. Smith to find a solution to his concerns in developing the property. Mr. Runyan commented on the difficulty of the situation. He noted the loyalty of the neighbors and the emotion involved for all. He explained that the Commission worked at preserving the deterioration of neighborhoods in similar cases; but added that perhaps this was a unique situation and should be considered on individual merits. Mrs. Peterson noted that 35 years was a long time to preserve the large parcel of land. In addition, the size and shape would make the subdivision less noticeable. Mr. Runyan agreed. Mr. Palmer mentioned that the lack of symmetry is somewhat appealing for the Indian Hills area and possibly this itself was a reason for approval. He moved for approval of the subdivision. Mr. Runyan seconded the motion. All were in favor; the motion carried. COM1MUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 31, 1983 S -83 -9 Peterson Replat of Lot 3, Block 1, Indian Hills Refer to: Attached preliminary plat Generally located North of Indian hills Road and 'Jest of Dakota Trail The subject property measures 92,200 square feet in area and is zoned R -1 Sinale Family Dwelling District. Approximately 29,000 square feet of this property is located within the bed of Arrowhead Lake. The property is developed with a single family dwelling which is centrally located on the lot. The proponent is requesting a subdivision of the property to create one new buildable lot which would be located westerly of the existing dwelling. The new lot would measure about 19, 000 square feet in area (exclusive of water) and about 91 feet in width. The proposed lot line is located 10 feet from the northwesterly corner of the existing dwelling. Due to the height of this dwelling and the location of a narrow, at grade deck on the west side of the dwelling, it appears that this setback would have to be increased to conform with ordinance requirements. This would result in a decrease in the proposed width of the new lot. The Commission may recall that a subdivision of a similar lot located approximately 700 feet west of the subject property was considered about four years ago. This subdivision, entitled Pat Moore's 1st Addition, was denied by the City Council. Recommendation In our opinion, the proposed subdivision exhibits the same characteristics which ,led the City Council to a denial of Pat Moore's 1st Addition in 1979. Although the new lot exceeds the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, this neighborhood should not be subject to minimum standards. The City's Comprehensive Plan notes that the City should allow further subdivision of developed single family lots only if neighborhood character and symmetry are preserved." We believe the proposed subdivision would be in conflict with this statement of policy. The following are some of the stated reasons which the Council cited when denying Pat Moore's 1st Addition. We believe these reasons support the same decision for the proposed subdivision: Indian Hills Road clearly forms a logical dividing line in the vicinity of the Subject Property between large lot subdivisionsyto the north and subdivisions with relatively small lots to the south. Community Development and Planning Commission August 31, 1983 Page two Property owners in the vicinity of the Subject Property should have the right to rely upon the existing plat of the area and should rightly presume that any modification or replatting of said plat will be suitable and compatible with surrounding properties. The approval of the Proposed Subdivision could establish a precedent encouraging the replatting of lots in areas adjoining the Subject Property which would adversely alter the character and symmetry of the surrounding neighborhood. I� 3S 9 I- S � 67200 • N b o _ S c VJ Ip 2�� .m P�d� 3�2 a h*v. . Dk N b �•\\ i MY U. CD). 18 _ �� /rtd'c.�U•'- ''§"f'".�.r.fv..;', r•.:._ <!/ oz z NUMBER Z -83 -8 S -83_10 Kenneth (Chip) Glaser LOCATION Generally located north of Radisson South Hotel and west of Highway loo RE Q U E S T PID, Planned Industrial District to PC -2, Planned Commerical District Glaser's Addition to Edina EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT •�. v ioluic�u k- ,_iilp) u_Laser PID, Planned Insutrial District to PC -2, Planned Commerical District �I S -83 -10 Glaser's Addition to.Edina Mr. Hughes told the Commission that the subject property measures 2.75 acres in area and is zoned'PID, Planned Industrial District. The easterly one -third of the property is improved witn an ottice building which is occupied by Minnesota Federal Savings and Loan. The westerly two - thirds of the property is vacant. East of the property is a service station and restaurant.. South of the property is the Radisson South. To the north and across the street is the First Southdale Bank. To the northwest and southwest are office and office warehouse uses. The proponents are requesting a rezoning to PC -2, Planned Commerical District for the property which would facilitate the construction of a 15,000 square foot building on the westerly portion of the site. About 60% of this building would be occupied by three, complementary fast food restaurants which would share seating facilities. The remainder of the building would be occupied by unspecified retail uses. Based upon the floor area of the proposed building and the seating capacity of the restaurant (about 120) seats, 110 parking spaces are. provided on the property which complies with ordinance standards. Mr. Hughes explained that the proponents have also included the Minnesota Federal building and lot in their petition for rezoning at Staff's suggestion because 1.) the parcel occupied by Minnesota Federal is below the minimum lot size for PID lots; and 2.) a finanacial institution is more appropriately zoned PC -2 rather than PID. Also requested is a lot subdivision of the property to separate the reatil site from the Minnesota Federal parcel. Staff believes the proposed use will provide a needed service facility for the adjacent office and industrial district and that the site is appropriate for the retail uses due to its proximity to adjoining commerical uses and collector and arterial streets. The Comprehensive Plan shows this site as a potential commerical site. Mr. Hughes recommended preliminary rezoning approval conditioned upon acceptable final development plans and final Platting. Final platting,is subject to subdivision dedication. Mr. Chip Glaser and Mr. Peter Jarvis were present to answer any questions. Mr. Jarvis told the Commission that Dairy Queen would occupy one of the restaurant spaces along with a chicken and a bakery type restaurant.in the other two spots. A travel agency and beauty shop would also be located in this one story structure. He displayed plans of the project for the Commission and noted that upon approval, construction would begin this fall. Mr. Gordon Johnson wondered if there was a curb cut across from Metro Boulevard and Mr. Jarvis noted that it was straight across, would be located from Metro Boulevard. Gordon Johnson moved for rezoning and preliminary plat approval subject to subdivision dedication. John Skagerberg seconded the motion. All were in favor, the motion carried. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AUGUST 31, 1983 Z -83 -8 Kenneth (Chip) Glaser PID, Planned Industrial District to PC -2, Planned Commerical District S -83 -10 Glaser's Addition to Edina Refer to: Attached Preliminary Development Plan Generally Located: North of Radisson South Hotel and West of Highway 100 The subject property measures 2.75 acres in area and is zoned PID, Planned Industrial District. The easterly one -third of the property is improved with an office building which is occupied by Minnesota Federal Savings and Loan. The westerly two - thirds of the property is vacant. East of the property is a service station and a restaurant. South of the property is the Radisson South. To the north and across the street is the First Southdale Bank. To the northwest and southwest are office and office warehouse uses. The proponents are requesting a rezoning to PC -2, Planned Commerical District for the property. Such a rezoning would facilitate the construction of a 15,00o square foot building on the westerly portion of the site. About 600 of this building would be occupied by three, complementary fast food restaurants which would share seating facilities. The remainder of the building would be occupied by unspecified retail uses. Based upon the floorarea of the proposed building and the seating capacity of the restaurant (about 120 seats), 110 parking spaces are provided on the property which complies with ordinance standards. Other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance appear to be met. The proponents have also included the Minnesota Federal building and -lot in their petition for rezoning at our suggestion. We recommended this because 1.) the parcel occupied by Minnesota Federal is below the minimum lot size for PID lots; and 2.) a financial institution is more appropriately zoned PC -2 rather than PI D The proponents are also requestinq a two lot subdivision of the property to ` separate the retail site from the Minnesota Federal parcel. Recommendation We believe that the proposed restaurant and retail uses will provide a needed service facilitiy for the adjacent office and industrial district. We also believe that the site is appropriate for the retail uses due to its proximity to adjoining commerical uses and collector and arterial streets. This site was also shown as a potential commerical site by the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends preliminary rezoning approval conditioned upon acceptable final development plans and final platting. Final platting is c dedication. onditioned upon subdivision SCALP 1-.wl SITE DATA TOTAL SITE 1.7 A BUILDING 15,020 S.F. RESTAURANTS 714S.F. RETAIL 6,306S.F. PARKING REOUIRED 91 PARKING PROVIDED 110 0 z. w W z w Z C Lu NUSIN 1 nu en pa I 3,S 79 CL a z ul Q z a tu it W � U Q (� W CL N ui CL �aw k . Mllz�i Al Ul cr W i i Mark W. Peterson Lawyer Mr. C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor 4313 Eton Place Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mr. Courtney: Suite 500 Builders Exchange 609 Second Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612)339.1431 SEPTEMBER 9, 1983 RE: 6604 Indian Hills Road Replat This letter is to supplement the letter from my mother, which is also enclosed. As your agenda for the September 19, 1983, Council meeting shows, my mother and I will be present seeking your approval of the above - referenced replat of her property, as approved by the Planning Commission at their meeting on August 31, 1983. The purpose of this letter is to ensure that you are fully advised of the relevant facts, and are in possession of all exhibits introduced at the Planning Commission hearing. By way of introduction, the purpose of the proposed subdivision is to provide a lot upon which we can build a home for my mother. Her present home, the first in Indian Hills and in which she has lived for 37 years, is simply too large for her and, due to the death of my father on July 4, 1983, she can no longer handle its upkeep. Our plan is to build a smaller house into the hill between her present home and that of the Haugens next door at 6612 Indian Hills Road. Not only will this have the least possible visible effect upon neighborhood appearance and character, but additionally will allow her to remain in the neighborhood and on the land where she has lived virtually all her adult life. As her home is completed, my wife and I will buy her present house, as we have always hoped to do. Having helped to build and having grown up in that house, it is a part of me, just as it is of my mother, and our intention is to make it our perma- nent home. Enclosed please find the following exhibits introduced at the Planning Commission hearing, which have not already been mentioned by my mother: Page 2 Mr. C. Wayne Courtney September 9, 1983 1. Exhibit 4, a list of persons approving the subdivision (which contains some duplication of the names on Exhibit 2. Exhibit 5, a list of persons who do not oppose the proposal; 3. Exhibit 6, a letter from Dr. and Mrs. Carlander, who live across the lake; 4. Exhibit 7, a letter from Dr. and Mrs. Ra'telle, who live up the street; and 5. Exhibit 8, a letter from Mr. Langhans, opposing the subdivision. Since Mr. Langhans did not appear at the hearing, I do not know where he lives nor what the facts underlying his conclusions are. Finally, I would like to address the Staff Report prepared by Mr. Hughes, dated August 31, 1983. 1. He asserts that somewhat less than one -third of the present lot lies on the bed of the lake. It does not appear to be that great a percentage to me, but as you will note from the enclosed map, every other lot around the lake also has some land on the bed, some with approximately one -half of the property so situated. 2. He makes reference to the proposed buildable lot as approxi- mating 19,000 square feet. As he was told before his report was prepared, the lot line is the surveyor's and not ours; using the line indicated on the enclosed surveyor's drawing, the size of the lot would be in excess of 19,000 square feet. And, when the portion on the lake bed is considered, the size should be in excess of 30,000 square .feet. The enclosed drawing also solves the setback problem to which he refers, which he was also told could be remedied with ease by moving the lot line, which still is the case. 3. Most significantly, the report shows that Mr. Hughes relied on a previous denial of a subdivision (the "Moore addition ") over four and one -half years ago which, coincidentally, he supported at that time. In any event, the total dissimilarities between that proposal and ours renders it meaningless, setting aside the fact that assumedly each proposal is considered on its own merits. Page 3 Mr. C. William Courtney September 9, 1983 ,L-tial list of the dissimilarities serves to illustrate the .:lt. "bore 1,500- square -foot lot. 5,000- square -foot subdivision. Eight property owners in opposition. No property owners in favor. Significant removal of trees required. Incompatible with existing dwelling. Peterson 92,200- square -foot lot. 30,000 -plus- square -foot subdivision. One in opposition; unknown whether adjacent owner. All adjacent property owners in favor; others in favor as well. No removal of trees required. Totally compatible with existing dwelling. When you finally consider that Mr. Moore proposed to subdivide, build and sell whereas my mother proposes to subdivide, build and live on the same property, the Moore denial should have no effect at all upon your decision. 4. The Report also suggests that neighborhood symmetry would be altered, with references to large lots north of Indian Hills Road and smaller lots south. It is perhaps too obvious to note that we would do nothing to alter the beauty of our own property, which will remain in our family. However, we question whether 30,000 -plus square feet is really a small lot; even if it is, upon examination of the enclosed map, you can see that there are many smaller lots at the other end of the lake, to the east of my mother's property and elsewhere. In any event, Indian Hills is a neighborhood where, except for lots that are very small, and where houses are very close together, lot size cannot be determined merely by looking. 5. The Report refers to the right of reliance by nearby owners that any replatting will be "suitable and compatible." No one has suggested that my mother's subdivision would not be; in fact, the owner most directly affected, Orrin Haugen, spoke in favor of the subdivision at the Planning Commission hearing. Page 4 Mr. C. William Courtney September 9, 1983 6. Finally, Mr. Hughes refers to the danger of setting precedent. When you consider the extremely peculiar circumstances of this case (the original Indian Hills resident building next door, on her own property, with total adjacent neighbor support), the danger of that happening is remote at best. Second, the proposed lot is clearly large enough for a house, location for the house would not result in alteration of the appearance of foliage, would not have an elevation offensive to anyone, and would essentially be "hidden in the hill." Finally, it seems naive for Mr. Hughes to suggest that you would feel bound to approve all future subdivisions just because you approve this one. You are better aware than I that each case is judged on its own merits and your decision is made on that basis, not merely because you approved or denied a subdivision in the past. To me, it is inappropriate to suggest that that would be the result of approving my mother's subdivision. I apologize for the length of this letter, but the proposal is a matter of great importance to me, and moreso to my mother. She cannot handle the house that she is in, but also cannot leave the property because my father and grandfather built virtually every part of her house themselves. I hope you will agree that the subdivision is appropriate and vote for its approval. Sincerely yours, Mark W. Peterson Enclosures mwp /psf Mr" varren P Pc[ r�")or1 6604 INDIAN HILLS ROAD • EDINA. MINNESOTA 55435 61211941-1668 September 9, 1983 Mr. C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor 4313 Eton Place Edina, Minnesota 55424 RE: 6604 Indian Hills Road Replat Dear Mr. Courtney: On the evening of August 31, 1983, my family and I met with the Planning Commission of Edina, where our proposal to sub- divide my property in Indian Hills was heard. The Planning Commission staff had recommended refusal, based upon a previ- ous decision. After hearing and seeing our proposal, the Commission voted unanimously in favor of the proposed sub- division. To familiarize you with this proposal, we are including a letter that my husband and I used when calling on our nearest neighbors during the last week of June, 1983. (Exhibit 1.) After obtaining our neighbors' agreement, he engaged a sur- veyor. Then, on July 4, Warren died from a heart attack. What. had then been a plan for some time became a necessity, because my present home is too much physically and financially for me to handle alone. We are also enclosing a map (Exhibit 2) that shows how the lot lines are drawn on the area surrounding Arrowhead Lake. It is obvious that the division we propose would be larger than some of the lots, as is also true across Indian Hills Road to the south. We are also enclosing the surveyor's drawing (Exhibit 3).. The original proposed lot line was drawn without our input, and the heavier line that appears is.more in keeping with our in- tentions as to the size of both lots. However, there is no magic to either of the lot lines, and we are more than will- ing to adjust them in accordance with the Council's wishes. We would be happy to have you come to see the property at your convenience; I can be home almost anytime. In the event you happen to drive by, you should know that our property ex- tends approximately two - thirds of the way up the hill (the mowed area is not the lot line). In the event that you approve the recommendation ning Commission, we are willing to situate my new fashion so as to meet the approval of our nearest well as the village requirements. It is my wish a home that would be a credit to Indian Hills, an loved since our purchase of the property in 1947. very much for your consideration. E e 71PL 1,1 of the Plan - home in a neighbors as only to build area we have Thank you EXHIBIT 1 NURIEL & WARREN PETERSOv 6604 INDIAN HILLS ROAD EDI1NA, MN 55435 To Our INDIAN HILLS Neighbors, For the past 35 years it has been our privilege to live at this address and see Indian Hills blossom into perhaps one of the most beautiful developments anywhere in the country. We have raised three children, all of whom together with many of our neighbors, have enjoyed the property and all of the seasons from the ski hills to the ball field, ice skating, canoeing and even an occasional dip in the pond at what has become known as "Peterson's Landing." Our older son Mark, for many years has given us indication that some day he and his wife Barbara would like to take over our home, but only at such time as we are ready to move. We are not yet ready to move but Mark and Barbara feel the need for a larger home away from the downtown/area and we have a proposal we'd like to make to you for your consideration. In our total land area we have approximately 80,000 square feet and according. to the village planner, there is a minimum of 9,000 square feet required for sub- dividing, but again any sub- division would have to be of a size in keeping with other lots in the area. The village planner has also suggested that we contact our neighbors to see if they would have any objections to our sub - dividing, which would be in the south -east corner of our property in an area that once occupied a garden as well as a portion of the baseball and football diamond, ski hill, etc. which has more recently been turned into just lawn. We, of course, would intend to build a home for ourselves in that location so that Mark and Barbara could take over our house, and working with a surveyor we would intend to apportion off an amount of land significantly more than the 9,000 square feet minimum required and in keeping with the size of other lots in the area. In the event you would have no objection to our taking this action, we would appreciate Your signing your name below. _ pp late T"nanks very much for your consideration. Muriel and Warren Peterson � rT11 s 17-- 1 .� X I�L EXHIBIT 4 Lt for Edina City Planning Commission /City Council Building on Western 1/2 acre lot has been approved by the following neighbors: Orren Haugens 6612 Indian Hills Road Howard Bergeruds 6520 Indian Hills Road Les Carlanders 6800 Indian Hills-Road Dick Smith 6600 Mohawk Trail Sandy Cawayna Halla 6604 Mohawk Trail Bill Turners 6608 Mohawk Trail John Neimegirs 6616 Mohawk Trail Dr. Alex Rattelles 6621 Mohawk Trail Dr. James MacGibbon 6601 Iroquois Trail Tbm Gessner 6605 Iroquois Trail Robert Phillips 6604 Iroquois Trail Robert Johnson 6608 Iroquois Trail Don Egberg Indian Hills Road and Dakota Trail Gordon Petersons 6517 Indian Hills Road Dan Bucks 6509 Indian Hills Road Arne Kendems 6501 Navaho Trail Approval obtained after 8/31/83- Warren Reynolds 6401 Indian Hills Rd. Mrs. Phyllis Jensen 6805 Sally Lane Mr. and Mrs. Dick Lidstone 6800 Sally Lane Mrs. Orrin Westberg 6620 Paunee Mr. and Mrs. Jerry Whelan 6604 Paunee EXHIBIT 5 The following neighbors also do not oppose this development: Norman Olsen 6600 Iroquois 'Nail Robert Gardner 6620 Indian Hills Road Joe Buchan .6612 Indian Hills Road David Kung 6700 Indian Hills Road EXHIBIT 6 Lester W. CarlanJer,M.D. 6800 Indian 11.11. Road AnneapoLs, Minnesota 55435 all"t 30' X 983 %A 7� OL;t 46- 01,00 0/ OAIAJ 55435 31 August 1983 Concern: r� ,,,,.,,owned property in this beautiful community for over thirty years and lived :or twenty- eight. We have always considered outselves exceptionally fortunate cur youthful decision to spend out lives in Indian Hills. ;fie or the special pleasures of living in this area has been the friendship and support we have received from our neighbors. Certainly among the foremost families ,,, ti,is list have been the Warren Petersons. They have added a dimension of respon- sibility and durability to our sense of security in this little community. ?th these substantial factors in mind, we approve and even applaud Muriel's wish to remain our neighbor. In addition, we approve of her request to divide the existing property on which she lives. We feel confident that her sense of aesthetics will see her plans suceed without detracting in any way from the charm and beauty we have come to love and appreciate. We approve of her plans admitting our substantial prejudice. The Petersons have helped us in many ways to grow and raise our family. They have our support not only in this matter but in any other endeavor they may pursue. We wish them well. And thank our other neighbors for sharing in this opportunity to express our love for this fine family. Sincerely, Dr. Alex and Patricia Ratelle r EXHIBIT 8 August 31, 1983 Edina Planning Commissioners and City Council Members: Concerning the proposed subdivision of the Warren Peterson property, I would submit two reservations to the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration. Having recently purchased a home in the Indian Hills area, I feel that a significant factor in the market price was the restricted density of the area. I accepted the restrictions on my property on the bases that such restrictions would.be universally enforced in the area. By making exception to the density fact- or through approval of the subdivision, I believe this action would potentially diminish the market value of the properties in the area. The other reservation involves the aesthetics of the area. It appears to me that the lot size of the Peterson property is not sufficient to adequately accomodate another single fanily dwelling. An add- itional dwelling would create a rather congested appearance and would eliminate one of the few views of Arrowhead Lake available to the.area residents. For these reasons, I have to take exception to the proposed subdivision.. Sincerely, First Bank Southdale First Southdale National Bank 7001 France Avenue South • Edina, MN 55435 • 612 - 927 -1200 Industrial Park Office 5108 Edina Industrial Blvd. • Edina, MN 55435 • 612 - 927 -1275 August 26, 1983 Mr. Gordon Hughes City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mr. Hughes Chip Glaser was in my office today presenting a proposed development for property located at the corner of Metro Boulevard and Industrial Boulevard. The property lies south across the street from our detached facility. The proposal would involve approximately 15,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. As proposed, it would appear to be an appropriate use of the site. Yours very truly, Robert L. Stehlik President RLS:dm cc: Chip Glaser Member First Bank System Member FDIC V. "PEI �tUV 1QWPMENI ice` ,.ao f _> A .� q'cT. '7 _ � �i .� s,. q avr � r.vo ..a+., • � °oe� ,v+e� .e�am �f_,.i 9 r : +:fi.?C `,...- d � , + � � . '7 ^�� , ,,.% � ®v � ., .. ,. 'tior .�.... °_7 "al F FP�±v i�• DUS'd";1AL : Minnesota Federal Serving Minnesota Since 1877 � o -e) 34 P G,-J— l- . 355 Minnesota Street • Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101.(612) 298 -6400 July 18, 1983 Mr. Gordon Hughes, City Planner City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mr. Hughes: This is to advise you that Mr. G. R. Taylor of Coldwell Banker is authorized by this Association to represent us in the matter of rezoning our property from Planned Industrial to Planned Commercial. This property is located at the intersection of Edina Industrial Boulevard and Metro Boulevard. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, 4Graydon K. Newman Senior Vice President Enclosure: Check Member Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation 'YAM construction company OF MINNESOTA INCOFIPOFIATEO September 6, 1983 Mr. Gordon Hughes City Planner City of Edina 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Gordon: This letter is a formal response to Ryan Construction Company's attitude relative to the rezoning of the parcel located adjacent to Minnesota Federal, by the group represented by Mr. Chip Glaser. As you well know, Ryan Construction has developed in excess of 600,000 sq. ft. of office space in the immediate vicinity over the course of the last few years. We take a very sincere interest in the present and future development of the surrounding community. I have met with Mr. Glaser and am very comfortable with his development concept. I encourage that development to'serve as a much needed amenity for the area. Sincer ly, RYAN'C NSTRUCTION COMPANY Patrick G. Ryan Vice President PGR /cm /9.5 HOME OFFICE: RYAN BUILDING, P.O. BOX 96, HIBBING, MINNESOTA 55746 -TELEPHONE 218/263 -6888 MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE: 7401 METRO BOULEVARD, SUITE 500 ONE CORPORATE CENTER, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55435 TELEPHONE 612!835 -7990 WAYNE G. POPHAM RAYMOND A. HAIK ROGER W. SCHNOBRICH DENVER KAUFMAN DAVID S. DOTY ROBERT A. MINISH ROLFE A. WORDEN G. MARC WHITEHEAD BRUCE D. WILLIS FREDERICK S. RICHARDS G. ROBERTJOHNSON GARY R. MACOMBER ROBERT S. BURK HUGH V. PLUNKETT, III POPHAM :, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH, KAUFMAN & DOTY, LTD. 4344 IDS CENTER MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 TELEPHONE AND TELECOPIER 612- 333 -4800 ' FREDERICK C. BROWN THOMAS K. BERG BRUCE D. MALKERSON JAMES R. STEILEN JAMES B. LOCKHART ALLEN W. HINOERAKER CLIFFORD M. GREENE D. WILLIAM KAUFMAN OESYL L. PETERSON MICHAEL 0. FREEMAN THOMAS C. O'AOUILA LARRY D. ESPEL JANIE S. MAYERON DAVID A. JONES LEE E. SHEEHY LESLIE GILLETTE MICHAEL T. NILAN ROBERT C. MOILANEN DAVID J. EDOUIST CATHERINE A. POLASKY STEVEN G. HEIKENS THOMAS J. RADIO KATHLEEN M. MARTIN JOHN C. CHILDS THERESE AMBRUSKO DOUGLAS P. SEATON GARY D. BLACKFORD SCOTT E. RICHTER September 16, 1983 Board of Managers Nine Mile Creek Watershed District 3320 West 90th Street Bloomington, MN 55341 Mr. Kenneth E. Rosland, City Manager City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edian, MN 55424 rec1 CI er, Re: City of, Edina Raa44eftt Park /Mud Lake Basic Water Management Project Our File Number 1333 -027 Dear Ken and Managers: 2660 PETRO -LEWIS TOWER 717 SEVENTEENTH STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80202' TELEPHONE AND TELECOPIER 303 -825 -2660 SUITE 802 -2000 L STREET N. W. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 TELEPHONE AND TELECOPIER 202- 887 -5154 The following will summarize the recommendations concerning the scheduling of the construction required to complete the Bredesen Park Basic Water Management Project initiated by petition of the City of Edina. The enclosed preliminary cost estimate prepared by Barr Engineering, together with the estimated project financing schedule assumes start of construction in early winter of 1983 -1984, continuing through the entire year of 1984 and concluding in the summer of 1985. The estimated financing schedule, based upon the allocation of costs in accordance with the district's policy statement, shows a breakdown of the total $880,841 cost between the City and the watershed district. Obviously, the final costs will be dependent upon the bids September 16, 1983 Page 2 which are received and the awarding of the contract. The City hopes to maintain its share of'project costs in the vicinity of $200,000. _ It is anticipated that the bids can be received in the late fall of this year, at which time we will be in a position to develop payment schedules consistent with the work to be performed which will be staged throughout the construction period. The scheduled completion date will be specified as September l-, 1985. The tax receipts continue to look good and the construction bid documents will be prepared so as to provide for payment over the entire construction period. Based upon present assessed valuations and reasonable increases, the managers can expect the third of a mill levy to raise between $360,000 and $375,000 each year. These amounts together with the funds presently available and the City funds should be sufficient to pay for the project over the 1984 -1985 period. Very truly yours, emu/ Raymond A. Haik RAH /cjw /0379w E La "W Ron Clark Construction, Inc. 8200 Normandale Blvd., Suite 301 • Bloomington, MN 55437 • Phone (612) 831 -3201 September 16, 1983 Mr. Gordon Hughs Director of Planning City of Edina 4801 West 50th. Street Edina, Mn. 55424 Re: Request for Revocation of Documents Lots 1 thru 14, Block 1, Gleason Court Addition Dear Mr. Hughs: The enclosed three declarations #3943173, 3865172, 3915247 as recorded in Hennepin County pertain to my Gleason Court Addition. A previous owner of the land filed these documents as part of his proposal to build 84 Condominium Units. They no longer pertain to the current development which consists of 14 lots for double bungalows. My buyers and their legal council are objecting to these documents since they are no longer appropriate to the development. The subject declarations contain a provision for their revocation which require the consent of the City of Edina by way of a resolution revoking them. I have prepared and enclosed a "Revocation and Release of Declar- ation of Protective Covenants" which require my signature and would be filed at Hennepin County along with the Resolution from the City of Edina. Please consider this as my request for you to assist in obtaining the Resolution from the City of Edina. Sincerely, Ronald E. Clark REC:rb; Enc. li 40091583 X15.1 REVOCATION AND RELEASE OF DECLARATION OF PROTECTIVE COVENANTS This Revocation and Release of Declaration of Protective Covenants, made this day of September, 1983, by RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION, INC., a corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (hereinafter called "Declarant "); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Declarant is fee owner of record of all of the property situate in the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, legally described as: Lots 1 through 14, Block 1, Gleason Court, according to the duly recorded plat thereof. (hereinafter called "the Property "); WHEREAS, the Property is subject to certain restrictions for the benefit of the City of Edina as set forth in Declaration of Protective Covenants dated July 31, 1970, filed December 31, 1970, recorded as Document No. 3865172, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds, as set forth in Declaration of Protective Covenants dated February 1, 1971, filed November 5, 1971, recorded as Document No. 3915247, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds, and as set forth in Amended Declaration of Protective Covenants dated April 27, 1972, filed April 27, 1972, recorded as Document No. 3943173, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds (hereinafter collectively called "the Declarations "); and WHEREAS, the Declarations provide for the amendment, modification, release, or revocation of the protective covenants at any time and from time to time by the then owner of the Property upon the consent of the City of Edina in the form o a --Resolution�f the City Council of the City of Edina, a certified copy of which rs -to be duly recorded in the Office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, by virtue of a certain Resolution of the City Council of the City of Edina, said City of Edina has heretofore consented to the release and revocation of the Declarations as hereinafter set forth, a certified copy of said Resolution being attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, in order to effect the foregoing, the Declarations are hereby released and revoked in their entirety and all of the Restrictions, Conditions and Covenants therein contained are hereby declared to be null and void, effective upon the recording of this Revocation and Release with the Office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the said Declarant has caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written. RON CLARK CONSTRUCTIONS, INC. By: Ron Clark, President Declarant STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SS. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) On this day of September, 1983, before me, a Notary Public within anchor said county, personally appeared RON CLARK, to me personally known, who, being by.me duly sworn did say that he is the President of RON CLARK CONSTRUCTION, INC., the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that said instrument was signed on behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors and said RON CLARK acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: GROSSMAN, KARLINS, SIEGEL & BRILL Suite 1350 100 Washington Square Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 - 2 - RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Ron Clark Construction., Inc. is the fee owner of record of the following described property: Lots 1 through 14, Block 1, Gleason Court, according to the duly recorded plat thereof ( "the Property "), and WHEREAS, the Property is subject to certain restrictions for the benefit of the City of Edina as set forth in Declaration of Protective Covenants dated July 31, 1970:, filed December 31, 1970, recorded as Document No. 3865172, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds, as set forth in Declaration of Protective Covenants dated February 1, 1971, filed November 5, 1971, recorded as Document No. 3915247, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds, and as set forth in Amended Declaration of Protective Covenants dated April 27, 1972, filed April 27, 1972, recorded as Document No. 3943173, Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds (hereinafter collectively called "the Declarations "); and WHEREAS, the Declarations provide for the amendment, modification, release or revocation of the protective covenants at any time and from time to time by the then owner of the Property upon the consent of the City of Edina in the form of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Edina, a certified copy of which is to be duly recorded in the Office of the Register of Deeds in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, Ron Clark Construction, Inc. has petitioned the City of Edina to revoke and release the Declarations; and WHEREAS, the continued enforcement of the Declarations is no longer necessary and the revocation and release of said Declarations is in keeping with the spirit and intent of applicable ordinances and the development presently contemplated for the property; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Edina hereby revokes and releases the Declarations in their entirety. ADOPTED THIS 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 1983. Draft Statement. of Purpose Edina Committee on Alternative Strategies for Delivering Municipal Serivices The economic pressures facing the City of Edina have caused the City Council to raise questions about the fundamental nature of the services provided by the City. The Council finds unsatisfying the traditional responses to these economic pressures, i.e, selected services are cut or reduced and /or property taxes are increased as "solutions" to the problems. As a part of the Council's effort to find more satisfactory solutions, we wish to form a Committee of leaders from the community who can help us analyze the basic questions related to the kinds of services which should be offered by the City as well as the most effective manner in which the services can be, delivered. Specifically, the Committee will be charged with analyzing the services currently provided by the City of Edina with the idea of recommending whether those services need to be provided at all and, if so, whether the services should be provided directly by City employees or by other mechanisms. The Committee should develop its recommendations unfettered by political realities and should, instead, focus its attention on finding creative ways for the City to accomplish its objectives regarding the health, safety, and welfare of its residents in a manner which may be far different from the traditional approach we have taken to this set of challenges. The Committee will receive staff support from the City and will be asked to report to the Council periodically upon the progress it is making. Beyond that, no subject should be considered "taboo" nor any potential solution left unproposed because of a perception that the Council or others might find implementing that proposed solution to be difficult. While it is clearly the Council's intention to have this Committee examine both.the services currently-provided by the City as well as the method in which those services are delivered, it is also our desire for this Committee to suggest ways in which the community (either through the City or otherwise) could take steps to prevent a need for provision of these basic City services. The Committee should also examine ways in which residents of the community would be able to benefit directly by steps taken by the City in order to make delivery of services more effective (e.g. if the City were to implement a fire prevention program which reduced fire losses by an appreciable amount, the residents of the City would benefit little from that program if the savings of fire losses simply were passed along to various insurance companies providing services to City residents). The Council believes that this Committee has the opportunity not only to dramatically improve the way the City will function over the next several decades, but its work may also serve as a model for other municipalities all over the country who are facing the same challenges as Edina is currently facing. Unquestionably, there will be risks associated with the implementation of strategies or recommendations which might be developed by this Committee. The Council believes, however, that the rewards associated with these actions far offset these risks. We further firmly believe that this community is endowed with many individuals whose career or other a experiences have created in them an extraordinary capability to help the City solve the challenges facing it. We expect that this Committee should be able to take advantage of these resources with a benefit which will result for all persons who reside in our community.. �,ff MEMO TO: KE ND, FROM: B Kojetin V DATE: September 19, City Manager 1983 Attached is a copy of the Motion from the September 13 Park Board Meeting. KR:mk Bob Kojetin mentioned that he has received suggestions that it might be nice to name a park after Herman'Strachauer who served on the Park Board from 1948 -1958 and was chairman at the time that most of the city park land was acquired. He thought it would be appropriate to choose one of the parks nearest to where Mr. Strachauer had lived at that time, and that there were several parks in that area which are presently named according to the street on which they are located. Don Wineberg MADE A MOTION THAT BEARD PARK BE RENAMED "HERMAN STRACHAUER PARK ". The MOTION WAS SECONDED AND PASSED. a' T,4-1 MEMORANDUM TO: MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL - CITY ATTORNEY FROM: KENNETH ROSLAND, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CABLE TELEVISION RATE INCREASE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 7, 1983 The Southwest Suburban Cable Commission, the joint powers organization that oversees the administration of our cable television franchise, has reviewed the proposed rate increases made by Minnesota Cablesystems- Southwest, our cable op- erator. Edina's representatives on the Commission are C. Wayne Courtney and Kenneth Rosland. On August 17, 1983, the Commission held a formal public hearing with respect to the proposed rates. Testimony was received from Minnesota Cablesystems- Southwest (Minnesota) and Commission staff. The results of this hearing lead to a decision that the Commission recommend to the city councils that the proposed rates be approved and appropriate changes be made to the cable franchise ordinance. A resolution to this effect accompanied by supporting findings of fact are included here. Ordinance change language, approved by the city attorney, Commission legal counsel and the Commission itself, is included with this portion of your packet. The exhibits referenced in the findings of fact are available for your review. These exh.i.bits were introduced as sworn testimony at the Commission's August 17, 1983 hearing. , KER: j km ZI RESOLUTION NO. 8.24.83 -1R A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING CERTAIN RATE CHANGES BE APPROVED BY ITS MEMBER CITIES WHEREAS, the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission (SWSCC) is a joint powers entity organized pursuant to a Joint Powers Agreement entered into between the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield; and WHEREAS, the SWSCC has undertaken a process of reviewing cer- tain rate changes to the Franchises granted by its Member Cities to Cablesystems Southwest; and WHEREAS, the process of the SWSCC has included a comprehen- sive study of the proposed rate changes, an in -depth hearing and public hearing and deliberation and review of Findings; and WHEREAS, the SWSCC desires to recommend approval of the requested rate changes and to transmit to its Member Cities for review and approval, its Findings, and a proposed Ordinance, and. the record and exhibits of its proceedings. NOW, THEREFORE, at a meeting of the SWSCC on August 24, 1983, on motion by _ Redpath and seconded by Cotton the following was resolved: 1. That the attached Findings and proposed Ordinance were approved. 2. That the Administrator of the SWSCC is hereby directed to transmit to the Administrator of each City, the Findings and proposed Ordinance and a record of the proceedings of the SWSCC. DATED: z�17 y/ SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION By C_ / 02c, C. rne Courtney Its: irman M RESOLUTION OF FINDINGS OF FACTS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN CABLE COMMISSION (HEREINAFTER "COMMISSION ") WHEREAS, the Commission was formed by the City Councils of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield, Minnesota (hereinafter "Parties ") in May, 1982, to coordinate the admi- nistration and enforcement of the respective cable communications franchises of the Parties; to report and recommend to the Parties relative to the operation of their respective cable communications franchisees; and to perform such other duties as are required; and WHEREAS, based upon the authority granted to it pursuant to Article VII, Section 3, subdivision Q, the Commission is to advise and recommend to the Parties as to all requested rate or charge changes; obtain from the cable communications franchisees and from any other source, such information relating to rates, costs and service levels as any Party is entitled to obtain; and conduct hearings as the Commission deems appropriate; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, at a meeting of the Commission, that the Commission does hereby make the following: I. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 1. . The Parties have received a request for a rate adjustment as set forth with supporting documentation and justification in a document entitled Minnesota Cablesystems- Southwest Rate Adjustment Proposal (hereinafter "Proposal ") dated June 24, 1983. 2. The Commission Attorney met on Friday, July 29, 1983, with the Parties' attorneys to discuss the process for reviewing -1- the Proposal and preparing, if necessary, a franchise ordinance amendment. 3. In a memorandum to the Commission's Operating Committee and Commission dated August 4, 1983, the Commission Attorney recommended a process for the Commission to follow in preparing a recommendation on the Proposal. The process was approved by the Operating Committee and recommended to the Commission. 4. The Commission at a regular meeting on Wednesday, August 17, 1983, reviewed the proposed process and received an explana- tion of the process from the Commission Attorney. 5. The Commission received a memorandum from its Attorney dated August 17, 1983, regarding the issue of whether Minnesota has completed construction of the Initial Service Area. The Attorney cited Article VI, Section 4C(2) of the ordinance which states that a rate change may not be approved until two years after commencement of construction or upon completion of all construction required by Article V, Section 1, whichever is later in the opinion of the City. 6. The Attorney, in the above described memorandum, reported that an area exists on Oakdale Avenue in Edina that is not yet completed. The Attorney further reported that Minnesota's response to this area of non - compliance is that a private easement is necessary to serve that area and that dif- ficulties have arisen regarding those negotiations. 7. On August 17, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. the Commission held a public hearing, after publishing notice and by further providing -2- notice over the cable system channels as provided for in the franchises, at the City of Edina regarding the Proposal. B. Prior to starting the hearing the Commission Chairman asked the Commission Attorney to review for the public in attendance the hearing process. This was done. Also, the Commission Attorney asked the Attorney for the company to stipu- late on the record to the following: A. The company accepts the process; B. The company waives the two week time period within which a City, pursuant to the franchise Section 4 Subdivision D(4)(d), is required to schedule a public hearing on the request; C. The company agrees to be bound by the record and proceedings before the Commission. Mr. Popham, Attorney for the company, agreed to this stipula- tion, and added only that his company would provide informal pre- sentations at the hearings before each city. 9. The Commission received oral testimony from Gary Mizga, Executive Vice President and Regional Manager for Minnesota. Mr. Mizga introduced the following Exhibits: A. Schedule of Delivery'of Rate Adjustment Document to Southwest Officials (attached hereto as Minnesota Exhibit 1); and B. Cablesystems- Southwest's response to the SWSCC's chart entitled "Areas of Non - Compliance with Ordinance and Offering" (attached hereto as Minnesota.Exhibit 2); and -3- C. Minnesota Cablesystems- Southwest's Rate Adjustment Proposal of June 24, 1983, with errata letter dated July 18, 1983 (attached hereto as Minnesota Exhibit 3). 10. According to Minnesota Cablesystems- Southwest (hereinafter "Minnesota ") the proposed adjustment is necessary because of unexpected cost increases including high interest rates, costs associated with the build for the additional miles of plant to accomodate new subdivisions which were built up be- tween the writing of the proposal and actual build, as well as mileage not included in the original estimates, doubling of con- verter costs, and lower than expected revenue because of market penetration difficulties associated with gaining access to multi- unit buildings and the general economic climate. 11. According to Minnesota, at current subscriber rate levels, losses will reach $9 Million by the end of 1985. For the fiscal period just ended, almost $500,000 was lost from opera- tions. An extra $4 Million of equity has been injected in order to relieve the pressures of higher plant, equipment and interest costs. 12. The proposed rate adjustment, according to the proposal, would provide the following financial benefits: A. 1984 losses would decline by almost $260,000; B. 1983 losses would follow suit by $530,000; and C. An economic foundation would be provided allowing the company to raise additional financing. ME 13. Mr. Mizga testified that Minnesota was aware of problems with a private easement on Oakdale Avenue in Edina, that Minnesota has been in continuous contact with residents in that area and that certain developments in St. Louis Park would now make it possible to service the Oakdale Avenue area without securing the private easement. 14. The Commission Attorney and the Commission itself were pro- vided an opportunity to question Mr. Mizga. 15. Mr. Ralph Campbell III, Franchise Administrator (hereinafter "Administrator "), presented oral testimony regarding his reports to the Commission. The following Exhibits were introduced by Mr. Campbell: A. Rate Increase Ordinance Criteria Report (attached - hereto as Commission Exhibit 1); B. Financial Analysis Rate Increase Proposal (attached hereto as Commission Exhibit 2); C. Cooper Associate, Inc. Technical Evaluation dated June 8, 1983, (attached hereto as Commission Exhibit 3). 16. The Administrator addressed the proposed rate adjustment in light of its fairness to residents and subscribers and the extent to which Minnesota has provided service to Schools, Hospitals, Libraries, Publicly Owned or Leased Buildings and similar institutions within the Cities. 17. With respect to the issue of fairness to residents and subscribers, the Administrator concludes Minnesota has been fair. -5- Complaints have been relatively few compared to the high number of residents and subscribers. The Administrator's report also illustrated additional steps being taken by Minnesota to deal more effectively and fairly with subscribers. 18. With respect to the issue of service to public buildings and similar institutions, the Administrator reports that Minnesota stands in substantial compliance with this criterion. 19. The Administrator's report also documented the quality of service offered by Minnesota and the extent to which Minnesota has adhered to the terms of the Franchise. The Administrator's report was supplemented by a performance evaluation prepared by Cooper and Associates. The areas of non - compliance were accom- panied by a response from Minnesota. 20. Minnesota, the Commission Attorney and the Commission itself were provided an opportunity to question Mr. Campbell. 21. The Commission retained the consulting firm of the Cable Television Information Center (hereinafter "CTIC ") to prepare a financial analysis of the proposal. CTIC submitted its analysis, entitled ANALYSIS OF THE PENDING RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS- SOUTHWEST (hereinafter "Analysis "), dated August 9, 1983. 22. The Commission also received oral testimony from Deborah Love - Heilig of CTIC regarding the Financial Analysis prepared by CTIC. Introduced as an Exhibit at this time was the Analysis OF THE PENDING RATE INCREASE PROPOSAL OF MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS- SOUTHWEST (attached hereto as Commission Exhibit 4). Q M. 23. The Analysis casts showed cumulati 1985 a total of $27.6 forecast for the same 24. These higher attributed to: illustrates that original company fore - ve capital expenditure at the end of fiscal Million will be invested. The original period was $20.1 Million. costs, according to the Analysis, can be A. More plant miles than were originally forecasted B. Higher per mile construction costs; C. High converter costs; and D. Design changes. According to the Analysis, Minnesota has provided ample sup- port for the concept that the added cost was necessary and bene- ficial to the system and its subscribers. 25. CTIC states that Minnesota's original proposal assumed 690 miles of plant of which 624 miles would be aerial plant and 66 miles would be underground construction. Minnesota reports that by the end of fiscal 1983, Minnesota will have constructed 595 miles of aerial plant and 150 miles of underground plant for a total of 745 miles. To date, the average per mile cost of new plant construction for Minnesota has been close to $17,830, close to 39 percent higher. 26. CTIC also states that in its original proposal, Minnesota had planned to use Scientific Atlanta Descrambler- Converters with an estimated cost of $70 per unit. Because the Scientific Atlanta Converter was not available at the time of construction, -7- Minnesota decided to use the Zenith Z -TAC addressable converter which costs approximately $150 per unit. According to CTIC, the Z -TAC allows for many operator benefits in terms of their security and reducing signal theft but has meant an additional $3.1 Million in capital spending. 27. CTIC reports further that the decision to use Z -TAC conver- ters also required upgrading of headend equipment. Additional higher headend cost can be attributed to the addition of one earth station above the original plan of two earth stations. This provides for a greater diversity of satellite signals. 28. CTIC reports that the system offers profitability at this time only to the limited partners who can fully benefit from the tax savings of the losses and investment tax credits. The proposed rate increase, according to CTIC, will not immediately have any effect on system profitability. According to the .Analy- sis, the principal benefit of the rate increase will be to hasten positive cash flow'in order to ensure that debt service or repayment can begin on schedule in 1986. 29. CTIC concludes that it finds the proposed rate adjustment is justifiable and merited. 30. Minnesota, the Commission Attorney and the Commission itself were provided an opportunity to question Ms. Love - Heilig. The Commission asked Deborah Love - Heilig to review each of the standards for reviewing a rate change request in the franchise ordinance. Ms. Love - Heilig then reviewed each of those standards. Wa 31. An opportunity was provided for members of the public to comment on the proposed rate adjustment. No public comments were received. 32. Based on the foregoing, it is the Commission's finding that the proposed rate adjustment is justifiable and merited; that the standards for reviewing a proposed rate change have been considered and properly addressed; that the failure of Minnesota to wire certain areas of Oakdale Avenue in Edina are being ade- quately and timely resolved; and the members of the public have been afforded reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard on the proposed rate adjustment. II. RECOMMENDATIONS A. The Council should accept this report from the Commission. B. The Council should adopt the ordinance set forth allowing Minnesota to implement its rate adjustment. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF CITY OF AMENDING THE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE ORDINANCE NO. , EXHIBIT B, PARAGRAPH I, SUBPARAGRAPHS Al, A3, B, C, D, E AND H1 AND H4 TO CHANGE THE RATES AND CHARGES FOR INSTALLATION, MONTHLY RATES, CONVERTER, RECONNECTION, EXTRA OUTLETS, COMMERCIAL RATES, FM SERVICES AND PREMIUM SERVICES AND PROVIDING FOR THE EFFECTIVE TIME OF THIS ORDINANCE. The City Council of the City of ordains: SECTION 1. Ordinance No. , Exhibit B is amended to read: Subdivision 1. Paragraph I.A.1. is amended to read: I. SUBSCRIBER NETWORK A. Basic Rates. 1. TIERS Standard 150 Ft. Aerial Installation Monthly First Outlet) TIER 1 Universal Service. $ 19 -.95- Free Converter not re- 24.95 quired for this service. TIER 2 Family Service. Subscriber owns $3:9.-95 $ 3.95 converter 24.95 Subscriber rents $.3:9.95 Various converter from 24.95 Grantee. TIER 3 Full Service. Subscriber owns $ i-9-.5 5.-95. converter 24.95 6.50 Subscriber rents converter from $ i9.95 *Various Grantee 24.95 -1- Seniors & Homebound Free $ 3.36 Various 5.96 5.52 *Various TIER 3 Expanded Service. (Expanded)(Included converter and unit) $ i9.95 $ 19.95 $ 9.34 24.95 13.95 13.25 Subdivision 2. Paragraph I.A.3. is amended to read as follows: 3. Subscribers will have the option of renting various types of converters as follows: Grantee Converter Rate Schedule Initial Monthly Description Rate 1. Blee3e Ge enter $ 1 on 2-1. OAK L -35 1.50 42. ZENITH Z -TAC A. Set -top converter 4.00 B. Set -Top Converter with remote control including remote 5.50 volume. C. Enhanced Set -Top converter with enhanced remote control in- 6.00 cluding remote volume muting, favorite channel. The rental rate shall be added to the appropriate base rate shown in the table above if the subscriber rents the converter from Grantee. Subscribers may choose to rent or buy converters from sources other than the Grantee, however, a Grantee converter or descrambler will be necessary for premium services. -2- Subdivision 3. Paragraph I.B. is amended to read as follows: B. Extra Outlets. TIER 1 Converter not required *Installation (At time of initial Installation) Monthly $104)8 each Free 15.00 TIER 2 Subscriber owns converter $19.GG• each $1.95 each 15.00 Subscriber rents converter $19 --OGL each * *Various 15.00 TIER 3 Subscriber owns converter $10.09 each $3 -.95 each 15.00 4.95 Subscriber rents converter from Grantee $10.00 * *Various 15.00 * Each outlet installed after the initial installation will be $14.95 $19.95 each. ** Same Converter rental option as provided for under Section IA of this Exhibit B. Subdivision 4. Paragraph I.C. is amended to read as follows: C. Reconnection. Charges for reconnection of existing installations shall be $14- -95- $19.95 for each reconnection regardless of the number of outlets. Subdivision 5. Paragraph I.D. is amended to read as follows: D. Commercial RatPC Fnr These rates will be subject to negotiation and will depend on the number of outlets required and the type of services selected. A typical commercial rate for department store requesting 10 outlets on TIER 3 with no converters and no premium pay would be: -3- Installation (at cost on time and material basis) Monthly Rate 1st outlet $1 -5.GG $20.00 2nd outlet $39 -:$0 15.00 3rd outlet $ 5.09 10.00 Additional outlets $ 4.09 9.00 Subdivision 6. Paragraph I.E. is amended to read as follows: E. FM Rates. FM service is ineluded �- he rate stru,tues fev rates shall be $10.00 for installation and $2.50 per month. FM service shall be available only on TIER 2 and TIER 3 and not available on TIER 1. Subdivision 7. Paragraph I.H.1. is amended to read as follows: H. Premium Services. 1. Premium service rates shall be as follows: MONTHLY C1 ? Home Box Office 7-.-58 8.95 CINEMAX 7.58 8.95 The Movie Channel 7.-58 8.95 Showtime 7.50 8.95 Premiere 7.-58 8.95 HTN plus 8.95 Bravo 8.95 The Disney Channel 9.95 Spectrum Sports 9.95 Subdivision 8. Paragraph I.H.4. is amended tb read as follows: 4. Installation for premium services shall be free with the intital installation of TIER 2 or 3 service. Thereafter, any number of premium services added at the same time shall be added �� at a maximum cost of $14-95 19.95. SECTION 2. Process for Adoption and Acceptance. Subdivision 1. Adoption by Other Member Cities and Cancellation. That notwithstanding any other provision of this Ordinance, if all of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield do not adopt a similar franchise Ordinance amendment then those that have may cancel the Franchise Ordinance amendment adopted by it. This right of cancellation must be exercised within thirty (30) days after all Cities have acted on a similar amendment. Subdivision 2. Time for Adoption and Acceptance. Grantee shall have thirty (30) days from the last date of adoption of a similar franchise Ordinance amendment by all of the Cities listed in Section 9 of this Ordinance, to accept this franchise Ordinance amendment in form and substance acceptable to City. However, in no event will acceptance occur later than ninety (90) days after the adoption of this franchise Ordinance amendment unless the time for acceptance is extended by City. Such accep- tance by Grantee shall be deemed the grant of this franchise Ordinance amendment for all purposes. Subdivision 3. Requirements with Acceptance. With its acceptance, Grantee also shall deliver to City an opinion from its legal counsel, acceptable to City, stating that this franchise Ordinance amendment has been duly accepted by Grantee, that the said Ordinance, as amended by this Franchise Ordinance -5- amendment is enforceable against Grantee, and the corporations which signed the Agreement of joint and several liability dated January 9, 1981 related to the franchise granted by the said Ordinance, in accordance with its terms, and which opinion shall otherwise be in form and substance acceptable to City. Subdivision 4. Effectiveness of Ordinance. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and publication and acceptance in writing by Grantee. Passed and adopted this day of 1983. CITY OF MINNESOTA By Mayor And Manager Um II. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED RATE INCREASES AND MINNESOTA CABLESYSTEMS - SOUTHWEST'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE RATE INCREASES Table 1 summarizes the proposed rate increases and the percent increase in the rates for the currently offered service. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF RATE CHANGES Current Proposed Service Rate Rate Monthly Fees Tier 1 - Tier 2 (Including converter) $ 5.45 Tier 3 a) Including set top con- $ 8.95 verter b) Including remote con- $10.45 verter Tier 3 Interactive (Including converter) $10.95 FM $ 1.95 Installation Fees Aerial drop $19.95 Underground drop $34.95 FM/Additional Outlet $10.00 $ 5.45 $10.50 $12.00 $13.50 $ 2.50 $24.95 $39.95 $15.00 Percent Change No change No change 17.3 percent 14.8 percent 23.3 percent 28.2 percent 25.1 percent 14.3 percent 50.0 percent II -2 TABLE 1 (Continued) SUMMARY OF RATE CHANGES Service Converter (Monthly) Oak Tier II Set Top Tier III with remote Set Top Tier III Enhanced Converter with Key Lock and Remote Additional Outlets Tier II (including con- verter) Tier III (including set top converter) Change of service Reconnect Current Proposed Rate Rate $ 1.50 - $ 3.00 $ 4.00 $ 4.50 $ 5.50 $ 5.00 $ 6.00 Percent Change No change 33.3 percent 22.2 percent 20 percent $ 3.45 $ 3.45 No change $ 6.95 $ 8.95 28.8 percent $14.95 $19.95 33.4 percent $14.95 $19.95 33.4 percent MCS is proposing no change in the rates offered for its Tier 1 and Tier 2 service. Tier 1 will remain a no monthly charge service. The monthly charge for Tier 2 remains at $3.95 per month plus a $1.50 charge for renting the Oak converter. The Tier III basic service rate is proposed to increase from $5.95 per month to $6.50 per month or 9.2 percent. The Tier III converter rental fees are targeted to increase from $3.00 per month to $4.00 per month or 33 percent for the set top converter; from $4.50 per month to $5.50 per month or RESOLUTION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY BOARD WHEREAS, the Crosstown Highway 62 segment from Highway 100 east to the Edina border is under Hennepin County control, and WHEREAS, the Crosstown Highway is a location of frequent accidents in Edina as compared to other freeway roads within the community, and WHEREAS, from 1979 through 1982 there have been 131 reported accidents on the Crosstown Highway segment from France Avenue to Highway 100 of which 59 were personal injury accidents, and WHEREAS, this segment of highway appears to have more potential hazard due to its configuration then other highway /freeway segments in the community, and WHEREAS, during inclement weather considerable incidents occur with vehicles leaving the roadway and result in constant police and public safety staff time monitoring this highway segment to the detriment of the rest of the community, and WHEREAS, the Edina Traffic Safety Committee has recommended to the City Council of Edina that action be taken to promote improvement of this highway segment to reduce accidents and incidents; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Edina requests that the Hennepin County Board take action to correct the existing problems on this highway segment (Crosstown Highway 62 from east Edina City borders to Highway 100). ADOPTED this 19th day of September, 1983. RESIDENCES WHERE TALL GRASSES IN LAWNS HAVE BEEN A PROBLEM: 5920 Wooddale Avenue. Backyard 6145 Brookview Avenue Front and Back 4121 W. 62nd Street Front and Back 4111 W. 62nd Street Side Yard 7128 Heatherton Trail Front and Back 6309 Maloney Avenue Front Yard 4700 Anaway Drive- Around Foundation 4021 Kipling Avenue Backyard 3915 W. 42nd Street Backyard 9/19/83 j 1983 Cr F EDINA CHECK RE ER 08 -31 -83 E 1 CHr-CK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDGR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N09 INV. # P.O. 0 MESSAGE y 214067 08/30/F3 21.90 CAPITAL CITY INVENTORY 50 -4632- 822 -82 MANUAL , 21.90 • _- ,+ 9 �• ••r *ff _ *-C Ks .E 1 214138 09/13/F3 18.23- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL ` �y 214138 09/13/P3 911.29 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 893.06 r I �y ••fir• *•* —CKS 214285 08/30/P3 960.01- JOHNSON WINE CREDIT 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL .�, 214285 08/30/83 960.02- JOHNSON WINE CROIT 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ;. 214285 08/30/F3 960.01- JO}+NSCN WINE CREDIT _ 5Q -4628- 862 -F6 _ _ _ _ _ MANUAL 29880.04 -* f f i f f i • t t- C'(S 215138 08/30/83 36.54 ED PHILIPS INVENTORY 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 36.54 d y„ •f•••. CKS 215435 08/3C/F3 31.78 PRIOR WINE INVENTORY 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL �, 31 .78 • *ffffr *** -CKS 222067 09/13/83_ _ ___ 12.60 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI_ _... _..__.._..___ _ 50- 4628- 842- 84 MANUAL 222067 09113/83 997.43 CAPITAL CITY OISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 4w 19010.03 • -- - *f * -CKS " OAF. / 222135 08/30/83 1.22 -- __. _ _EACLEWInE CREDIT 50 -3710- 003 -00 _ _ MANUAL 222135 09/13/83 8.29- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 222135 09/13/P3 8.99- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 222135 09/13/P3 _.. --- -414.44 -__ - EAGLE_ WINE. - - - -- -_ 50- 4628 - 822 -82__- -- MANUAL 222135 09/13/P3 449.66 EAGLE WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL �hr 222135 08/30/133 61.10 EAGLE WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 MANUAL 906.70 • �'' irrffi *r* -CKS • 222139 09/13/13 63.76- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 222138 09113/83 9.63- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 222138 09/13/83 _- .25 _ ED PHILLIPS_____._ - - - -- - — - 50- 3710- 822 -82 - -50- MANUAL 040` 222138 222138 09/13/83 09/13/F3 15.77- ED PHILLI °S 3710- 842 -64 - -- -- - MANUAL .50 ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL -• 22213? 09/13/83 - 17.69- ED PHILLIP __ S._- _ - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL , 222138 09/13183 1.17 E7 FHILLIPS 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL y 22213? 09/1303 8.97- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 1 222138 09/13/83 -- - - -- _ 116. 68- .------ - -ED_- PHILLIPS _------ _.__-- _- ------- _ - -_ -- - -- - - - -- 50- 3710 -- 842- 84-- - - - -_- MANUAL 222138 222139 09/13/83 09/13/P3 5.26- 213.34- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL / I' r � I� 1983 CITY CF EDINA CHECK RE. _g ER 08 -31 -83 ,E 2 CHECK,NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO* INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE '1 ' 222138 09/13/E3 3,187.R0 ED FHILLIPS 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL I' 222138 09/13/83 59833.90 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 222138 0013/83 10,666.82 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL ' 222138 09/13/°3 12.59- ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222138 09/13/E3 481.25 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 822 -82 _ I' T MANUAL 222138 09/13/83 - -449.40 - -- fD FHILLIPS -- - 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222138 09/13/83 58.50- ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL ,I 222138 09/13/E3 984.25 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 222138 09/1303 788.60 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222138 09/13/83 25.30- ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL ' 222118 09/13/83 263.00 ED FHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 862 -86 - -- MANUAL 229008.45 • - - -- - - - - - -- - **..** - - - - * ** -CKS i 222190 09/13/8,3 8.60- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 222190 09/13/E3 80.98- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 222190 09/13/83 131.32- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 2221901 09/13183 430.15 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 222190 09/13/E3 4,049.19 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 222190 09/13/E3 69565.80 GRIGGS COOPER AAD C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL IC.,Q24.23 *. * *.• * *►-CKS 222271 09/13/83 3.44- _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 87.57- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 120.94- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 642 -84 MANUAL ' 222271 09/13/E3 10.51- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 222271 09113/E3 10.51 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 10.51- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL " 222271 09/13/83 3.23- INTERCONTINENTAL PK _50- 3710 - 862- 86 MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 9.43- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL ' 222271 09/13/83 19.71- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL " 222271 09/13/E3 197.15- INTERCONTIN =NTAL PK 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 222271 09/13/E3 4.378.58 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL " 222271 09/13/83 26.00 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 222271 09/13/E3 6,047.03 _ - -- - INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ _ 50- 4626- 842 -84_ _ _ -- _ MANUAL i' 222271 09/13/E3 26.00 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL " 222271 09/13/E3 161.94 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 9,857.97 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 43.60 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL ' 222271 09/13/E3 .80 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 222271 09/13/E3 1.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222271 09/13/93 172.10 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222271 09/13/E3 8.00 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222271 99/13/E3 525.54 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222271 09/13/93 8.00- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL " -�` 222271 09/13/83 525.34- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222271 09/13/E3 8.00 _ _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 ._ _. _ MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 525.34 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MIA MUAL 222271 09/13/E3 9.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 222271 09/13/E3 471.68 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 222271 _ 09/13/13 _ _ _ 6.40 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 222271 09/13/83 985.85 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 462'8- 862 -86 MANUAL �•" i a 1993 CT F EOINI CHECK RE ER 08 -31 -83 E 3 CHECK NO. DATE __ -_- _ AMOUNT _ -_ _ _ VENOQR._- - -_ - ITEM _.DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV,_tl -- P. O.pMESSAGE-- -- I � r , 22269.91 f '. �I .1 •••••i i•f -CKS . 222285 09/13/93 13.57- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 222285 09/13/93 4.90- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 222285 09/13/83 4.48- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 222285 09/13/93 - 4.50- _ JOHNSON WINE - - - - - -- 50- 3710 - 842 -84 - MANUAL 222285 09/13/P3 7.82- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 222285 09/13/F3 3.65- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 2222.95 09/13/93 20.62- JOHNSCN WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 222285 09/13/P3 6.00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 222285 09/13/83 1,031.10 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 222285 09/13/F3 182.91 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626 - 862 -P6 _ MANUAL 222285 G9/13/P3 4.40 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 222285 09/13/P.3 678.56 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222285 09/131F3 245.09 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 222285 09/13/F3 9.60 JOtINSGN WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222285 09/13/93 5.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222285 09/13/93 _ 225.00. _ JOHNSON WINE - 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222285 09/13/83 5.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 222285 09/13/23 2.00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222285 09/13/83 224.49 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222285 09/13/83 391.22 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 222285 -39/13/9.3 5.20 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 2,956.33 • ••• -CKS � 222378 09/13/03 128.15 MARK VLI SALES INC 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222378 09/13/93 330.27 MARK VII SALES INC 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 222378 09/13/93 251.19 MARK VII SALES INC 50- 4628 - 862- 86 MANUAL 709.61 • ...•.• o f -GKS 222418 79/13/93 48.96- OLC PEORIA 50- 3700 - 842 -84 MANUAL 222419 09/13/P3 9.90- _ CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 - -_ MANUAL 222418 09/13/F3 23.75- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 222418 09/13/P3 12.89- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/13/P3 _- 12.88- CLC PEORIA _ 50- 3710 - 842- 84_____ -__ -- MANUAL 222418 09/13/83 76.41- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/13/F.3 12.98 OLD PEORIA 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/13/P3 12.39- _ _ LLD PEORIA _ _ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 _ MANUAL 222419 09/13/83 81.83- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 22241E 09/13/83 19187.80 CLC PEORIA 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL " 222418 09/13/93 39820.92 __ CLD - PEORIA 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/13/8.3 49091.72 OLD PEORIA _ 50- 4626- 862 -86 _ MANUAL 222418 09/13/93 490.25 CLD PEORIA 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 222418 09/13/93 .00 CLC PEORIA _._ _..._-- ._.. -_. 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/13/93 631.17- CLD PEORIA 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/13/F3 644.05 CLC PEORIA 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/ 13/83 _ 12.88- _CLC_PEORTa _ _ _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222418 09/13/93 631.17 CLD PEORIA 50- 4628- 842 84 MANUAL �.;', 222419 09/13/03 12.48 CLC PEORIA 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 1983 CITY CF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 08 -31 -83 PAGE 4 ' i• CHECK N3. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. p P.O. # MESSAGE ' 222418 09/13/83 619.52 CLC PECRIA 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 109588.24 ._- • rrr►rr +r+ —CKS 222435 09/13/83 2.65- fRTOR WIkE CC 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 222435 09/13/83 132.50 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 129.85 r rir -CKS 222540 09/13/83 5.92- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 222540 09/13/83 4.11- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 222540 09/13/E3 - 4.80 - - -- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 222540 09/13/83 296.22 16IN CITY WINE - - -50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 222540 09/13/83 205.53 TWIN CITY W I N T 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 222540 09/13/83 6.00 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 502.52 ►rirar + ►+ —CKS � ' 222700 09/13/E3 147.50 FIX UP 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 147.50 r ' rrrtrr • ++ -CKS 228067 09/13/83 375.97 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 228067 09/131F3 4.95 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 228067 09/13/83 119.92 _ CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 228067 09/13/83 4.40 CAPTTAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 228067 09/13/F3 6.75 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 228067 09/13/83 _ _ _ 22.4.85 - CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ; 228067 09/13/E3 5.50 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL ' 228067 09/13/83 367.40 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 19109.74 r irrrir rrr —CKS 228135 09/13/83 7.64- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 228135 09/13/E3 23.11- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL - 228135 09/13/F3 15.53- -- - - -- EAGLE 6TkE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 228135 09/13/83 .10 EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL ' 228135 09/13/F3 19155.73 EAGLE WIkE: 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL ` 228135 09/13/E3 -- -- - - -- 5.12- - - - -- EAGLE WIkE SO- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 228135 09/13/83 381.80 EAGLE WIRE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 228135 09/13/E3 776.68 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 228135 08/30/83 270.55 _ EAGLE_ - WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL 29533.46 r •' 999999 - - -- - - -. . -- - - -- - - --- -- - - - -- -- - - - - -- rrr -CKS 'I 'S 228138 09/13/83 11.96- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL ^ 223138. 09/13/83 - - -- - 7.66- - -- - ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 228138 09/13/83- 8.42 - ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 228138 09113/83 112.80- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 1983 CI'i EDINA CHECK RE .R 08 -31 -83 5 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ __ VENDOR _ _ ITEM_ DESCRIPTION___ __ACCOUNT- N0. ",- INV.,_A_P_.0._I MESSAGE - - - �„' 223138 09/13/93 .07 ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 228138 09/13/83 16.30- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL +, 228138 09/13/F3 22.90- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL k 228138 Da /13/E3 2.94- EO PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 228138 09/13/F3 11.59- _ ED PHILLIPS_ _ _ _ 50- 3710 - 862- 86,__ _ __ _ __ MANUAL r iy 228138 _ 09/13/P3 .16 ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 228138 09/13/+!3 9.13- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 228138 09/13/83 2C.44- ___ -- ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-862-86 MANUAL 22813E 09/13/E3 36.22- EO PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 22813P 09/13/E3 7.11- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL ! 2281 38 09/13/93 19145.00 ED FHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 _ _ MANUAL 228138 09/13/E3 59639.85 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL y, 228138 09/13/93 579.60 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 228138 09/13/93 7.R4- ED PHILLIPS -__ 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 228138 U9/13/F3 597.97 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL y 228138 09/13/93 383.00 ED FHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 228139 09/13/93 421.05 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 228138 09/13/F3 800.00 ED FHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 228138 09/13/93 3.26- EO PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 228138 09/13/F3 456.60 _ ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4628 - 862- 86 MANUAL 228139 09/13/93 1,810.90 EO FHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL %0 228139 09/13/E3 355.48 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 228138 09/13/P3 147.00 ED FHILLIPS 50 -462E- 862 -86_ MANUAL 228138 09/13/93 _ 1.022.00 ED PHILLIPS _ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL y, 228138 08/3[/93 273.04 ED PHILLIPS INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 MANUAL -c + 139353.45 • . __ AW ffifff **6-CKS 228190 09/13/93 38.78- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL I! v 228190 09/13/P3 27.13- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 228190 09/13/93 1,939.09 - _ _. GRIGGS. COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 228190 09/131E3 19356.45 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 4w 39229.63 * • f i t► f f f f f- C K S " ti✓ - t 228271 99/13/83 _. 3.73 -_ _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK - -- -- - 50- 3710 - 822 -82- MANUAL 228271 09/13/F3 9.02- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 229271 09/13/93 152.05 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL c 228271 09113/93 152.05- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 228271 09/13/83 157.05- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 4w 228271 09/13/E3 4.64- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL c 228271 09/13/E3 60.92 -- - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -3710- 862 -86 - MANUAL 221271 09/13/E3 79602.86 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 40 228271 09113/E3 43.20- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL e 228271 09/13/83 79602.86 INTERCONTINENTAL PM 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 228271 09/13/83 43.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 4" 228271 09/13/93 7.602.46- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 228271 U9/13/F3 43.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ _ _ - 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 228271 09/13/F3 39046.10 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 228271 09/13/E3 20.00 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL ! 223271 09/13/83 186.94 INTERCONTI NENTAL PK 50 -4628- 822 -82 - -_._ MANUAL 228271 09113/93 2.01 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL i,' 228271 09/13/83 451.31 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 228271 09/13/E3 6.80 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 228271 09/13/13 4.80 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 228271 09/13/F3 232.30 INTERCONTINENTAL PK ' 11.365.95 • 228285 09/13/E3 - 3.49- - JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/E3 .08 ._ - -_- - WINE ' 228285 09/13/F3 14.53- JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/83 27.42- JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/E3 39.69- JOHNSON NINE ' 228285 09/13/83 3.72- JOHNSCN WINE 228285 09/13/F3 4.50- JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/13 10.52- JOHNSON WINE ' 228285 09/13/E3 8.00 JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/E3 1,371.40 JOHNSON WINE 226285 09/13/E3 _ 174.75 JOHNSCN WINE ' 228285 09/13/83 4.37- JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/83 _ _ 2.00 JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/E3 16.00 JOHNSON WINE ' 228285 09/13/E3 25.60 JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/F3 726.91 JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/83 19984.67 JOHNSON WINE ' 228285 09/13/E3 2.00 JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/83 4.00 JOHNSON WINE 228235 09/13/E3 116.25 JOHNSON WINE 228285 09/13/F3 8.00 JOHNSON WINE 229285 09/13/13 225.00 JOF+NSCN NINE 228285 09/13/F3 526.18 JOHNSON WINE ' 59152.60 228418 09/13183 1.25- OLD PEORIA 228418 09/13/83 9.01 - --- - - CLC PEORIA 228418 09/131F3 26.03- CLC PECRIA 228418 09/13/83 38.45.- CLC PEORIA_ 228418 09/13/13 24.68- -_ -_ CLO PEORIA 228418 09/13/E3 33.20- CLC PEORIA 228418 99/13/83 450.50 CLC PEORIA 228418 09/13/83 - 11922.96 - -- - CLO PEORIA 228418 09/13/E3 19660.15 CLO PEORIA 228418 09/13/E3 62.70 CLO PECRIA 228413 09/13/83 1,301.80 CLC PEORIA 228418 09/13/F3 1,234.32 CLC PEORIA 69499.81 + •►i ra * 228433 09/13/83 79.90 PAUSTIS 8 SONS 1 228433 09/13/83 1.60 FAUSTIS 9 SONS 81.50 • •iif** 08 -31 -83 PAGE 6 • ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.G. h MESSAGE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL • 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 822 -82 50- 3710- 822 -82 50 -3710- 842 -84 50- 3710 - 842 -84 50 -3710- 842 -84 50- 3710- 862 -86 50- 3710- 862 -86 50- 3710- 862 -86 50- 4626- 842 -84 50- 4626- 842 -84 50- 4628- 822 -82 50- 4628- 822 -82 50- 4628- 822 -82 50- 4628- 842 -84 50- 4628- 842 -84 50- 4628- 842 -84 50- 4628- 842 -84 50- 4628- 862 -86 50-4628-862-86 50 -4628 -862 -86 50- 4628 - 862 -86 50- 4628- 862 -86 50- 4628 - 862 -86 50- 3710 - 822 -82 50- 3710 - 822 -82 50- 3710- 842 -84 _ 50- 3710- 842 -84 50-3710-862-86 50- 3710- 862 -86 50- 4626- 822 -82 50- 4626- 842 -84 50- 462 6- 862- 86 50- 4628- 822 -82 50- 4628- 842 -84 50- 4628- 862 -86 50 -4628- 842 -84 50- 4628- 842 -84 **+ -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL * ** -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL * *• -CKS MANUAL MANUAL • ** -CKS j 1983 CI = EDINA CHECK RE ER 08 -31 -83 = 7 CHECK AO. DATE AMOUNT_ -__ VENDOR__ ITEM C1ESC.RIP_TION ACCOUNT .- N0._- I.NV9_A- P. -O.- A MESSAGE _ 228540 09/13/93 3.82— TWIN CITY WINE _., 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL � 228540 09/13/83 7.79— TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL �. 228540 09113/83 4.52— TWIN CTTY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 228540 09/13/83 2.30 _ TWIN CITY _WINE _ _ _ _ 50- 4628- 822 -82 _ _ MANUAL e , 229540 09/13/83 191.45 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 228540 09/13/83 10.00 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ;1 229540 09/13/83 389.80 TWTN CITY WINE _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 228540 09/13/P3 5.20 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL y 228540 09/1303 226.02 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL P09.14 + CKS 229703 08/30/93 51.00 DOUBLE COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50 -4632- 822 -82 MANUAL 14„ 22870? 08/3O/F3 505.76 OCUBLE COLA BCTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 MANUAL 556.76 + 228704 08/30/93 108.05 ROYAL CROWN INVENTORY 50- 4632- 822 -82 MANUAL i' 224704 09/30/F3 517.60 _- ROYAL CROWN . INVENTORY ,_- __,_______ __ _.__ 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 625.65 • r • f . • + f - - - - - __._ ••• -CKS - �, 235067 09/13/93 .00 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL , 235067 09/13/83 1.65 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI _ ._50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 235067 09/13/F3 108.15 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 235067 09/13/93 11.10 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL ! 120.90 + #fifff •f + -CK5 �! 235135 09/13/83 25.45— EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 235135 09/13/83 15.44 EAGLE WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL ! 235135 09/13/93 15.44— EAGLE_ WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 235135 09/13/P.3 15.44— EAGLE WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 235135 09/13/83 11272.64 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 235135 09/13/P3 772.11 EAGLE - -WINE _- 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 235135 09/13/93 772.11 — EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 _ MANUAL rr , 235135 09113/83 772.11 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL t 2,003.86 • f f f f r r rrr —CKS 235138 09/13/E3 89.42- - ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 235138 09/13/93 12.33- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL • 235139 09/13/83 _ -..- _ _ 14.67- ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 235138 09/13/83 7.68- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL « 235138 09/13/83 13.30- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL • " 235138 09/13/93 4.90 ED PHILLIPS __ -- 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 23513P 09/13/83 9.94- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL _ 235138 09/13/93 20.58- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 235138 09/13/93 _ 25.36 - ED PHILLIPS _. .._ 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 235138 09/13/93 7.92- ED PHILLIPS 5D- 3710 - 842 -84 _ -._. _ MANUAL r 235138 09113/93 7.21- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL ! 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 08 -31 -83 PAGE 8 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. # MESSAGE 235138 09/13/E3 1.80 ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL • 235138 09/13/F3 48.59- _ ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 235138 09/13/E3 15.09- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 235138 09/13/P3 49421.21 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL • 235138 U9/13/F3 245.00 -__ ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 235138 09/13/F3 396.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 235138 09/13/F3 2,429.25 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 235138 09/13/F3 616.55 ED- PHILLIPS - _ - - -__ 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 235138 U9/13/83 3F4.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 235138 09/13/23 733.50 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL • 235138 09/13/E3 665.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 235138 09/13/83 360.25 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 842 -R4 MANUAL ' 235138 09/13/E3 19268.10 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL • 235139 09/13/E3 19028.75 __ ED PHILLIPS_ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 235139 09/13/F3 496.80 ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 235138 09/13/E3 90.00- ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL • 235139 09/13/23 754.50 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 12,954.52 r f* f f r ***-CKS 235190 09/13/F3 67.72- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 235190 09/13123 67.72- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 235190 J9/13/83 6 7. 72 GRIGGS COOPER ANO C 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 235190 09/13/F3 21.80- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 842 -34 MANUAL 235190 09/13/E3 _ 50.93- GRIGGS.COCPER AND C _ ._ _ .. 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 235190 09/13/F3 3,385.91- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 5C- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 235190 09/13/F3 39385.91 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 822 -82 MANUAL 235190 09/13/F3 3,385.91 _ GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 822 -82 MANUAL 235190 09/13/E3 19089.95 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 235190 09/13/F3 29546.68 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 6,882.09 ffrfrf * ** -CKS 235271 09/13183 116- .17- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F.3 96.74- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/83 -_ _ _ 2.40 - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 13.59- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 8.18- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 235271 09/13/E3 192.17- _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 235211 09/13/83 27.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 822 -192 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 59808.73 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 _ 4,837.27 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 28.40 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 235211 09/13/83 50.80 INTERCONTTNENTAL PK 50- 4626 - 862 -F6 MANUAL ' 235271 09/13/F3 99608.76 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 _ 120.90 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/83 .Ft INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/E3 7.20 _ __ _- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 679.71 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 235271 09/13/F3 409.02 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 235271 09/131F3 - -- 3.60 - - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL i- 21,,153.14 . -._ .. - - - -- ----- - - - - " -- kkr -CKS � ,T rrf iff ER 08 -31 -83 _ 9 I ITEM DESCRIPTION ____ ACCOUNT__N0.- _I_NY._# P.O._ # MESSAGE =1 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL <i J MANUAL 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL , 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 862 -86 1983 Cl r EDINA MANUAL _ 50- 3710- 862 -86 CHECK RE 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 842 -R4 CHECK NO. DATE ------ AMOUNT___ VENDCR 23541F 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 235285 09/13/P3 14.14- JOHNSON WINE rfr -CKS 235285 09/13/F3 9.92- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626 - 822 -82 235285 09/13/E3 .02 JOHNSON WINE CLC PECRIA 235285 09/13/P_3 .29 235418 WINE 4,409.27 235285 09/13/03 .13 _JOHNSON JOHNSON WINE 09/13/F3 235285 09/13/83 8.70- JOHNSON WINE 235418 2352R5 09/13/F3 7.47- JOHNSON WINE 235285 09/13/E3 4.22- JOHNSON WINE MANUAL 235285 09/13/03 707.15 JOHNSCN WINE 235285 09/13/93 1.45- _ JOHNSON WINE 235285 09/13/E3 _ 496.05 JOHNSON WINE ..- - - - 235285 09/13/03 15.20 JOHNSCN WINE 09/13/F3 235285 09/13/03 7.20 JOHNSON WINE 235435 235285 09/13/03 373.60 J04NSON WINE 235285 09/13/03 4.80 JOHNSON WINE MANUAL 235285 u9/13/83 435.13 JJFNSCN WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 2352.85 09/13/x3 9.20 JOHNSON WINE 235285 09/13/03 6.69- JOHNSON WINE . 1,995,.97_+ _ 235540 ,T rrf iff ER 08 -31 -83 _ 9 I ITEM DESCRIPTION ____ ACCOUNT__N0.- _I_NY._# P.O._ # MESSAGE =1 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL <i 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL , 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL _ 50- 3710- 862 -86 _ MANUAL 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 842 -R4 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL _ 50-4628-842-84 23541F 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -66 MANUAL . 50- 3710- 862 -86 rfr -CKS • • • I.• 235418 09/13/03 38.09 - CLO PEORIA 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 235418 09/13/23 2.64- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 235418 09/13/03 20.97- CLC DEORIA _ 50- 3710 - 842 -R4 MANUAL 235418 09/13/F3 20.03- CLO PEORIA 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 23541F 09/13/F3 11.65- CLC PECRTA 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 235419 09/13/P.3 88.18- CLO PEORIA_ 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 235418 09/13/F3 1,904.72 CLC PEORIA 50- 4626 - 822 -82 MANUAL 23541P 09/13/03 1,049.70 CLC PECRIA 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL " 235418 09/13/F3 4,409.27 CLC PEORI4 _ -.- -__ __ -- 50- 4626- 862 -86 _ MANUAL 235418 09/13/F3 132.25 CLC PEORIA 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 235418 09/13/83 1,001.80 CLC PEORIA 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 235418 09/13/P3 582.55 _ CLO PEORIA 50- 4628- 862- 86 MANUAL 89897.73 # • r # f f ..- - - - - rr r -CKS 235435 09/13/F3 1.04- PRIOR WINE CC 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 235435 09/13/P3 .44 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 235435 09/13/F3 51.80 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 2.35435 09/13/03 22.05- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 29.15 + irrfrf fir -CKS 235540 09113/03 2.50- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 235540 09/13/83 125.04 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 23554C 09/13/F3 3.20 _- TWIN - CITY_ -WINE .. -_.50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 125.74 + ' lkiiif rr -�K 238174 08/30/03 959000.00- 1ST SOUTHOALE BANK TRANSFER 50 -1010- 000 -00 MANUAL • • • I.• 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 238174 08/30/83 95,000.00 1ST SOUTI,DALE BANK TRANSFER ,238174 08 /3C /F3 959000.00- 1ST_SOUTFDALE - BANK TRANSFER 959000.00 -* r f f . • . 08 -31 -83 PAGE 10 ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. h MESSAGE 50- 1010 - 000 -00 MANUAL 50- 1010 - 000 -00 MANUAL 238430 08/30/83 19,075.12 STATE TREAS PERA EMP PERA CCNT 10- 4145 - 510 -51 199075.12 1 f a► f i 238700 08/30/83 100.00 -N-IC-CLINIC 100.00 242063 08/30/83 19981.01 ELUTE CROSS 19981.01 + PRO SERV EMP HOSP CONT 10 -4224- 420 -42 10- 4156- 510 -51 fraffa 242067 09/13/83 9.00 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 3710- 862 -86 242067 09/13/P3 3.06- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 3710- 862 -86 242067 09/13/83 9.00- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 3710 - 862 -86 242067 09/13/F3 14.85 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 242067 09/13/23 842.67_ CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 242067 09/13/F3 _ 1.65 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 242067 09/13/83 132.15- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 242067 09/13/F3 626.8.6 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 242067 09/1303 1.65- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 242067 09/13/83 7.65 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 242067 09/13/83 123.15 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 242067 09/1.3/F3 _ 132.15 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 242067 09/13/F3 123.15- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628 - 862 -86 242067 09/13/83 1.65- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 862 -86 242067 09/13/83 123.15 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 242067 09/13/83 1.65 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628 - 862 -86 242067 U9/13/83 1.65- _____..__CAPITAL. CITY DISTRI _ 50 -4628- 862 -86 - - - - -- - 19613.77 r trtfir 242135 09/13/83 7.77- EAGLE WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 242135 09/13/83 9.03- WINE. 50- 3710 - 862 -86 242135 09/13/23 388.65 _ EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 „ 242135 09/13/F3 451.57 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 823.42 attrrr = 242138 09/13/23 24.35- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 622 -82 242138 09/13/83 9.71- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 242138 09/13/F3 28.85 -_ ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 242138 �• _ 09/13/03 57,43-________E0 PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 842 -84 242138 09/13/23 29.20- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 *** -CKS MANUAL *** -CKS MANUAL *** -CKS MANUAL ** * -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL * ** -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL Ik • �I A i i o i' W v w ! f f f 4 f 242198 ffffff 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 fff -CKS 08/30/F3 4.975.44 GRCUP HEALTH EMP CONT 10- 4156- 510 -51 MANUAL 4.975.44 • ff R -CKS 03/30/P3 8.16— INTER PKG 1983 Ci )F !:DINA MANUAL CHECK R IER 12.24— 08 -31 -83 iE 11 DISCOUNT 50- 3710 - 002 -00 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENOCR ITEM DESCRIPTION—___ .A000UN.T__NO_._INV. -- N.P.O._ 1 MESSAGE 99/13/P3 242138' 09/13/83 28.02- ED PHILLIPS MANUAL 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 2� INTERCONTINENTAL 242138 09/13/E3 5.22— ED PHILLIPS .09 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL �I 50- 3710 - 842 -84 242138 09/131F3 113.31— ED PHILLIPS PK 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 09/13/13 242138 09113/F3 24.30- ED PHILLIPS MANUAL 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL 242138 09/13/F3 3.90— ED PHILLIPS 3.20— 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50 -3710- 862 -86 242138 09/13/83 19217.45 ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL `! 09/13/83 242133 O9 /13 /F3 9.55— ED PHILLIPS MANUAL 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL INTERCONTINENTAL 242138 09/13/E3 2.871.51 _ ED PHILLIPS _ _ 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL I 50- 4626- 842 -84 242138 09/13/13 5.665.64 ED PHILLIPS PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 09/13/P3 242138 09/13/83 485.65 ED PHILLIPS MANUAL 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 1 INTERCONTINENTAL 242138 09/13/F3 1.442.25 ED PHILLIPS _ 7_.372.51 50-4628-842—F,4 MANUAL 50- 4626- 862 -86 242139 09/13/83 1.400.75 ED PHILLIPS PK 50- 4628 - 842 -84 _ _ MANUAL 09/13/83 242138 09/13/F3 1.459.80 E PH IL LT PS MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 242138 09/13/F.3 19214.93 ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4628- 862- 86. MANUAL 242138 09/13/F3 261.08 ED PHILLIPS —_ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 242138 09/13/83 190.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 15.875.22 + 1�ffffff fff —CKS n' �,i 242190 09/13/13 9.66 —� GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL v 242190 09/13/13 138.03 -4 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 242190 09/13/F3 23.31 —j GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 242190 C9/13/F3 482.90/ GRIGGS COOPER AND C _ _ 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 242190 09/13/E3 1.165.40 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 242190 09/13/E3 6.901.Al GRIGGS COOPER ANO C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 8.378.91 f W v w ! f f f 4 f 242198 ffffff 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 242271 fff -CKS 08/30/F3 4.975.44 GRCUP HEALTH EMP CONT 10- 4156- 510 -51 MANUAL 4.975.44 • 1 1 4 14 ff R -CKS 03/30/P3 8.16— INTER PKG DISCOUNT 50- 3710 - 001 -00 MANUAL 08/30/F3 12.24— INTER PKG DISCOUNT 50- 3710 - 002 -00 MAAIUAL 08 /3C /F3 _ 12.24— _ _ INTER _ PKG DISCOUNT.._,___ 50- 3710 - 003 -00 MANUAL 99/13/P3 63.21— TNTERCONTTNENTAL PK - 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 09/13/83 .26 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/P3 .09 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/F3 4.83— INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/13 170.79- TNTERCONTTNENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/P3 19.91— INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ _._50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/83 3.20— INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 09/13/F3 147.45— INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 09/13/83 14.90 _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 09/13/F3 39160.89 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 09/13/E3 8.539.78 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/83 49.20 _ 1N7ERCONTTNENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/P3 13.12— INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/F3 35.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 09/13/F3 7_.372.51 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 09/13/F3 241.A0 /NTERCCNTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 09/13/83 995.77 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 1 1 4 14 ' 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 08 -31 -83 PAGE 12 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. 0 MESSAGE ' 242271 09/13/E3 4.88- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 242271 09/13/83 1.60 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 242271 09/13/83 11.60 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL • 242271 09/13/E3 160.11 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -E6 MANUAL 242271 09/13/83 3.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 242271 08/3C/83 _ 408.00 INTER PKG INVENTORY 50 -4630- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 242271 08 /3O /P3 612.00 INTER PKG INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 MANUAL 242271 08/30/83 612.00 - - -- INTER PKG - - INVENTORY 50- 4630- 862 -86 rANUAL 21,758.78 * _ _ _ _ _ r.rrrr + ++ -CKS ' 242285 09/13/83 17.77- JOHNSCN WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 242285 09/13/83 _ 13.40- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL ?242285 09/13/83 17.80- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL ' y242285 09/13/23 .06 JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL X242285 09/13/83 9.71 - JOHNSON DINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 242285 09/1.3/E3 26.81- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 242285 09/13/23 3.69- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL n242285 09/13/83 4.00 JOHNSON 61 NE 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 242285 09/13/23 - -- -- - 670.40 - JOHNSON WINE 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 242285 09/13/23 8.00 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 242285 09/13/83 1 @340.80 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 242285 09/13/83 19.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 242285 ►, 242285 09/13/23 09/13/23 888.84 485.79 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL _ JOHNSON WfNE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 242285 09/13/83 3.33- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 242285 09/13183 8.40 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 242285 09/13/E3 11.20 WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 242285 09/13/E3 890.18 _JOHNSON JONNSCN WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 242285 09/13/83 4.00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 242285 09/13/23 — - 184.53 - - - - - - -- JOHR-SCN WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 49422.89 t rrrrrr -- - +.+ -CKS ' 242415 08/3C/E3 3.666.70 MEO CENTER EMP CONT HCSP 10 -4156- 510 -51 MANUAL _ 3x666.70 • rrrr►r +•• -CKS 242418 09/13/83 2.50- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 242418 09/13/83 21.42- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 242418 79/13/83 2.61- OLD PEORIA 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 242418 09/13/E3 16.33- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 242418 09/13/E3 51.29- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 242418 09/13/83 6.68- CLO PEORIA 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL ' 242418 09/13/23 57.72- OLD PEOR14 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 242418 09/13/E3 .58 OLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 242418 09/13123 - -- - 130.98 -- OLE PEORIA 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 242418 09/13/83 1,071.17 OLD PEORIA 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 242418 09/13/23 2,564.85 CLC PEORIA 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 242418, 09/13/E3 - --- 2988606 CLO PEORIA 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 242418 09/13/23 -- 125.40 - - OLD PEORIA - 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 242418 09/13/23 216.50 OLD PEORIA 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL `1 1983 Cl F EDINA CHECK R iER 08 -31 -83 E 13 I CHECK A0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. # P.O. 0 MESSAGE 24241P' 09/13/F3 25.34- CLD PECRTA 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 1 24241E 09/13/F3 28.85- CLC PEORIA _ _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 242418 09/13/F3 334.25 CLO PEORIA 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL ' 7,716.95 • - -- -- - -- - • f f • f f !!! -CKS V - - , ,• 242435 09/13/F3 3.14 -- PRIOR WINE CO _ -50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 242435 09/13/83 156.75 FRIOR WIN= CC 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 242435 08/30/E3 70.70 PRIOR WINE INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 MANUAL ... J 242435 08/3C/F3 70.70 PRIOR WINE INVENTORY - 50- 4630- 862 -86 MANUAL 295.01 ! - r. ; I. fff•f. _. _. -..__ - __. - _- -_ ••! -CMS. 242540 09/13/F3 3.20- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 242540 09113/!3 10.44- TWIN CITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84_ MANUAL 242540 09/13/F3 5.79- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 242540 09/13/F3 160.29 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL , 242540 09/13/F3 3.60 TWIN CITY WINE 50-4628-822-82 242540 09/131F3 522.34 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 24254C 09/13/!3 12.00 TWIN CITY WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 242540 09/13/F.3 289.83 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 242540 09/13/!3 5.20 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 973.83 ! !!• -CKS / 242589 08/30/!3 234.72 WESTERN LI -FE- EMP LIFE INST - - -- 10- 4157 - 510 -51 MANUAL 234.72 ! fff ••f •f! -CKS 242702 28/30/F3 50.00 BROWN INST CONTRIBUTION 10- 4200 - 508 -50 MANUAL 50.00 • 242103 08/30/83 107.80 ERIC ANDERSON PERSONAL SERV 10- 4120 - 160 -16 MANUAL • 107.80 • i r, 242704 08/30/F3 39000.00 POSTMASTER POSTAGE WATER 10- 4290 - 510 -51 MANUAL 3,000.00 • 242705 09/07/F.3 398.00- LA BELLES CORRECTION 29- 4572 - 702 -70 MANUAL 242705 09/07/F3 398.00 _ LA BELLES_ AMMUN 29- 4572- 702 -70 MANUAL 242705 09/17/83 398.00 LAEELLES AMMUN 29 -4572- 702 -72 MANUAL 242105 09/[7/83 398.00- LA BELLES CORRECTION 29- 4572- 702 -72 MANUAL 242705 U9/07/F3 398.00 LA BELLES - -- AMMUN 29 -4572- 720 -72 MANUAL 398.00 •t•f •• __ .. •f • -CKS ,. 243368 09/07/!3 2,295.20 MUTUAL DISABILTY PREMIUM 10- 4158 - 510 -51 MANUAL 2,295.20 • � lffflf f•f-CKS ,. y � 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK NO. DATE 243706 09/07/83 AMOUNT --- - -- 14,827.20 149827.20 CHECK REGISTER VENCOR STATE TREAS 08-31-83 PAGE 14 ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. ft P.C. 4 MESSAGE FICA CONT 10-4149-510-51 MANUAL • fit —CKS 250067 09/13/83 183.70 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50-4628-842-84 MANUAL 250067 09/13/83 2.25 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 59-4628-842-84 MANUAL 250067 09/13/83 294.50 CAFITAL CITY DISTRI 50-4628-862-86 MANUAL 250067 09/13/83 7.20 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50-4628-862-86 MANUAL 487.65 • 250135 09/0183 EAGLE WINE 50-3710-822-P2 MAAIUAL 250135 09/13/83 19.22— EAGLE WINE 50-3710-842—ta4 MANUAL 250135 09/13/E3 26.76— EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 V.A NaU A L 250135 09/13/E3 16.23— EAGLE W INE 50-3710-862-86 MANUAL 250135 09/13/83 1 XF EAGLE WINE 50-3710-862-86 MANUAL 250135 09/13/83 3.42— EAGLE WINE 50-3710-862-86 MANUAL 250135 09/13/E3 721.95 EAGLE WINE 50-4628-822-82 MANUAL 250135 09113/23 961.16 EAGLE WINE 50-4628-842—F4 MANUAL 250135 09/13/83 1037.95 EAGLE WINE 50-4628-342-84 MANUAL 250 115 09/13/83 525.00 EAGLE WINE 50-4628-842-84 MANUAL 250135 09/13/83 811.55 EAGLE WINE SO -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 250135 09/13/P3 54.00- EAGLE WINE 50-4628-862-86 MVJUAL 250135 09/13/83 170.94 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MA.'-JUAL 49 395.56 250138 09/13/83 --- .37 ----- ED PHILLIPS --ED---PHILLIPS 50-3710-922-82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/E3 40 3- 1 50-3710-822-82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 4.01— ED FHILLTRS 50-3710-822-82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/P,3 .77— ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-822-82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/P3 5.38— ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-822-82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 12.82— ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-842-84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/F3 ... .... —ED.PHILLIDS 50-3710-842-84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/03 12.32- ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-842-84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 41.21— ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 .14 ED FHTLLIP-S 50-3710-842—F,4 MANUAL 250138 09/13/P3 21.03— ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-842-84 MANUAL 25013.3 09/13/F3 4.75— ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/E3 7.74— ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/P3 6.90— E13 PHILLIPS 50-3710-862-86 MANUAL 250138 09/13/?3 21.47— ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 250138 09/13/E3 1.93— ED PHILLIPS 50-3710-862-86 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 21.72— ED PH.TLLTPS 50-3710-862-86 PA'IUAL 250138 09/13/E3 105.15— ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 - 33.94— En PHILLIPS 50-3710-862—F6 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 .14 ED PHILLTFS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 250138 09/13/e3 18.34— ED PHILLIPS 50-4626-822-82 MANUAL 250138. 09/13/83 29015.30 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 822 -82 MVIUAL 250138 09/13/F3 29060.42- -ED PHILLIPS 5G- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13183 7009- ED PHILLIPS 50-4626-862-86 MANUAL 1983 Cl EDINA CHECK RL ER C8 -31 -83 15 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR_ ITEM_ DESCRIPTION _______ACCOUNT- _NO. -INV. N P.O._l MESSAGE 2501384 09/13/83 59257.50 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 25013R 09/13/23 38.68 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 269.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/F3 200.50 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 19051.25 _ ED PHILLIPS 4628- 842 -P4 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 640.75 _ _ ___________50- ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 237.72 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 11.52 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/E3 39 6.RD ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/1.3/83 7.10- ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 652.27- ED FHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 652.27 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -24 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 19696.99 ED FHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 250138 09/13183 344.75 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 1,073.30 ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 250138 09/13/83 1,086.19 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL X250138 09/13/F3 96.70 ED -PH I_L_LIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 169106.36 f -- ' ffffff ***-C KS - 250190 09/13/83 11.27- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3700 - 822 -82 MANUAL 250190 09/13/P3 23.00- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -3700- 862 -86_ MANUAL 250190 09/13/83 51.33- GRIGGS COOPER AND C _ 50 -3710- 822 -82 _ MANUAL 250190 09/13/83 98.50- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 942 -84 MANUAL 250190 09/13/83 75.75- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 250190 09/13/F3 29566.59 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 250190 09/13/83 49924.89 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 250190 09/131E3 39787.25 _ - GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -4626- 862 -8E_ MANUAL 250190 09/13/83 .00 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL _ 250197 09/13/P3 .00 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 119018.88 + f f f f r f ••• -CKS 250271 09/13/23 61.86- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710- 822 -22 MANUAL 250271 09/13/23 9.14- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 250271 09/13/E3 157.35- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 250271 09/13/83 5.25- INTERCONTTNENTAL PK 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL - 250271 09/13/P3 19.28- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 250271 09/13/E3 _ 152.67- INTERCONTINENTAL PK 3710- 862 -8E MANUAL 250271 09/13/E3 3,093.39 INTERCONTINENTAL PK __ -50- 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 250271 09/13/83 18.40 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 250271 09/13/23 45.20 _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 250271 09/13/83 79867.50 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 842 -84 MA"JUAL 250271 09/13/F3 46.40 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 250271 _ 09/13/23 79633.94 _ INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ -_ 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 250271 09/13/83 457.20 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250271 09/13/83 6.40 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250271 09/13/E3 262.56 INTERCONTINENTAL PK _ 50- 4628- 842 -94 MANUAL 250271 09/13/E3 4.80 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL - 250271 09/13/83 964.15 INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL X250271 09/13/P3 - 18.80 - INTERCONTINENTAL PK 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 20,013.19 * _ " ffrrff fff -CKS ++ •- K 250418 119/13/f3 29.74- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 PANUAL 250418 09/13/f3 18.04- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 1983 CITY OF EDINA 10.98- CLD CHECK REGISTER 50- 3710- 842 -84 _ 09-31 -83 PAG-_ 16 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDCR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. p MESSAGE 250285 09/13/83 7.59- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -92 MANUAL 250285 09/13/23 1.32- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL ` 250285 09/13/8.3 15.69- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 14.97- JOHNSON W =NE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 10.69- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ` 250285 09/13/P3 15.14- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 250285 09/13/f3 14.21- - J04'NS0N W -NE 50- 3710 - 862 -P6 MANUAL +250285 09/13/8.3 - - - - -- 13.51 - - JOHNSON WING 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 1 250285 09/13/P3 675.50 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 250285 09/13/f3 _ 4.00 JOHNSON 6INE 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL ` 250285 09113/83 379.66 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 6.80 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 622 -82 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 66.46 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 1.60 JCHNSON 61NE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 8.40 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250285 09/13/f3 15.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 8.80 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL u 250285 09/13/83 784.52 JOHNSON 6INE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL a 250285 09/13/83 534.75 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250285 09/13/f3 748.94 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250285 09/13/P3 710.88 0HNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 250285 09/13/8..3 16.40 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -26 MANUAL 250285 09/13/f3 757.07 JOHNSON W:NE 50 -4628- 862 -b6 MANUAL 250285 09/13/83 10.00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 49635.86 ++ •- K 250418 119/13/f3 29.74- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 PANUAL 250418 09/13/f3 18.04- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 250418 09/13/P3 10.98- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710- 842 -84 _ MANUAL 250418 09/13/8.3 6.34- OLD PEORIA 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 250418 09/13/83 67.88- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710- 842 -84 PANUAL 250418 09/13/83 17.27- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 250418 09/13/83 4.45- OLD PEORIA 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 250418 09113/F3 25.32- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 250418 09/13/83 _ _ 17.55- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 250418 09/13/.83 65.58- CLC PEORIA 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 250418 09/13/83 3.26- CLD PEORIA 50- 3710 - 862 -86 M ;NUAL 250418 09/13/8..3 19487.12 CLD PEORIA 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 250418 09/13/f3 39394.33 OLD PEORIA 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 250418 09/13/83 221.95 CLD PEORIA 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 250419 09/13/83 3,279.30 CLD PEORIA 50- 4626- 862 -86 PANUAL 250418 09113/83 163.20 OLE PEORIA 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 250419 09/13/83 902.27 OLD PEORIA 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 250418 09/13/83 - - 317.00 CLC PEORIA - 50- 4628- 842 -84 PANUAL 250418 09/13/83 549.25 CLD PEORIA 50- 4628- 842 -84 MA`:UAL 250418 09/13/83 863.98 CLD PEORIA 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250418 09/13/83 _ 1,266.48 _ CLD _PEORIA _ 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL .250419 0013/83 877.93 CLD PEORIA 50- 4628- 862 -86 PANUAL 139056.40 • •. + +•+ •• * -CKS 250540 -_ _ _09f.1-3 /f3 _- _3.65- TWIN_CITY_WINE ____ _, 50- 3710- 822 -82 PANUAL 1993 Cl . r EDINA CHECK RE ER 08 -31 -83 17 f CHr_CK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION_ ACCOUNT N0.-INV. p P.O. p- MESSAGE 250540 09/13/F3 13.33- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 250540 09/13/°3 5.59- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 250540 U9/13/E3 3.07- TWIN CITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 250540 09/13/23 182.98 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -F.2 MANUAL 250540 09/13/F3 5.60 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82_ MANUAL 250540 09/13/93 14.40 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 250540 09/13/F3 666.67 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 25054n 09/13/F3 153.85 TWIN CITY WINE _ .- 50- 4628 - 862 -86 I. MANUAL 250540 09/13/?3 1.20 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 250540 09/13/E3 6.90 TWIN CITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL ... ,250540 39/13/23 279.87 TWLN_ __CITY WINE _ _.50- -4628- 862 -86 _ MAP:UAL 1,285.73 + fit -C�S •- 50.313.19 FUND 10 TOTAL GENERAL FLND e 398.00 FUND 29 TOTAL GUN RANGE FUND 207,495.81 FUND 50 TOTAL LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND 258,207.00 TCTAL I, 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK N0. DATE -, AMOUNT , -_- '- 250135 09/12/83 39.95 - -- - - - - 39.95 - �- • iiff *i 250433 09%12/83 250433 09/12183 250433 09/12/83 f i f f f t CHECK REGISTER 09 -19 -83 PAGE 1 II_ VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO* INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE EA,_GE MINE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 322 -82 MANUAL *** -CKS ° 95.10 PAUSTIS & SONS INVENTORY 50- 1630- B22 -82 MANUAL 95.10- PAUSTIS & SONS CORRECTION 50- 1630 - 822 -82 MANUAL 95.10 PAUSTIS & SONS INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 MANUAL 95.16 f - - -- - -- - - 250442 09/12483 10,518.19 PHYSICIANS HEALTH EMP CONT HOSP 10- 4156 - 510 -51 109518.19 f ' iffffi 252174 09M/83___ - - 125,000.00- _- ___ -_ -1 ST BANK - - - - -- -BAK TRANSFER- -- -- - - 50- 101 0- 000 -00 252174 09/12/83 125,000.00- 1ST BANK BAK TRANSFER 50- 1010 - 000 -00 .00 *** -CKS MANUAL * ** -CKS MANUAL MANUAL * ** -CKS 252354 09/12/83 82.35 MN GAS CO. HEATING 10- 4254 - 446 -44 MANUAL ' 252354 09/12/113 102.81 MN GAS CO. HEATING 10 -4254- 520 -52 MANUAL _- _252354 09/12/E3 MN GAS_ CO. HEATING____ 10- 4254 - 540 -54_ MANUAL 252354 09/12/83 6.11 MN GAS CO HEATING 20- 1130 - 000 -00 MANUAL 252354 09/12/83 14.15 MN GAS CO HEATING 20- 4254- 629 -62 MANUAL 252354 09/12/83 _ _ _ 17.59 MN GAS CO HEATING 20- 4254 - 643 -64 MANUAL 252354 09/12/83 105.08 _ MN GAS CO _ _ HEATING 20- 4254 - 646 -64 MANUAL 252354 09/12/83 12.76 MN GAS CO HEATING 27- 4254 - 662 -66 MANUAL - 252354_ 09112/83 _1_,242.39 MN- .GAS- CO HEATING__-- 28- 4254 - 706 -70 MANUAL I 252354 09/12/83 162.50 MN GAS Co- . .-- __-- _- ________ HEATING 30- 4254 - 781 -78 MANUAL 252354 09/12/83 19.88 MN GAS CO HEAT 50- 4254 - 841 -84 MANUAL 252354 09/12/83 42.80 MN GAS CO HEAT 50- 4254 - 861 -86 MANUAL 19913.16 • _._ _.... - fi*fff *** -CKS 252391 09/12/83 832.19 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 301 -30 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 _ 12,036.88 _ NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC_ 10- 4252- 321 -30 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 8,936.79 NCRTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252- 322 -30 MANUAL 252391 09112/83 1,919.07 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 330 -30 MANUAL 252391 _ _ 09/12/83 - 60.84__ _NORTHERN STATES - - ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 345 -30 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 113.53 NCRTHERN STATES ELECTRIC -__ 10- 4252 - 354 -30 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 1,703.95 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252- 375 -30 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 _ 467.43 NORTHERN STATES__ ELECTRIC____ 10-4252-440-44 252391 09112/83 34.93 _ _ NCRTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252- 460 -46 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 19752.78 NCRTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 520 -52 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 1 ,187.10_ NORTHERN - STATES ,ELECTRIC_ 10- 4.252- 540 -54 MANUAL S2 252391 09/12/83 105.90 NORTHERN STATES -- ELECTRIC _ 20- 1130 - 000 -00 MANUAL " s� 252391 09/12/83 695.60 NCRTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 20- 4252 - 629 -62 MANUAL 'a 252391 09/12/83 _ 5.30 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 20- 4252- 643 -64 MAPJUAL 252391 09/12/83 297.82 _ NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 20 -4252- 646 -64 MANUAL S6' 252391 09/12/83 .1908804 NCRTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 26- 4252 - 689 -68 MANUAL w� 4 v w� w 1 4,728.14 + fr• rff 252430 09/12/83 229353.16 STATE TREASURE PER.A EMP CONT PER 10- 4145- 517 -51 + f f f f ► 252522 229353.16 • 09/12/83 . -. - - __ -- 99194.12 -------- AMOCO- _OII -__ -- _ -- - - GASOL_INE_____------."------..___-- 10- 4612- 560 -56__- 99194.12 ' f f f r• f 252553 1983 OF EDINA UNITED ELECTRIC CHECK #TER 10 -4540- 322 -30 09 -19 -#mGE 2 09/12/83 ._ _ CHECK NO. .DATE AMOUNT_ VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION _ ACCOUNT _No. _INV.p_P_.0.. p_M- ESSAGE________� 09/12/83 252391 09/12183 2,208.28 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 27- 4252 - 661 -66 MANUAL 70.96 252391 09/12/83 _ 84.66 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC. _ _ _ 27 -4252- 662 -66 MANUAL. UNITE O_ELECTRIC 252391 09/12/83 3962107 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 28- 4252- 709 -70 MANUAL ELECTRIC 252391 09/12/83 317.55 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 29 -4252- 721 -72 MANUAL el 252391 09/12/83 _ __33,270.26 _ _____NORTHERN STATES _- ELECTRIC 30- 4252 - 781 -78 _ _ _ MANUAL_._ PARTS- _ 252391 09/12/83 4.31 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 30- 4252 - 783 -78 MANUAL .30- _ 252391 09/12/83 19187.95 NCRTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 30- 4252 - 784 -78 MANUAL „! 252391 09/12/83 29055.70_ NORTHERN_ STATES ELECTRIC 40- 4252 - 801- 80 MANUAL 252391 09/12/83 704.85 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 50- 4252 - 821 -82 MANUAL "I 252391 09/12/83 19195.98 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 50- 4252 - 841 -84 tlANUAL 252391 09112/83 577.72 -- NORTHERN STATES _ _ - ELECTRIC_ 50 -4252- 861 -86 MANUAL 769466.58 �. _ _ _ . - ffffff +fr -CKS "I ='I 252396 09/12/83 39058.61 NW BELL TELEPHONE 10- 4256- 510 -51 MANUAL 252396 09/12/83 207.28 NW BELL_ TELEPHONE__. __ 20- 4256- 622- 62_____ MANUAL 252396 09/12/83 135.77 NW BELL TELEPHONE 20- 4256 - 623 -62 ____ MANUAL 252396 09/12/F3 24.28 NW BELL TELEPHONE 20- 4256- 646 -64 MANUAL 252396 09/12/83 _ -_ ____149.42 NW BELL _ TELEPHONE______ -_ -- -_____23- 4256 - 611 -61_ _ -_ _ _ MANUAL �I 252396 09/12/83 44.60 NW BELL TELEPHONE 26- 4256- 689 -68 MANUAL 252396 09/12183 349.75 NW BELL TELEPHONE 27- 4256- 661 -66 MANUAL 252396 09/12/83 290.37 NW BELL_ TELEPHONE _ _ _ _ 28- 4256 - 709 -70- PANUAL 252396 09/12/83 39.01 N W BELL TELEPHONE - 29- 4256- 721 -72 MANUAL 252396 09/12/83 82.05 NW BELL TELEPHONE 40- 4256 - 801 -80 MANUAL 252396 09/12/83 _ 121.46 _ _ RW BELL____ TELEPHONE -_ -_ _ 50- 4256- 821 -82 MANUAL 252396 09/12183 134.19 NW BELL TELEPHONE 50- 4256 - 841 -84 MANUAL ,252396 09/12/83 91.35 NW BELL TELEPHONE 50- 4256 - 861 -86 MANUAL 4,728.14 + fr• rff 252430 09/12/83 229353.16 STATE TREASURE PER.A EMP CONT PER 10- 4145- 517 -51 + f f f f ► 252522 229353.16 • 09/12/83 . -. - - __ -- 99194.12 -------- AMOCO- _OII -__ -- _ -- - - GASOL_INE_____------."------..___-- 10- 4612- 560 -56__- 99194.12 ' f f f r• f 252553 09/12/83 250.48 UNITED ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 322 -30 252553 09/12/83 ._ _ .495.95 _ UNITED ELECTRIC -.. REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 390 -30 252553 09/12/83 364.02 UNITED ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 441 -44 252553 09/12/83 70.96 UNITED ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 252553 09/12/83 _ 138.68 _ UNITE O_ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS. 10- 4540 - 540- 54._______ 252553 09/12/83 163.71 UNITED ELECTRIC _ -_ REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 252553 09/12/83 142.07 UNITED ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS 20 -4540- 645 -64 252553 09/12/L+3. _ "_- _.__,..,_ ------ .144.34 - ___UNITEO_ELECTRIC _ REPAIR- PARTS- _ 4540 - 787 -78_._ 1,770.21 • .30- _ v 252700 09/12/83 840.25 NIC EITEL ti1M *•• -CKS ! MANUAL ••• -CKS MANUAL •• • -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL ---- - - - - -- - f■• -CKS EMP CONT HOSP 10- 4156 - 510 -51 MANUAL i'� 1983 OF EDINA CHECK STER 09 -19 -8 E 3 r • CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ VENDOR _ ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. p_P.O._N_ MESSAGE 840.25 r I f +f +►• f++ -CKS 256733 09/14/83 300.00 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE 10- 4290 - 510 -51 MANUAL • r +rfrf +ff -CKS 262008 09/12/83 255.52 KAMAN HEARING 8 SPLY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 • 255.52 262009 09/14/83 250.00 ASTLEFORD EQUIP CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 „ • - 250.00 • r♦ +ff+ + ++ -CKS • 262012 09/14/P.3 24.95 AUTOMGBILE SERVICE C CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560-56 24.95 j• f f f • r r - - - -- -- - - - - - frf -CKS � 2620?8 09/12/83 1.186.50 BEER WHOLESALERS INVENTORY 27- 4630 - 664 -66 262028 09/13/83 3.276.65 BEER WHOLESALERS _ INVENTORY _ 50- 4630- 822 -82 262028 09/13/83 7.158.30 BEER WHOLESALERS INVENTORY 50 -4630- 842 -84 • 262028 09/13/83 6.444.07 BEER WHOLESALERS INVENTORTY 50- 4630- 862 -86 18.065.52 • - - -- - - fff ► +f *•* -CKS . 262038 09/14/83 100.00 GEORGE BUTLER POLICE SERVICE 10- 4100- 420 -42 • 100.00 r +frrrf f ++ -CKS • 262041 09/13/83 44.80 BURY & CARLSON INC BLACKTOP 10 -4524- 301 -30 44.80 * • - ff+ -CKS 262046 09/12/83 25.20 BLUMBERG PHOTO GEN SUPPLIES 20- 4504 - 627 -62 v 25.20 - - -- - -. •►+ -CKS ' 262053 09/12/83 47.97 BROWNING FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 20 -4250- 628 -62 !/ -- - - -- 47.97 . 262054 09/13/83 76.05 BATTERY WAREHOUSE REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 262054 09/13/83 13.38 BATTERY WAREHOUSE REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 262054 09/13/83 102.00 -_ BATTERY WAREHOUSE REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 191.43 • 0 -- + +f -CKS 262059 09/14/83 100.00 WAYNE SENNETT POLICE SERVICE _ -_10- 4100 - 420.42- J 1483 OF EDINA CHECK #TER 09- 19 -80E 4 V� CHECK NO. DATE - -- -- AMOUNT - - - -- -- -- - -- - VENDOR - - - -- - - - - - -- - --- - -- - ITEM-_ DE_SCRIPTION ACCOUNT - - - - - -- NO. L_NV.qP.O. _ MESSAGE y ♦;' 100.00 • ,I fff # # • ••* -CKS 262073 09/13/83 156.10_ CITY PEER _ _ INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82___ 262073 09/13/83 132.20 CITY BEER INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 842 -84 262073 09/13/P3 136.50 CITY BOER INVENTORY 50- 4630- 862 -86 ___.. 424.80 4. fff #if fff -CKS 262078 09/12/83 238.00 COCA COLA BOTTLING CONCESSIONS 26- 4624 - 684 -68 4 262078 09/14/23 225.25 COCA COLA BOTTLING CONCESSIONS 27- 4624- 664 -66 262078 09/13/83 528.95 _ COCA COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 822- 82__._, 262078 09/13/23 19220.20 COCA COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50 -4632- 842 -84 I 262078 09/13/83 936.90 COCA COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 862 -86 3,149.30 # I 262080 09/12/83 39399.09 CONT - FINN CONCESSIONS 27- 4624- 664 -66 I 39399.09 + * ** -CKS 262087 09/14/83 _ 3P1.21 _CURTIN MATH SCI GEN SUPLIES 10- 4504- 482 -48 262087 09114/23 27.31 CURTIN MATH SCI GEN SUPLIES 10 -4504- 482 -48 408.52 • **f -CKS 1 262090 -- 09/14/83 _ _ . 111.21 CERT_ PO4E:R TRAIN REPAIR_ PARTS. 4540 - 563 -56_ ' 111.21 r _10- v . # +... - - -- -- -- - -- - - - +# r -CKS 262094 09/13/83 48.92 CASH REGISTER SALES GEN SUPPLIES 23- 4504- 611 -61 - - - --- 48.92 • . �,I' fff • i f frf -CKS � 262106 09/14/83 100.00 DAHL- MR HILDING POLICE SERVICE i0- 4100 - 420 -42 1W 100.00 + - •t ►fff - _ ___ .. - .- ____.___.. _ +ff - CKS 262110 09/13/83 _ - 218.60 DAVIDSEN_.DIST INC_ INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 262110 09/13723 803.55 DAVIDSEIN DIST INC INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 y 262110 09/13/83 803.55- DAVIDSEN DIST INC CORRECTION 50- 4630- 842 -84 y 262110 09/13183_ 803.55 _. _ -DAVID -SON DIST INC INVENTORY ....._ ... 50- 4630 - 8.42 -84 1.022.15 • _ -, -_ __ - --------- - -_� -_ _.. ----- ----- .._.. "__ ff# -CKS �'`i 262125 09/12123 45.15 MERIT SUPPLY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 326 -30 1983 OF EDINA CHECK STER 09- 19 -8ftE 5 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE - " = 262125 09/12/83 437.25 MERIT SUPPLY PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 ` 1- I' 262125 09/12/M_3 118.00 MERIT SUPPLY REPAIR PARTTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 262125 09/12/83 219.00 MERIT SUPPLY - SIGNS 8 POSTS _ 10- 4542 - 328 -30 262125 09/14/83 120.00 MERIT SUPPLY PARTS 27- 4620- 662 -66 - 262125 09/12/83 394.05 MERIT SUPPLY CLEAN SUPPLIES 28- 4512 - 708 -70 262125 09/12/83 - 160.00 - --MERIT SUPPLY CLEAN SUPPLIES - - - -- 28- 4512 - 708 -70 - -- - - " -' 262125 09/12/83 486.55 MERIT SUPPLY CHEMICALS 28- 4564 - 707 -70 i• 262126 09/14/83 103.95 DAVIS EUGENE SALARY 60- 4100 - 985 -9G • 262126 09/14/83 _ 46.69 DAVIS EUGENE MILEAGE 60- 4208 - 985 -90 150.64 - • f f • f • • _ - - --_ - _ - -- -- -- - - - - - -- ffi -CKS ] -� 262134 09/13/83 36.75 REGAL WINDOW CLEAN CONTRACT REPAIRS 50- 4248 - 841 -84 - 36.75 + i f f f i f *•• -CKS 262147 09/14/83 7.23 EDINA CAMERA CENTER PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508 - 200 -20 r 7.23 • - - ff+ -CKS 262149 09/13/83 1 041 .00 EGEBERG GOLF CARTS EBLIP., RENTAL 27 -4226- 661 -66 ` 1,041.00 +. Y. • t i i• f• - - �- 262183 09/14/83 36.29 GIVENS INC REPAIR PARATS 1D- 4540 - 520 -52 • 262183 09/12/83 10.04 GIVENS_ INC _ -, CONT- 4248 - 708 -70 46.33 : .REPAI_RS ._.._-- __. -_ -__ - _28- - •.+•ff fff CKS 262185 09/14/83 422.92 GOODIN CO REPAIR PARTS_ 30- 4540 - 783 -78 _ -422.92 + - - - -- - - - -- -- - - .- .f +. +• f +f -CKS ` 262214 09/12/83 37.16 H.R. TOLL COMPANY WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610 - 560 -56 37.18 + r - - -- - . +• -CKS - . 262228 09/12/83 _ .46 HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 421 -42 262228 09/12/83 _ 19.14 HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y GENERAL SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 440 -44 262228 09/12/83 420.54 HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 ` 262228 09/12/83 252.31 _ HILLSTROM AUTO SUP Y _. 10- 4620 - 563 -56 ..'.. 692.45 • - _._ _. ' . • • f • f i 262238 09/14/83 18000 WM M MCCOY GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 301 -30 s � f 1983 OF EDINA CHECK TER 09 -19- GE 6 �. CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT_ VENDOR ITEM_DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT. N_0. INV. tt_?.0._A _ SAGE �,!,i 18.00 • 2 � f *r * ** * ** -CKS n V 262245 09/12/ @3 38.25 ROBERT B HILL SALT 28- 4538 - 708 -70 ----- - - - - -- - -- — 38.25 . -- -------- - - - - -- i *r•ft *ft -CKS "I 262249 09/14/E3 100.00 WILLIAM NOFFMAN POLICE SERVICE 10 -4100- 420 -42 100.00 • *f* -CKS 262253 09/12/!'3 26.50 HUMPHREY RADIATOR CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 26.50 • I, t *atr* *** -CKS 262278 _ 09/12/@3 1.24 - -__ _- S FOODS_ – ___JERRY,. __- CONCESSIONS ---------- - _- __- ___..__27- 4624 - 664- 66_ -__ _ -.. : •� 262278 09/12/@3 1.98 JERRYS FOODS CONCESSIONS 27- 4624 - 664 -66 262278 09112/E3 9.93 JERRYS FOODS CONCESSIONS 27- 4624- 664 -66 13.15 `,•' raftrf * ** —CKS 262290 09/12/83 345.85 JACKS DIST CONCESSIONS 27- 4624- 664 -66 345.85 * t rrf rf * *• * —CKS ' 262302 09/13/ @3 4.245.20 * KUETHER DIST CO INVENTORY _50- 4630- 822 -82 _ " 262493 09/13/E3 4,101.70 SOUT- H-;SJD9 DISTRIBUTING CO. INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 " v' 262493 09/13/P3 374.30 "+ - SOUTH.SIDE DISTRIBUTING CO INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 862 -86 A V ', tffrff 4,476.00 * * ** —CKS I, 262304 09/12/83 11.60 KNOX LUMBER CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 390 -30 262304 09/12/83 20.16 KNCX LUMBER CO LUMBER 20 -46D4- 645 -64 262304 09/14/@3 7.68 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 20 -4604- 646 -64 262304 09/13/83 59.45 KNCX LUMBER CO LUMBER 20- 4604- 646 -64 262304 09/12/83 34.99 KNOX LUMBER CO LUMBER 20 -4604- 645 -64 262304 09/12M _ __- -__ _ 10.49 KNOX– LUMB- -R..CO - _ LUMBER —.._.. -- _- - 20- 4604- 646 -64 – 144.37 t v fffrft ***-CKS -' 262311 09/13/@3 4,974.80 EASTSIOE BEVERAGE INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 822 -82 262311 09/13/83 _ _ _- 99571.40 EASTSIOE - BEVERAGE _ INVENTORY _ _- . 50- 4630- 862 -86 149546.20 • •tr *tt • 262315 09/14/83 370.26 ANCHOR PAPER GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 520 -52 • � 1 1983 OF EDINA CHECK ISTER 09- 19 -8%GE 7 CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT - _VENOCR ITEM DESCRIPTION _— ACCOUNT NO. I_NV. 9 P.O. p MESSAGE 370.26 . 1 frffff .._. * *• -CKS 262318 09/12/P3 95.18 LEEF BROS_ INC LAUNDRY 4262 - 440 -44 262318 09/12/83 10.00 LEEF BROS INC ________ LAUNDRY _10- _ 23- 4504- 611 -61 -- - - - - - 262318 09/12/83 17.75 LEEF BROS INC LAUNDRY 27- 4262 - 662 -66 ' 262318 09/12/83 17.50 LEEF BROS INC LAUNDRY_ 28- 4262 - 708 -70 140.43 _ f f f f f f *•• -CKS 262331 09/12/P3 556.88 LAHASS CORPORATION CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 563 -56 262331 09/12/P3 325.98 LAHASS CORPORATION CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 563 -56 882.76 r - - - - f f f f f t -- - - - -- f.• -CKS ' • 262339 09/12/P3 83.00 LAKELAND ENG REPAIR PARTS 20- 4540 - 645 -64 83.00 • `_ fff kfi fff -CKS 262355 09/14/P3 34.51 M INNESOTA BEARING CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- Sb0 -56 34.51 - - fff -CKS 262359 09/12/P3 23.79 MINN INC REPAIR PARTS__ 10- 4540 - 560 -56 262359 09/14/83 44.57 _TORO MINN TORO INC _ _ REPAIR _ PARTS 27- 4540 - 662 -66 C 68.36 f 262360 09/14/P3 25.00 MINNESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 563 -56 262360 09/12/E3 17.50 FINI%ESOTA WANNER CONT REPAIRS 10 -4248- 560 -56 ' 262360 09/14/83 12.50 MINNESOTA WANNER GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 335 -30 262360 09/12/83 13.50 MINNESOTA WANNER REPAIR DARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 68.50 f - •ff -CKS 262365 09/14/83 -- 100.00 BERT MERF_LD POLICE SERVICE 10- 4100 - 420 -42 100.00 •- - - - -- - -- 262366 09/13/83 372.63 MINNESOTA BAR INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 822 -82 262366 09/13/P-3 723.53 MINNESOTA BAR INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 642 -84 `. 262366 09/13/Y3 783.82 MINNESOTA BAR INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 ; 1,879.98 • v 262367 09/13/83 70.90 MCGARVEY COFFEE GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 500 -50 70.90 • _. U fff Rff fff- ' CKS 262378 09/13/83 _ 3,389.05 MARK V11 SALES INC INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 822 -82 262378 09/13/83 79549.00 MARK V11 SALES INC INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 862 -86 ' 2 1983 OF EDINA CHECK #TER 09 -19 -goc 8 CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR -- _ _ -.. ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0._ -I -NV. p -_P.O. _tt MESSAGE _ 10,938.05 + - rf f -CKS e 262381 09/13/83 79.20 STAR 8 TRIBUNE ADVERTISING 10- 4212 - 160 -16 262381 09/13/83 88.00 STAR 8 TRIBUNE ADVERTISING - - -- 30- 4212 - 780 -78 - - - " 167.20 + ______. -_ _ —_. — _. _ ___ _ __ _ ._ _ ff•-CKJ it 262413 09/13/E3 229.18 NATIONWIDE PAPERS GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 510 -51 229.18 * -- - - . • . f f . ffa -CK$ 'I 262420 09/12/83 376.95 OLD DUTCH FOODS CONCESSIONS 27- 4624 - 664 -66 376.95 f ti. afff +f aff —CKS 262429 09/13/83 373.50 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 822 -82 262429 09/13/83 428.50 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 802.00 �- rrrfrf ffi-CKS 262453 09/14/83 llt074.92 ORS CCNSTRUCTICN PAYMENTS 60- 2040 - 000 -00 119074.92 - --- -- - - - - --- -- - -- - - _ ffr -CKS W 262455 09/14/83 _ _- 142.20 RITEWAY - _. - _ . REPAIR-.PARTS. -___ __ 10-4540-5.63-56 142.20 • __ _,_ ._ iftrra - raf-CKS r,< 262457 09/14/83 499 75.00 R.L.GCULO 8 CO.INC. CAPITAL OUTLAY 27 -4900- 663 -66 49975.00 • - - W +fffi+ ffa -CKS � 262467 09/13/E3 87.20 ROYAL BEVERAGE CO INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 W 262467 09/13/83 793.60 ROYAL BEVERAGE CO INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 262467 09/13/83 264.80_ - _ ROYAL -- BEVERAGE CO INVENTORY - - - 50- 4630 - 862 -86 19145.60 • - '- faa +fa - - - - -- -- - - - - f ++ -CKS r, 262469 09/13/83 428.32 ROAD MACHINERY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 428.32 + ,., 262470 09/14183 25.00 OR ROCKWELL POLICE SERVICE 10 -4100- 481 -48 25.00 + • *+ -CKS � 262503 262503 262503 262503 262503 262503 r*ffr. 262505 262505 4 262508 %v 262512 C 262516 ff *frf 262521 u ►far 262527 262527 262527 * *f+ ** 262530 68.03 oTER 1983 OF EDINA 09/12/?3 6 CHECK SUBURBAN P 09 -19 -8 E 9 SUP R CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. p P.O. N. MESSAGE DLUMB S 26249 5 09/12183 77.25 SOUTHT04N :REFRIGERATION CONT REPAIRS 26- 4248 - 689 -68 SUBURBAN ° °LUMB S 77.25 REPAIR P PARTS 1 _- 1 ...... 24.87 S SUBURBAN P PLUMB S SUP R +•r -_CKS 262502 09/14/83 7.84 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10 4540 560 56 262502 09/14/83 35.84 SUBURBAN CREVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 563 -56 262502 09/14/83 15.04- SUBURBAN CHEVROLET CREDIT 10- 4540 - 560 -56 � 262502 09/14/E3 30.08 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 2625132 D9114/83 9.31 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 262503 262503 262503 262503 262503 262503 r*ffr. 262505 262505 4 262508 %v 262512 C 262516 ff *frf 262521 u ►far 262527 262527 262527 * *f+ ** 262530 09/12/83 - V. o . - 6UBU0F'AN PLUMB SUP iREPAIR PARTS "B 4540565 515, 09/12/83 3.73 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP REPAIR PARTS 50- 4540 - 841 -84 eQQ 6i 991.77 - 09/14/83 10.01 SUN------ ADVERTISING_ _ 10- 4210 - 140 -14 09/12/83 40.95 SUN ADVERTISING 10- 4210 - 140 -14 50.96 + 09/121P3 17.61 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 23- 4504 - 611 -61 17.61 + - -. - - 09/121F3 65.10 S T RCBB REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 567 -56 65.10 • 09/14/,93 60.05 SEARS ROEBUCK TOOLS 10- 4580 - 560 -56 60.05 09/12/83 297.00 - SEELYE PLASTICS CONT REPAIRS.-_. 28- 4248 - 708 -70 297.00 09/12/E3 33.88- TEAM ELECTRONICS CORRECTION 10- 4540 - 527 -52 09/12/83 _ 33.88 TEAM ELECTRONICS REPAIR PARTS_ _ 10- 4540 - 520 -52 09/12/83 33.88 TEAM ELECTRONICS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 33.88 . 09112/83 262.50 TEKGAS CORPORATICN REPAIR PARTS _ 10- 4540- 301 -30 *•* -CKS * ** -CKS *** -CKS r � * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS C *** -CKS 1 I r_m 68.03 09/12/?3 6 6.90 S SUBURBAN P PLUMB S SUP R REPAIR P PARTS 1 10- 4540- 322 -30 0 D9 /12 /P3 1 158.80 S SUBURBAN D DLUMB S SUP R REPAIR P PARTS _ 0� 09/12/P3 7 797.47 S SUBURBAN ° °LUMB S SUP R REPAIR P PARTS 1 _- 1 09/12/83 2 24.87 S SUBURBAN P PLUMB S SUP R REPAIR P PARTS 1 10- 4540 - 560 -56 - 6UBU0F'AN PLUMB SUP iREPAIR PARTS "B 4540565 515, 09/12/83 3.73 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP REPAIR PARTS 50- 4540 - 841 -84 eQQ 6i 991.77 - 09/14/83 10.01 SUN------ ADVERTISING_ _ 10- 4210 - 140 -14 09/12/83 40.95 SUN ADVERTISING 10- 4210 - 140 -14 50.96 + 09/121P3 17.61 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 23- 4504 - 611 -61 17.61 + - -. - - 09/121F3 65.10 S T RCBB REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 567 -56 65.10 • 09/14/,93 60.05 SEARS ROEBUCK TOOLS 10- 4580 - 560 -56 60.05 09/12/83 297.00 - SEELYE PLASTICS CONT REPAIRS.-_. 28- 4248 - 708 -70 297.00 09/12/E3 33.88- TEAM ELECTRONICS CORRECTION 10- 4540 - 527 -52 09/12/83 _ 33.88 TEAM ELECTRONICS REPAIR PARTS_ _ 10- 4540 - 520 -52 09/12/83 33.88 TEAM ELECTRONICS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 33.88 . 09112/83 262.50 TEKGAS CORPORATICN REPAIR PARTS _ 10- 4540- 301 -30 *•* -CKS * ** -CKS *** -CKS r � * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS C *** -CKS 1 I r_m 09/14/,93 60.05 SEARS ROEBUCK TOOLS 10- 4580 - 560 -56 60.05 09/12/83 297.00 - SEELYE PLASTICS CONT REPAIRS.-_. 28- 4248 - 708 -70 297.00 09/12/E3 33.88- TEAM ELECTRONICS CORRECTION 10- 4540 - 527 -52 09/12/83 _ 33.88 TEAM ELECTRONICS REPAIR PARTS_ _ 10- 4540 - 520 -52 09/12/83 33.88 TEAM ELECTRONICS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 33.88 . 09112/83 262.50 TEKGAS CORPORATICN REPAIR PARTS _ 10- 4540- 301 -30 *•* -CKS * ** -CKS *** -CKS r � * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS C *** -CKS 1 I r_m *•* -CKS * ** -CKS *** -CKS r � * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS J * ** -CKS C *** -CKS 1 I r_m *** -CKS 1 I r_m 1983 OF EDINA CHECK #TER 09 -19- GE 10 �. CHECK NO. DATE ., _ AMOUNT _ _ - VENDOR _ - _ _ITEM_ DESCRIPTION, _ ACCOUNT -NO. I-NV.4__P_.0. p- MESSAGE - 262.50 + 2 •flirt -. - _ -_. -- - __._ .____ - _. _ _. _ _ -_ * ** -CKS �` 262542 09/13/83 16x017.85 THCRPE_DIST INVENTORY 169017.85 f - __50-46-3-0-862-86 - ir►ffr - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - -- * *-CKS �., 262582 09/14/P.3 642.92 CORDON SMITH CO GASOLINE 27- 4612- 662 -66 642.92 + �f *ff r ►f **+ -CKS 262589 09/13/E3 177.08 XEROX CORPORATICN EQUIP RENAL 10- 4226- 510 -51 ., 177.08 262590 09/14/83 100.00 HENRY WROBLESKI POLICE SERVICE 10- 4100 - 420 -42 - - rf • -CKS 262612 09/14/P3 5.914.30 MIDWE- ST__ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP__ 10- 4524 - 301 -30 262612 09/14/83 351.96 NICWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP 20- 4524 - 645 -64 69266.26 -- - - * *f -CKS 262701 09/12/P3 _ 254.00 FR I_DE.N_AKATEL -- CONTRACTS 10 -4288- 517 -51 254.00 i - _- _. " 262702 09/12183_ 36.00 KERNELS CHOICE _ CONCESSIONS 27- 4624 - 664 -66 36.00 * 262703 09/12/83 12.00 ALFON- S - ANDERSSON CONT SERV 27- 4233- 661 -66 � 12.00 • -- - -- r 262704 09/12/E3 - 3.00 _ -_ -_ UNITED STATE -GOLF GEN SUPPLIES_ 27 -4504- 661 -66 3.00 + 262705 09/12/83_ - 49000.00 MIOWEST_A -QUA_ CARE _. CCNT SERV 10- 4200 - 350 -30 4000.00 • - 262706 09112/P3 _ _ - 64.63 _ - - ED LANCELLO _ MILAGE_ .. -. 10- 4208 - 390 -30 64.63 + r 262707 09112/E3 229.78 __. ED WAR _ -- ___HEADWALLS - 10- 4554 - 345-- 229.78 • __- - __.. _ _ .30.__ 262708 09/13/83 _. 17.27 LAKE_STATE_EQUIP _ REPAIR P.ARTS__.__. -.__ 10- 4540- 56) -56 • 17.27 f _ 262709 09/12/83 50.00 BUSSI_H3SS_CNSULT CONF 8- SCHOOLS 10 -4202- 440 -44 50.00 • - - -- - - 262710 _09/121 P3 _- 52.3.1______ _DECKER._ SUP_ PL- Y__..._- .__.- .__- ._._____ - - -- 262123 09/12/83 262724 09/12/P3 262725 09/12/23 88.79 88.79 • 386.40 386.40-*--- 47925 GIVENS INC AMBASSADOR SAUSAGE CITY OF RICHFIELD GEN SUPPLIES 20-4504-646-64 CONCESSIONS 27-4624-664-66 LIGHT & POWER 10- 4252 - 345 -30 ?-19-83 r-AGE 11 j P.C. # MESSAGE Oft 1983 CITY OF EDIKA CHECK REGISTER CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. 52.31 262711 09/12/P3 53.75 CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 563 -56 262711 09/12/23 70.30 API REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 262711 29/12/83 170.81 AMI REPAIR PARTS 10-4540-563-56 262711 09/12f83 133.87 AMI REPAIR PARTS 10-4540-560 -56 262711 09/12/83 22.98 AMI REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 563 -56 262712 09/12/23 35.00 CONDENSER SERVICES CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 563 -56 35.00 • 262713 09/12f83 488.75 JOHN P LANCELLO CONT SERV I0-4200-390-30 262713 29/12f83 497.25 JOHN P LANCELLO CONT V 10 -4200- 390 -30 986.00 • -SER . 262714 09/12fP3 195.30 MCNELLUS STEEL INC REPAIR PARTS 10-4540-441-44 262714 09/12/83 1-506.44 MCNELLUS STEEL INC PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 1:701.74 • 262715 09/12/23 20.00 APEX FEST CONTROL GEN SUPPLIES 28-4504-703 -70 2000 * 262716 09f12/83 226.67 ASCAP LIC & PERMITS 28-4310-708-70 226.67 262717 09/12M 22.91 - _ MILSCO ENG REPAIR ... PARTS 27- 4540 - 673 -66 2291 262718 09/12/23 7100.00 ELECTRIC SERVICES CAPITAL OUTLAY 10-4900-460-46 7:100.00 262719 09/12M 78.73 _PARCE_LLADAEHN MEETING EXPENSES 10 -4202- 140 -14 78.73 262720 09/12/83 690.15 G_ i K _SERVICES LAUNDRY 10-4262-301-30 262720 139/12/83 262.72 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 10-4262-540-54 262720 09/12/e3 497.03 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 10-4262-563-56 262720 09/12/23 422 .3 5 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 20- 4262- 646 -64 262720 09/12/E3 309.08 G & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 30-4262-783-78 262720 29/12/83 364.59 6 & K SERVICES LAUNDRY 40-4262-301-8C 29545.91 262721 09/12/23____ BOBS SMALL ENGINE REPAIR PARTS 20-4540-646-64 7.55 • 262123 09/12/83 262724 09/12/P3 262725 09/12/23 88.79 88.79 • 386.40 386.40-*--- 47925 GIVENS INC AMBASSADOR SAUSAGE CITY OF RICHFIELD GEN SUPPLIES 20-4504-646-64 CONCESSIONS 27-4624-664-66 LIGHT & POWER 10- 4252 - 345 -30 ?-19-83 r-AGE 11 j P.C. # MESSAGE Oft 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 09 -19 -83 PAGE 12 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT-NO. INV. # P.O. 4 MESSAGE 47.25 + 262726 09/12/83 36.00 GREATER MPLS AREA DUES 10- 4204 - 200 -20 36.00 + i 262727 09/12/83 - 10.00 IRS DUES 29 -4204- 720 -72 10.00 262728 09/12/83 -- - 135.00 - --- ------ -- LAS - - - R- ITTER - - DITCHINS - - --_- - - CONT REPAIRS _____ - - - - - - 10- 4 42424 8 - 441 -44 - ' 135.00 * 262729 09/12/83 95.40 BLOOMINGTON RENAL EQUIP RENAL 10- 4226 - 441 -44 95.40 + - 262730 09/12/83 101.04 INSTRUMENTATION S REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 101.04 • 262731 09/12/8 33.00 MARSHALL SWIFT DUES 10- 4204 - 200 -20 33.00 • 262732 09/12/83 78.60 COOD MGMT SYST CONT SERV 10- 4200- 395 -30 78.60 * - Ah 262735 09/13/23 305.50_--- _-- .ROYAL_CROWN -BEV INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 262735 09/13/P3 407.80 ROYAL CROWN BEV INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 862 -86 713.30 • 262736 09/13/83 280.50 SHARON HALE PRINTING 23- 4500 - 613 -61 280.50 + 1 262737 09/13/P3 5.00 PEGHAN BURKE REFUND 10- 3050 - 1100 -00 5.00 + 262738 09/1343 _____2__465 ..85 THCMSEN NYBECK SERV LEGAL 10- 4100 - 220 -22 2:405.85 + 1 262739 09/13/83 104.00 THE PRINT SHOP PRINTING 23- 4600- 610 -61 104.00 i 262740 D9/13/83 24.13 ASLES ENS GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 510 -51 24.13 + 1 262741 09/13/83 115.50 ASHLAND CHEMICAL CO ANTIFREEZ 10- 4504 - 420 -42 262741 09/13/83 115.50 ASHLAND CHEMICAL CO ANTIFREEZ 10- 4504 - 440 -44 262741 09/13183 535.50 ASHLAND CHEMICAL CO ANTIFREEZ 10- 4540 - 561 -56 " 262741 09/13/E3 42.00 ASHLANO CHEMICAL CC ANTIFREEZ 20- 450.4- 646 -64 808.50 • 1 262742 09/13/83 63.20 MICHAEL JEUB SERVICES 10- 4120 - 520 -52 i 63.20 + 1 262743 09/14/83 650.00 TREMCC CONT SERV 10- 4200- 440 -44 262743 09/14/P3 592.00 TREMCC CCNT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 520 -52 • w 1983 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGTSTER 09 -19 -83 PAGE 13 ogk CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. k P.O. # MESSAGE 262743 09/14/83 8.00 TREMCC CONT SERV 49- 4200 - 801 -80 ^ 262743 09/14/83 - - 250.00 TREMCC - -- - CONT SERV 50- 4200 - 860 -86 19500.00 + 262744 09/14/83 350.00 HENN CTY TREAS RUBBISH REMOVAL 10- 4250 - 353 -30 350.00 • - -- - 262745 09/14/ _ 83_ 50.00- _____GILBERT_PETERSON SEMINAR- 10- 4202 - 280 -28__ 50.00 • A 262746 09/14/83 249451.50 ASPHALT PAVING PAYMENTS 60- 2040- 003-00 249451.50 • -- - A rrf +rr f-CKS 262748 09/14/83 1419264.46 MICNEST PAVINGS B PAYMLENTS 60- 2040 - 000 -00 1419264.46 + 262749 09/14/83 349665.60 M G ASTLEFORD PAYMENTS 60- 2040 - 003 -00 349665.60 * 262750 09/14/83 70.00 CLSCN EQUIPMENT GEN SUPPLJIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 70.00 262751 09/14/E3 60.00 LARKSTUR REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 oft 60.00 262752 09/14/83 15.84- NA TL ATOMIK MTR PTS CREDIT 10 -4540- 560 -56 A% 262752 09/14/83 61.24 NAIL ATOMIK MTR PTS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 45.40 262753 09/14/83 _ 135.20 - -- - - -- FLEET_MAINT - -_ _ - REPAIR PARTS _. 10- 4540- 560 -5b 135.20 * �v 262754 09/14/83 21.36 HALL SIGNS GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 325 -30 21.36 + or 262755 09/14/83 41.69 AUTO FARTS CRYSTAL GEN SUPPLIES _ 10- 4504 - 340 -30 41.69 + f f f• f f • +• -CKS i 262757 09/14/83 35.42 SOUTHCALE FORD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 35.42 + 262758 09/14/83 10.87 CONTRACTORS MACH REPAIR PARTS 10-4540-569-56 262758 09/14/83 48.96 CONTRACTORS MACH REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 - - - - -- -59.83 262759 09/14/83. _ _._ _.178.85 2AHL_EOULP _ REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 540 -54 5: 178.85 • 262760 09/14/83 44.28 AMALGAMAT =O CREDIT GEN SUPPLIES 26- 4504 - 688 -68 44.28 r - ,.__ _ 262761 _ -____ 09/14,/83 -_� -- __57.17 __Y_ 6_PEA_RSON_SAND- _GRAVEL_.RUCK_ _ -_.__- -. 10- 4522- 301.3G_ -- I "1983 OF EDINA CHEC *ST'R 09 -19- GE 14 O'CMEC•, NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDCR__ - ITEM DES CRI __PTI- ON-________._A000U NJ- N0e— INVe __p P.O. NMESSAGE__ - 57.17 + _� 262762 09/14/83 152.50 NATL PURITY SOAP GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 390 -30 .. 152.50 + 262763 09/14/83 149.14 K 8 K SALES REPAIR PARTS 20 -4540- 646 -64 149.14 + ^I 262764 09/14/83 8.42 WARNERS IND SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 260 -26 262764 ')9/14/83 12.63 WARNERS IND SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 262764 09/14/83 4.21 WARNERS IND SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 322 -30 262764 09/14/23 8.42 WARNERS IND SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 390.30 262764 09/14/83 4.21 WARNERS IND SUPPLY PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 262764 09/14183 12.63 _- _ _ WARNERS_IND SUPPLY .. GEN SUPPLIES_, 40 -4504- 801- 80___._ 50.52 + V 262765 09/14/13 3.00 PAM K- EATINGS _. REFUND _ _ _ _ 20- 2240 - 000 -00 3.00 : - - 262766 09/14/83. 3900 JAS WEISZ REFUND .__ 20- 22.40 - 000 -00 - • 262767 09/14/83 73.20 GLAD -STONE STEASCN AMBULANCE_ REFUND- -10- 3180- D00 -00 73.20 r _ GENERAL FUND 1139560.89 FUND 10 TOTAL GENERAL FUND +► +-CKS ` PARK FUND 39113.68 FUND 20 TOTAL PARK FUND ART FUND 610.45 _______ _ FUND 23 TOTAL ART CENTE2 SWIMMING POOL 1,492.27 FUND 26 TOTAL SWIMMING POOL FUND GOLF COURSE 15,503.79 FUNC 27 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND RECREATION 69803.89 FUND 2B TOTAL RECREATION CENTER. FUND GUND RANGE 366.56 FUNC 29 TOTAL GUN RANGE FUND WATER 35,589.36 FUND 30 TOTAL WATERWORK FUND SEWER RENTAL 29522.96 FUND 40 T3TAL SEWER RENTAL FUND LIQUOR FUND 79,089.96 FUND 50 TOTAL LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND • CONSTRUCTION 2119607.12 FUND 60 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION FUND _ Computer checks Vs 4709260.93 TCTAL 52164 thru 52303 Hand typed checks 1151667 - - - - -- — -- - .... - - - -- - - - thru 51673 _ /aP ROVE0 FOP PAYMENT, - - -- - - -- -- - -- - - - - - - - -- - C1490K RZOISTER DATED •