The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1987-05-18_COUNCIL PACKETAGENDA EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MAY 18, 1987 7:00 P.M. ROLLCALL I. APPROVAL OF HRA MINUTES OF MAY 4, 1987 II. AWARD OF BIDS A. Ice Resurfacer and Tractor - Edinborough Park B. Kiosk - Edinborough Park ADJOURNMENT EDINA CITY COUNCIL I. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. All agenda items listed with an asterick ( *) are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of such items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which case the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. * II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of May 4, 1987 III. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Engineer. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution. 3/4 favorable rollcall vote to pass if improvement has been petitioned for; 4/5 vote required if no petition. A. Permanent Street Surfacing with Concrete Curb and Gutter - Improvement No. P -BA -278 - Link Road from Eden Av to Vernon Av (Contd from 4/20/87) IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND REPORTS ON PLANNING MATTERS. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Planner. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. Zoning Ordinance: First and Second Reading requires 4/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of the Council to pass. Waiver of Second Reading: 4/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of Council required to pass. Lot Divisions, Plats, Appeals: Favorable rollcall vote of majority of quorum required to pass. Final Development Plan Approval of Property Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote of majority of quorum required to pass. A. Final Rezoning and Final Plat Approval - R -1 to PRD -4 Planned Residence District,- Namron Corporation - Generally located north of Vernon Av and west of Villa Way B. Final Development Plan - Construction of a new medical office building - Fairview Southdale Hospital - 6401 France Avenue C. - Preliminary Plat Approval - U.T.F.C. Addition - Generally located east of Washington Av and north of I -494 D. Final Development Plan - Construction of a new office building - Regis Corporation - 5000 Normandale Rd E. Flood Plain Ordinance Amendment V. PUBLIC HEARING ON EASEMENT VACATION. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk. Presentation by Engineer. Public comment heard. Motion to close hearing. If Council wishes to proceed, action by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote ti.. required to pass. A. Vacation of Utility Easement - Lot 1, Block 1, Winsor Addition Agenda Edina City Council - May 18, 1987 Page Two VI. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS VII. AWARD OF BIDS * A. Public Improvement No. BA -265 (Contract #87 -7 (Eng) * B. (2) Plows C. Emergency Repair - Electric Well Motor VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS A. Council Liaison Assignments B. Approval of 3.2 Beer License - Good Earth Restaurant C. I -494 Corridor Study Report D. Metropolitan Council Hearing on Highway Jurisdiction E. Feasibility Report - Sidewalk Improvements - Set Hearing Date (6/1/87) IX. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL X. POST AGENDA AND MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS XI. FINANCE * A. Payment of Claims as per pre -list dated 5/18/87: General Fund $344,314.00, Art Center $4,919.50, Swimming Pool Fund $247.59, Golf Course Fund $26,326.04, Recreation Center Fund $10,461.49, Gun Range Fund $79.25, Utility Fund $40,279.46, Liquor Dispensary Fund $100,009.70, Construction Fund $107,472.36, Total $634;109.39; and confirmation of payment of claime dated 4/30/87: General Fund $873,504.61, Art Center $980.41, Swimming Poc Fund $136.42, Golf Course Fund $5,015.13, Recreation Center Fund $8,975.2, Gun Range Fund $120.62, Utility Fund $17,355.75, Liquor Dispensary Fund $314,828.48, Total $1,220,916.64 SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /EVENTS Mon June 1 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. Council Room June 9 - 12 LMC Annual Conference Mayo Civic Center - Rochester Mon June 15 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. Council Room Mon July 6 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. Council Room MINUTES EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MAY 4, 1987 Answering rollcall were Commissioners Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner and Courtney. MINUTES of the H.R.A. Meeting of April 20, 1987 were approved as submitted by motion of Commissioner Turner, seconded by Commissioner Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. There being no further business on the H.R.A. Agenda, the meeting was adjourned by motion of Commissioner Kelly, seconded by Commissioner Turner. Motion carried. Executive Director REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: H.R.A. .FROM: Bob Kojetin, Director, Park and Recreation Dept. VIA: Ken Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000 DATE: May 13, 1987 Material Description (General Specifications): Ice resurfacer and tractor for Edinborough Park Quotations /Bids: Company Frank J. Zamboni & Company, Inc. 15714 Colorado Avenue Paramount, CA 90723 (213)633 -0751 HRA II.A Amount of Quote or Bid $9,000 Department Recommendation: Frank J. Zamboni Company 9,000 Finance Director's nis ement: The recommended bid is no t "it Manager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation c Council approve the purchase. 2. I. recommend as an alternative: Signat)oe i P�� Department within the amoun budget for the purchase. ohn Wallin, Finance Director r REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: HRA FROM: Gordon Hughes VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000 DATE: May 18, 1987 Material Description (General Specifications): Edinborough Park Kiosk Quotations /Bids: Company 1. D & M Iron Works 2. 3. Department Recommendation: D & M Iron Works Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is . is not $9,475.00 HRA II.B. Amount of Quote or Bid $9,475.00 ly"t— Signature v Department within the amount budget for the purchase. John Wallin, Finance Director City anager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: L `'T./-► Kenneth Rosland, City Tinager t MINUTES DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL MAY 4, 1987 Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner and Mayor Courtney. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED. Member Kelly advised that she would be absent at the May 18, 1987 Council Meeting when various Planning matters would be heard. Motion was made by Member Smith, seconded by Member Turner to adopt the consent agenda as presented. Rollcall: Ayes: Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Nays: Kelly Motion carried. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING OF APRIL 20, 1987 APPROVED. Motion was made by Member Smith, seconded by Member Turner to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of April 20, 1987. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes, one nay. *LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR 6820 CHEYENNE CIRCLE. Motion was made by Member Smith, seconded by Member Turner to adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land constitute various separate parcels: Lot 1, Block 3, INDIANHEAD CREST and Lot 1, Block 1, INDIANHEAD LAKE VIEW ADDITION; and WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to subdivide said tracts into the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as follows: Lot 1, Block 3, INDIANHEAD CREST, except that part of Lot 1, Block 3, INDIANHEAD CREST, lying Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the Southwesterly line of said Lot 1, distant 50.0 feet Southeasterly of the Northwest corner of said Lot 1,. to a point on the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1, distant 50.0 feet Southeasterly of said Northwest corner of said Lot 1 and Lot 1, Block 1, INDIANHEAD LAKE VIEW ADDITION, and that part of Lot 1, Block 3, INDIANHEAD CREST, lying Northwesterly of a line drawn from a point on the Southwesterly line of said Lot 1, distant 50.0 feet Southeasterly of the Northwest corner of said Lot 1, to a point on the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1,.distant 50.0 feet Southeasterly of said Northwest corner of said Lot 1; WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City.of Edina Ordinances Nos. 801 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the convenyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of -land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes, one nay. *HEARING DATE SET FOR VARIOUS PLANNING MATTERS. Motion was made by Member Smith, seconded by Member Turner setting May 18, 1987 as hearing date for the following Planning matters: 1) Final Rezoning and Final Plat Approval - R -1 to PRD -4 Planned Residence District - Namron Corporation - Generally located north of Vernon Av and west of Villa Way 2) Final Development Plan - Fairview Southdale Hospital - 6401 France Av 3) Final Development Plan - Regis Corporation - 5000 Normandale Rd 4) Preliminary Plat Approval - U.T.F.C. Addition - Generally located east of Washington Av and north of I -494 5) Amendment to Flood Plain Ordinance Motion.carried on rollcall vote, four ayes, one nay. FIRST READING GRANTED FOR ORDINANCE NOS. 825 -A18 AND 711 -A4 TO ALLOW CURBSIDE PICK -UP OF YARD WASTE IN THE MORNINGSIDE AREA. Janet Chandler, Recycling Coordinator recalled at the meeting of March 16, 1987 Vierkant Disposal had requested permission from the Council for curbside pick -up of leaves and grass clippings in the Morningside area. This separation of yard waste from garbage would facilitate a composting program. Garbage would be handled in the usual manner and taken to the landfill whereas the leaves and grass clippings would be taken to a composting site. At that meeting the Council referred the matter to the Recycling Commission for their recommendation. The Commission met and reported back to the Council that they unanimously supported this proposal and asked that curbside pick -up of yard waste be allowed in Morningside on a trial basis. It was also pointed out that a successful composting program would qualify Edina for a greater percentage of funding from Hennepin County for the recycling program. The Council then moved to consider the ordinances changes that would be necessary and in addition to the required legal notice the Council requested that a letter be sent to each Morningside resident which was done. She advised that written responses to the notice have been received with 17 addresses objecting and 4 addresses in favor of the proposal. The main objection was that the curbside pick -up would be unsightly. Assistant Manager Hughes pointed out that the amendments to Ordinance Nos. 825 -A18 and 711 -A4 should be considered together as they both address the placement of containers for yard waste. Member Turner asked if the draft amendment to the Zoning Ordinance No:' 825 would allow individuals in other parts of the City to place garbage containers on the curb for pick -up. Mr. Hughes said that he and the City Attorney had concluded that the two ordinances contain the same language and thereby the language could be deleted from the Zoning Ordinance without affecting the rest of the City. Mayor Courtney then asked Mr. Vierkant to explain his proposal for the benefit of the audience. Gary Vierkant said that in mid - February he was contacted by the Edina Recycling Commission asking if he had any ideas on recycling. Prior to that they had been kicking around ideas on recycling that could be easily done in connection with the rubbish hauling business since by 1990 no unprocessed refuse can be deposited in landfills. That lead to his proposal for separation of leaves and grass clippings and pick -up for hauling to a composting site because it is a volume product. Mr. Vierkant said that this would cut his landfill fees considerably and he would divert those funds into operation of a second truck for pick -up of the compostable materials. This would save him time and would also be an experiment in looking to the future. Mr. Vierkant said that his fees are probably the highest in Edina but that he also offers twice a week pick -up. Landfill fees have tripled during the last 18 -14 months and his proposal would reduce his landfill fees while also recyling the compostable yard waste. The proposal was to have compostable materials put in any type of container for curbside pick -up, with re- usable containers being returned to the point of origin after they were emptied so they would not be on the curb for any length of time. After talking with the Reycling Commission he learned that a new bag which is compostable is being tested by the University of Minnesota which he would distribute to the residents in Morningside in which they could place their leaves and grass clippings. Mr. Vierkant added that his proposal would require a change of attitudes, that people are afraid that curbside pick -up will be unsightly and there is that chance. The original proposal was for pick -up every day. At this point in time grass clippings would be the main compostable material which is a weight product rather than a volume product and pick -up could be twice a week. There would be no additional cost to the residents. With regard to the concern that curbside pick -up would be unsightly, Mr. Vierkant said that he.could not force residents to put it on the curb and for those who did.not want to put it on the curb he would go up to the . residence and get it. He said the Council had asked earlier what the cost would be to go up to the house to get the compostable material. He said he did not know the cost but it cannot cost more than the landfill fees he would pay for the materials. He said he probably could do the entire Morningside area in the summer in approximately 2 hours. In the fall it will take considerably longer, probably the better part of day, because of the volume of leaves and he would pick -up every day. He said he would be saving time as it is a two hour round trip to the landfill. He proposed during the summer to haul on Monday and Friday and to start later in the morning, i.e. 9 -10 a.m., so that residents could place their bags on the curb in the morning. Mr. and Mrs. Greg Murphy, 4311 Morningside Road, said they had no problem with separating the compostable materials but that they were opposed to curbside pick -up as they had indicated by letter and that if the Council had any doubt on this he requested that the matter be continued to the next meeting so that he could poll the neighbors. John Peterson, 4239 Grimes Avenue, said he would like to see curbside pick -up tried for leaves for a two month period only. Mrs. Fechner, 4116 France Avenue, said that Vierkant allows three bags only for bi- weekly collection and anything over that is an additional charge of one dollar a bag. She asked how they would distinguish the leaves and grass from the regular garbage'so there is no additional charge. Mr. Vierkant said that is a problem and that people now mix garbage and grass together. Bu notification to the residents he is hoping to change that so they would use bags just for grass or just for garbage. He said the experimental bag would help solve the problem by having printed on it "compostable material only ". Member Turner asked if the Recycling Commission members had anything further to add. Mrs. Buerosse, chairman, responded that they.had nothing further to add but that they were in favor of the proposal. Bob Reid, member of the commission, said he was confident that this would work out in the Morningside area. Member Richards said he felt we should not change our longstanding policy of no curbside pick -up and that he would ask Mr. Vierkant to consider doing what he proposes to do by picking up the compostable materials at the residence, keeping track of his costs and then coming back to the Council this fall with that information so the Council could react. Member Kelly said we should be doing something about all the waste going into the landfill, that she was aware of the concerns of the residents, and that she would support the proposal. Member Turner said she agreed, that the significance of the solid waste disposal problem is of such magnitude that we need to try something on a voluntary basis to see if it will work before a program is imposed on us by others outside of this community as to who we ought to recycle both .the compostable material and the garbage. She added that she hoped this pilot project would work well so that the residents of Morningside are happy with it and also the rest of the community. Member Kelly moved First Reading of Ordinance No. 825 -A18 and Ordinance No. 711 -A4 to permit placement of grass clippings and leaves on the curb on a temporary basis for the Morningside area.. Motion was seconded by Member Turner. Member Smith said he thought it was a tremendous proposal but that he was troubled by several things, i.e. we don't know what the costs are, we are beyond the spring clean -up volume, the proposal now is for twice a week pick -up, and although the compostable bag is a good idea they are not available as yet. He suggested that this pilot project be tried for a period of time next fall so that the community can get geared up for it and that it be tried when there is a heavy volume of compostable materials so that we could get a meaningful report. Mayor Courtney said he agreed that it should be started in the fall. Member Kelly asked if the provision of the amendment that compostable materials be placed at the curb no more than 12 hours prior to the scheduled pickup could be enforced. Chief Swanson said that normally we enforce on a complaint basis only but that probably a community service officer could check for violations. Mayor Courtney then called for a rollcall vote on the motion. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Turner Nays: Richards, Smith, Courtney Motion failed. Member Smith then moved First Reading of the following ordinance amendments: ORDINANCE NO. 825 -A18 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING PARAGRAPH B(2) OF SECTION 7 OF ORDINANCE NO. 825 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Repealer. Paragraph B(2) of Sec. 7 of Ordinance No. 825 is hereby repealed in its entirety. Sec. 2.. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage and publication. ORDINANCE NO. 711 -A4 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 711 TO PERMIT THE PLACEMENT OF GRASS CLIPPINGS AND LEAVES ON THE CURB ON A TEMPORARY BASIS FOR A PORTION OF NORTHEAST EDINA THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Sec: 4 of Ordinance No. 711 is hereby amended by inserting "(a)" immediately after the hearding of Sec. 4 and by adding a new paragraph "(b)" to Sec. 4 as follows: "(b) Within that portion of the City located north of Sunnyside Road and east of Wooddale Avenue, grass clippings and leaves suitable for composting -may be placed next to the street or curb for pick -up provided that such grass clippings and leaves so placed shall be: i) stored within a plastic bag designed for such a purpose, and ii) placed at the curb no more than 12 hours prior to the scheduled pickup." Sec. 2. The provision of Sec. 4(b) of this Ordinance No. 711 shall automotically cease and be of no further effect on December 1, 1987._ Sec. 3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon passage and publication, but not earlier than August 1, 1987. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Member Richards reiterated his objections to curbside pick -up and said he thought it was permature to be to be trying this experimental project. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Smith, Turner, Courtney Nays: Richards First Reading granted. ORDINANCE NO. 434 -AlO CHANGING ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SWIMMING POOLS ADOPTED: SECOND READING WAIVED. Manager Rosland advised the Council that our present ordinance regulating swimming pools prohibits electrical conductors within 15 feet of a swimming pool. The State Electrical Code permits electrical conductors within 10 feet of a swimming pool providing the conductors are elevated above the swimming pool by specific distances; such elevations being determined by the voltage carried by the conductors. An amendment to the ordinance is recommended that will change the City's requirement for electrical conductors from 15 to 10 feet. The 10 foot separation appears to be a reasonable safety distance. Because a building permit is being withheld pending adoption of the amendment, staff would ask that Second Reading be waived. .Tom Berger, 5030 Yvonne Terrace, stated that they are in the process of putting in a swimming pool and there was some question as to what the exact code was in placement of the pool in relationship to power lines. On contacting the State he found out that the State code did not match with the City code. Mr. Berger added that they would like to place their pool to meet the State guidelines and he understood that Edina basically follows the State electrical code. He said according to information from staff when Edina adopted this ordinance with the 15 foot requirement the State had not addressed this distance requirement. No further comment or objection being heard, Member Kelly introduced Ordinance No. 434 -A10 as follows and moved its adoption, with waiver of Second Reading: ORDINANCE NO. 434 -A10 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 434 CHANGING THE ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SWIMMING POOLS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Paragraph (b) of Section 19 is hereby amended to read: "(b) No current - carrying electrical conductors shall cross residential swimming pools, either overhead or underground or within 10 feet of such pools except as necessary for pool lighting or pool accessories." Sec. 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its passage and publication. Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Ordinance adopted. BID AWARDED FOR RENEWAL OF LIABILITY INSURANCE FOR POLICE AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS. Manager Rosland advised that the City's liability insurance for Police and Public Officials is due for renewal and that the City has sought premium quotations for this insurance. He noted that for the first time in three years, the rates are starting to drop and presented the following tabulation of quotes: PUBLIC OFFICIALS' LIABILITY INSURANCE National Casualty $10,625.00 Tudor Insurance Company 20,625.00 Municipal Purchasing Group, Inc. 34,557.00 POLICE PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY Western World Insurance Company $28,230.52 Municipal Purchasing Group, Inc. 30,273.00 Imperial'Casualty & Indemnity 31,968.00 Mr. Rosland recommended award of bid at $31,968.00 for Police Professional coverage to Imperial Casualty & Indemnity for the following reasons: 1) As in prior years, in order to get the Public Officials Liability at the rate quoted by National Casualty of $10,625.00 it is necessary to insure the Police with a coverage acceptable to National Casualty. Imperial Casualty & Indemnity is acceptable to National Casualty; the other companies are not. 2) Imperial Casualty & Indemnity offers $1,000,000 annual aggregate;.the other two quotes are for $500,000 annual aggregate. 3) Imperial Casualty & Indemnity is offering an occurance rather than a claims -made form of coverage. The claims -made coverage is less desirable than the occurance form of coverage because of the potential of significantly higher premiums in subsequent years of similar coverage. In summary, Mr. Rosland award of bid for Public Officials' Liability to National Casualty and award of bid to Imperial Casualty & Indemnity for Police Professional Liability. Member Kelly moved award of bid for Public Officials' Liability to National Casualty at $10,625.00 and award of bid for Police Professional Liablity to Imperial Casualty & Indemnity at $31,968.00. Motion was seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. *BID AWARDED FOR ANNUAL CONCRETE SUPPLY. Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Turner for award of bid for annual concrete supply to recommended low bidder, Johnson - Bigler Co., Inc., at $48.25 per cu, yd. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes, one nay. *BID AWARDED FOR TRUCK REPLACEMENT FOR PARK DEPARTMENT. Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Turner for award of bid for small truck to replace Cushman Scooter to recommended bidder, Polar Chevrolet, at $10,879.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes, one nay. *BID AWARDED FOR MINNEHAHA CREEK MILLPOND WEED HARVESTING. Motion was made by Member Sith and seconded by Member Turner for award of bid for Minnehaha Creek Millpond-Weed Harvesting to sole bidder, Midwest Aqua Care, at $8,768.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes, one nay. I -494 CORRIDOR STUDY REPORT GIVEN BY CONSULTANT. Manager Rosland introduced these individuals who have been involved in the I -494 Corridor Study: Dick.Wolsfeld of BRW, Inc., project consultant, Connie Kozlak, Metropolitan Council project manager, and Allison Fuhr, member of the project management team representing the RTB. Mr. Wolsfeld began the report by showing a video tape on the I -494 Corridor Study. The video tape explained that the Study is analyzing the kind of improvements to be made to I -494 so that it can handle future growth in this very important freeway corridor. It also covered the following components of the Study: 1) background on why the Study is being done, 2) who is working on the Study, and 3) the kind of improvements being considered. The Study is focusing mainly on an area running from the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport on the East to the proposed extention of the Crosstown Highway on the West. It will look in lesser detail at the area that extends east to 35E in Eagan and north to 394 in Minnetonka. The Study has identified these key issues: 1) what type of improvements are appropriate and how much of each, 2) whether short and medium length trips should be made on I -494, 3) whether the private sector should pay for any proposed transportation improvements, and 4) how to protect businesses on the frontage roads east of Highway 100. These key issues helped the Study team to develop goals they could look to in selecting alternatives for improving I -494. The goals are: a) to provide a level of mobility on I -494 consistant with its functional classification as an interstate freeway, b) to develop a system of support roadways in the I -494 corridor, c) to provide sufficient capacity in the I -494 corridor to serve the travel demand forcast = for the year 2010, d) to provide public transit and other lower cost methods of managing travel demand to make the most efficient use of capital investments, e) to maintain or improve access to existing developments in the study area, f) to minimize the impact of transportation facilities on existing developments, g) to minimize the construction of residential neighborhoods along arterial and collector streets, h) to achieve these goals in the most cost effective manner possible. Alternatives selected by the Study team fall into three groups: First, freeway lane alternatives; Second, frontage road and parallel arterial roadway alternatives, and Third, I -494 interchange alternatives. The alternatives in the three groups were then explained in some detail. The video concluded that total reconstruction of the I -494 Corridor is a long way off. Before any reconstruction can occur MNDOT must do environment studies and final designs, and most importantly it must find funding for the project. However, some of the individual projects will be started soon. The reconstruction of the interchange at 24th Avenue and Highway 77 will start this fall. Within the next five years it is likely that the Penn Avenue bridge and the I -35W interchange will be rebuilt. The I -494 Corridor Study being conducted today is important as it will serve as a conceptual design for the individual projects and eventually be blended into a complete rebuilt freeway to better serve travel desires in the southwestern part of the metropolitan area. Mr. Wolsfeld stated that what they are attempting to do in the I -494 Corridor Study is to make sure that these various components are in balance. Such as that the traffic generated by the land use - that we have transportation systems to support that either with roadways, with transit service or that we manage the travel. That we have money to pay for those improvements and that we have an institutional structure (relationship between the private sector and the public sector) that will make these things happen. We need to make sure that the amount of land development that occurs will only result in traffic that can be accommodated by the transportation system and be paid for. That will be a considerable challange to the Project Management Team. Mr. Wolsfeld explained that one of the reasons that we have alternatives in terms of add one lane or add two lanes to I -494 relates to some differences between the local units of government and the Metropolitan Council relative to projections of population and employment. He presented graphic illustrating those differences, noting that the projections of local governments of 70- 80,000 more jobs by the year 2010 is very significant. That increment and the traffic associated with it results in two different traffic projections. He said they were very serious about looking at travel demand management strategies and transit strategies. Mr. Wolsfeld concluded his report by presenting estimated construction costs for the I -494 improvements, stating that it is very costly to go in and improve and update I -494, noting that the real cost is in the interchanges. He said that an open forum on the I -494 Corridor Study will be held for all the communities along the corridor on Wednesday, May 6 at the Edina Community Center to give this presentation and to get reaction from the public. The next three to four months are the critical point in the Study because the decisions that will be made are on very significant issues that will have impacts on a lot of people. Mr. Wolsfeld then responded to questions and comments from the Council members. Member Turner commented that she hoped the Council members would attend the open forum so that they could hear the questions from the other cities, the business people, the legislators and all who have some stake in the decisions that are finally made for the I -494 corridor. She suggested that the Council then take some additional agenda time to be sure that the Council's representatives on the Management Project Team have a clear understanding of the Council's position on the issues and speak for all the Council members. No formal action was taken. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE FOR SWENSONS ICE CREAM REVIEWED. Manager Rosland directed the Council's at to a memorandum from David Velde, City Sanitarian, with regard to his recommendation that the food establishment license for Swensens Ice Cream be revocated. The memorandum pointed out that since Mohammed and Fatima E1 Gamal began operating the establishment in March of 1986 they have not passed a food establishment inspection. It was noted that a passing score is 70 or higher based on a maximum score of 100. The five inspection scores at Swensons Ice Cream since May 1987 were 52, 68, 65, 66 and 44. An inspection conducted on May 1, 1987 gave them a score of 80. The memorandum documented the violations which have repeatedly been identified during the nitial inspections and compliance inspections. The Health Department is seeding revocation of the license based on the fact that there have been repetitive violations and the restaurant has not passed the minimum inspection rating of 70 for the inspections prior to May 1, 1987. Mr. Velde stated that although they had a passing score on the most recent inspection he is not confident that the improvement will be sustained. Mohammed and Fatima El Gamal were present and said they felt Edina was very restrictive and had very high requirements for passing inspections; that they did not have good communications with the Assistant Sanitarian who has been performing the inspections and were not told what they were not doing properly and that they felt they are being discriminated against. Mrs. E1 Gamal said she has been very cooperative and has done everything she can to keep the restaurant up to the standards required by Edina. They commented on the various violations which had been identified by staff. Member Kelly asked if staff had recommended that the El Gamals attend the county food protection assurance class. Mr. Velde responded that.he did not recall if this was discussed when they first obtained a license. Mr. E1 Gamal said that they are selling the restaurant franchise and that they expect to close on the sale on May 26, 1987. Mrs. E1 Gamal said that she would give all her effort to maintaining the restaurant until that date if they can remain in operation. Member Richards commented that, given the fact that the business will be sold on May 26, if the E1 Gamals are willing to post a cash bond with the.City in the amount of $3,000, that a charge be made of $150.00 for each additional inspection until that date to be deducted from the bond fund and that if they fail any inspection the license be revoked he would support such action and if this is not acceptable to the E1 Gamals that he would support revocation of the license. Attorney Erickson opined:l) that the City can charge for reasonable costs of the additional inspections, 2) that if the restaurant fails an inspection the ordinance provides revocation as a remedy and that the balance of the cash bond funds may not be retainable by the City. He suggested that the proposed amount of the bond and the inspection charge be modified. Mayor Courtney then asked Mr. E1 Gamal if he would accept the proposed conditions which could allow the restaurant to remain open. Mr. E1 Gamal said he could accept them if the charges were reasonable. Member Smith moved the following: 1) that inspections be made every three days at a charge of $100.00 per inspection between now and May 26, 1987, 2) that the E1 Gamals deliver to the City a cash bond in the amount of 2,000.00 from which the inspection charges will be deducted, 3) that any money remaining after May 26 be refunded -to the E1 Gamals, and 4) if the restaurant fails to pass an inspection that the City Health Department is authorized to immediately revoke the food establishment license. Motion was seconded by Member Richards. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. CENTENNIAL COMMISSION CHALLENGE DISCUSSED. Manager Rosland recalled that the Centennial Commission was waiting for the Council's action on the Conditional Use Permit for Arneson Acres Park which would allow the renovation and expansion of the Arneson home to house the Edina Historical Society and the Edina Garden Council. The Commission had proposed that they accept a challenge to raise the funds for the addition to the Arneson home of $250,000 as their Centennial project. The Centennial Commission now feels they would rather kick off their campaign this fall. This would also allow the Edina Park Board to hold a meeting on May 19, 1987 with the neighbors adjacent to Arneson Acres Park to present the master park plan to them. The Park Board could then being back a report to the Council on June 1, 1987 together with their request for funding for the initial renovation. Following that the Centennial Commission chairpersons would bring to the Council their proposed challenge. APPOINTMENT MADE TO HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD. Member Turner stated that the Council has three candidates to consider for appointment to the Heritage Preservation Board following interviews conducted earlier. Member Smith made a motion for appointment of Donald W. Wray to the Heritage Preservation Board for an unexpired term to February 1, 1989. Motion was seconded by Member Turner. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. COUNCIL LIAISON DISCUSSED. Member Turner recalled that as a follow -up to the Council workshop in March the Council decided to talk about their individual liaison assignments and other activities in terms of evening out responsibilities. Following some discussion, it was informally agreed that each member would identify three or four things that they are especially interested in with the lists to be turned in to the Clerk and that the Mayor would make the re- assignments as has been done traditionally. GOOSE CONTROL PROGRAM DISCUSSED. Manager Rosland referred to a memorandum regarding possible control measures for Canada geese. In other cities these control measures have focused primarily on the capture of geese during their flightless stage in mid - summer and then subsequent translocation to other parts of the country. These efforts have been coordinated by Dr. James Cooper of the University of Minnesota. Dr. Cooper has outlined a three year program the annual cost of the program would be $3,266.00. Staff has also received interest by some residents to contribute to the program to defray costs. The first step of the program is to hold a public hearing. This hearing would be conducted by Dr. Cooper and representatives of the DNR and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Staff would suggest that this hearing be conducted on May 13, 1987 at City Hall but that the Council need not attend. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Kelly to approve of May 13, 1987 as the hearing date for the goose control program. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. NAMRON DEVELOPMENT PROCESS DISCUSSED. Member Smith expressed some concerns he had regarding the process on the Namron Development project as to notifying the public and also regarding the density issue. A brief discussion was held with no formal action being taken. COFFEE REQUESTED FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS. Member Kelly asked if coffee or water could be available for the Council Members at their regular meetings. Manager Rosland responded that he would take care of the request. ANNUAL VOLUNTEER AWARD RECEPTION COMMENDED. Member Turner commended all who had worked to make the Annual Volunteer Award Reception held on April 28, 1987 a marvelous event. She asked if there was some way the members of advisory boards and commission could be included in the annual event. Mr. Kojetin responded that the board and commission-members are invited to the annual Braemar Inspection Tour and dinner and that some special recognition may be included in that event. HERITAGE PRESERVATION BOARD MINUTES DISCUSSED. Member Richards commented on reference in the Heritage Preservation Board Minutes that the Engineering Department was responsible for removal of the elm trees on the West 50th Street project. He said that was not accurate, that it was a Council decision and asked that the information be conveyed to the Board. COMPLAINT REGARDING TAPE RECORDSINGS DISCUSSED. Manager Rosland referred to a recent letter from a resident complaining about the propriety of an officer tape recording conversations with violators.. He presented a memorandum from the Chief of Police regarding the complaint and the unstated policy of the department. Member Richards moved that the City respond to the complainant on behalf of the Council in accordance with the policy set forth by the Police Department, supplemented by the City Attorney's response. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. LMC CONFERENCE DATES NOTED. Manager Rosland reminded the Council of the League of Minnesota Cities Conference on June 9 -12 and advised that he would be attending. He asked that anyone planning on attending let him know so that reservations could be made. RESIGNATION NOTED. Manager Rosland advised that a resignation has been received from John Brady, media specialist, who is moving to Los Angeles. He presented a rough draft of the Council brochure which Mr. Brady has prepared and asked the Council to make notes and corrections on the format and content and return them so that the final draft can be prepared. PROGRESS ON UNION CONTRACTS REPORTED. Manager Rosland advised that negotiations are still proceedings on union contracts but that none of the three unions have settled. Salary and benefit issues are close to resolution but it may go to binding arbitration. TAX LEGISLATION DISCUSSED. Manager Rosland passed out data just received from the League of Minnesota Cities regarding tax legislation now being considered. He pointed out that the school aids bill passed on April 30, 1987 could raise the levy for Edina by 42 %. He said the Municipal Legislative Commission is working on forming a coalition with lobbyists from the LMC, Minneapolis and St. Paul to work on behalf of the metropolitan cities who will be greatly affected by the proposed legislation. He also presented data on the Senate property tax plan highlights. He said local government aids are being grandfathered in. It also looks like the homestead exemptions will also remain but that the school aids formula is the most devasting. He said if the proposed legislation is passed taxes in Edina could go up by some 30 %. He said our legislators are fully award of the situation and are doing all they can. No action was taken. MEETING DATES NOTED. Manager Rosland reminded the Council of the following meeting dates: May 6 - I -494 Corridor Study public hearing; May 11 - Board of Review at 5:00 p.m. and joint meeting with School Board at 8:00 p.m. and May 12 - meeting with developers on Hedberg property_. PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON BOND REFUNDING. Pursuant to due notice given, a public hearing was conducted on a proposed issuance by the City of Edina, Minnesota of General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds. The proposal is that the City issue its general obligation tax increment refunding bonds (the Refunding Bonds), in order to refund in advance of their maturity all or a portion of the City's General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985, dated September 1, 1985, in the aggregate principal amount of $12,000,000 (the series 1985 Bonds). The maximum aggregate principal amount of the Refunding Bonds is $13,200.00. The principla of and interest on the Refunding Bonds are expected to be paid from tax increments to be derived from the Southeast Edina Redevelopment Area, but if necessary for the payment of such principal and interest, ad valorem taxes will be required to be levied on all taxable property within the corporate limits of the City. No public comment was heard and,none had been received prior hereto. Manager Rosland commented that following direction by the Council we would hold the public hearing but would not sell refunding bonds unless there would be a savings of at least $400,000. *CLAIMS PAID. Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Turner for payment of the following claims as per pre -list dated 5/4/87: General Fund $188,099.20, Art Center $6,696.95, Capital Fund $74.00, Swimming Pool Fund $263.00, Golf Course Fund $27,332.24, Recreation Center Fund $786.30, Gun Range Fund $195.67, Utility Fund $230,478.23, Liquor Dispensary Fund $2,644.37, Construction Fund $1,803.09, Total. $458,373.85. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes, one nay. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Courtney declared the meeting adjourned at 10:53 p.m. III.A M E M O R A N D U M TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager FROM; Francis Hoffman, City Engineert/4 SUBJECT: Link Road /Vernon Ave. Road Hearing - Continuation to June 1, 1987 DATE: May 14, 1987 _ This project hearing has been continued from the April 20th to May 18th. The staff has continued to work with Hennepin County and Superamerica over design and access issues. The attached sketches depict two alternatives which have been selected from five original alternatives. Superamerica representatives prefer Alternative 4 and Hennepin County representatives prefer Alternative 3. City staff believes there are advantages and disadvantages to either alternative. The staff would recommend that we continue this hearing to June 1st to allow additional time for discussions to occur which could result in development of a plan acceptable to all parties. FJH:lmb PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM � TURN LANE ROADWAY CHANGES; CONSTRUCT FOR THIS ALTERNATE r 1 REJISE VErzti1�1J �°►VE/.JVE CONSTRUCT TORN LANE -� V2 � � _r •I I Cis I I 4. �� 1 ''.• 0 iii 4~ o fi• ApprOa_ Seep 1 IM1>`M{� /a! -LESS `,f�1C7� euw.,: W, _ VElLtilC�til P.V6f�ciE .w...o.w rw •'1, � 'S1'.... �.i /, ��` E�IF.IA. M�Nr- I�SOTA .e. �' �/ �_ •1• �. � _ ��_ �►� SUPERAMER_ ICA 1240 W22r UO /r.[2r •• ^• .L DOYMpT014 YIMK.erA' 6N21 - -- - BaN Drawrq A AR 7 by &Pwamwica7 Alb. Z Mm 5 by S&WROw4efaweh, Ina. D STRGAR O�Sn' ^UqCH INC VERNON AVENUE AT LINK ROAD IN EDINA i EVALUATION nF Rne nw Al -rcDLI A - rniCL+ Commission Number 0870854 April 1987 PROPOSED SIGNAL SYSTEM VEr CONSTRUCT DRIVEWAY _ 1 ztil�J ,�vENVE CONSTRUCT T ROADWAY CHANGES URN LANE --► _ CONSTRUCT TURN LANE -1 FOR THIS ALTERNATE) - - 1 I ty Approx. Seale SAM �`l.IM IF•Id{�' ACLESS `JfiA� e.,....: bJ. - � ;�; :. � • � ' %- - `� ` -- - VER► -loll AvEF -lUE ,•,; � , � :' -. : � � :< • �- - E�IiJA N111a1- IESoTA .o (611Nr -.tp SUPERAMER_ IC_A_ taw .nr om .r.err w~ aoorworaa .aIt Bne DfeMtita A AR 1 by SupwatOMIC; Ab. 2 thru b by StrWRoecoe4Fawel4 by- I D srRGARROSC1OKaCH INC. VERNON AVENUE AT LINK ROAD IN EDINA .EVALUATION OF ROADWAY ALTERNATIVES � i Commission Number 0870854 I April 1887 �T4 C 0 fJ p® j IV. A- F N U M B E R Z -86 -2 and S -86 -3 L O C A T 1 N North of Vernon Avenue and west of Villa Way REQUEST Approval to construct a apartment complex EDINA PLANNING-` DEPARTMENT T � r f r ? Subdivision No. SUBDIVISION DEDICATION REPORT TO: Planning Commission Park Board Environmental Quality Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBDIVISION NAME: S1 r) LAND SIZE: U�c� 1 LAND VALUc (By: Date: lo�6 ) The developer of this subdivision has been required to A. grant an easement over part of the land ElB. dedicate % of the land donate $ as a fee in lieu of land As (a result of applying the following policy: A. Land Required (no density or intensity may be used for the first 50 of land dedicated) 1. If property is adjacent to an existing park and the addition beneficially expands the park. II 2. If property is 6 acrt-s or will be combined with future dedications so that the end result will be a minimum of a 6 acre park. II3. If property abuts a natural lake, pond, or stream. 4. If property is necessary for storm water holding or will be dredged or otherwise improved for storm water holding areas or ponds. D 5. If the property is a place of significant natural, scenic or his- toric value. F] 6. B. Cash Required El1. In all other instances than above. r + DRAFT DRAFT MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON APRIL 29f, 1987, AT :30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman, William Lewis, John Bailey, Helen McClelland, Del Johnson, Gordon Johnson, David Runyan, Virginia Shaw and Lee Johnson STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner Fran Hoffman, City Engineer Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: /� Mr. Gordon Johnson moved for approval of the January 28, �! f' 1987 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Mr. Del Johnson seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. ` Mrs. Shaw moved for approval of the April 1, 1987 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Mrs. McClelland seconded the motion. All were in ievor. The motion carried. II. OLD BUSINESS: Z -86 -2 Namron Company S -86 -4 R -1 to PRD -4 Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the City Council referred the subject rezoning back to the Planning Commission at its April 20, 1987 meeting. The reason for the referral was to review the reasons for the approved density of the proposal. Mr. Larsen added the motion to refer was made by the Council Member Smith, who,did not participate in'the preliminary approval of this proposal. As you are aware the Commission recommended final rezoning and final plat approval for this project at its April 1, 1987, meeting. No facts or circumstances have changed since that approval. Mr. Larsen explained to the Commission the history of this dates back to at least 1966. In 1966 the City Council approved plans for a 7 story 175 unit apartment building on the property. The project was not constructed. . T I Mr. Larsen pointed out the Comprehensive Plan designates the property for "high density residential ". High density residential translates into a range of from 12 units per acre to over 40 units per acre when Zoning Ordinance standards are applied. By using "Type I or II" construction (concrete) on this site density could legally exceed 24 units per acre: Mr. Larsen with graphics reviewed the density of apartments in the area. Highland Villa , 176 units, with a density of 18 units per acre, Interlachen Court, 61 units, with a density of 24 units per acre, Vernon Terrace, 12 units with a density of 43 units per acre, Summit Point, 29 units, with a density of 43 units per acre. The proposal for Vernon Oaks is 135 units, 19.8 units per acre. Mr. Larsen noted that including the private drive of the easterly side of the site, the density of Vernon Oaks is reduced to 18.9 units per acre. Mr. Larsen said staff's original position was that the appropriate density range for this site was between 18 and 24 units per acre. He added staff has maintained that the density should be closer to 18 than to 24. As a consequence, the Commission denied their first proposal and recommended a reduction from the originally proposed 21.9 units per acre. The proponents responded with 19.8 units per acre which was approved by the Commission and City Council. Mr. Larsen told the hear from you regarding the proposed density. The proponents, Mr. Junior, and Nick Palaia, the area were present. Commission the Council would like to the reasons for recommending approval at Bjornnes, Senior and Mr. Bjornnes, architect were present. Residents of Neighbors who spoke in opposition and their reasons are summarized as follows: Mr. David Getsch, 5233 Richwood Drive, stated he strongly opposes this development proposal. He said the frontal view of the apartment complex from Vernon Avenue will oe very imposing. He added he felt this proposal is out of character with the beautiful residential flavor of this neighborhood. He commented that the density appears high at the proposed 19.8 units per acre and recommended a reduction to 12 units per acre if this proposal is approved. Mr. Getsch also requested additional buffering on the site. Mr. Connor Schmid, 4711 Meadow Road was present representing his clients Wilma Adams Smith, 5304 Gle__nbrae Circle and Mr. and Mrs. L. Jonason, 5300 Glenbrae Circle. Mr. Schmid said the comparison between the Highland Villa and the property in question is very deceiving. With the aide of graphics he pointed out the different site configurations of both parcels. r' Y Mr. Schmid said the property of Highland Villa is relatively regular in shape, whereas the property in question is elongated with a portion that considerably narrows. Mr. Schmid stated this configuration leaves a smaller area for development on the Vernon Oaks site. Therefore, the density should be addressed accordingly. Mr. Schmid stated for the record the site is to dense at the proposed 19.8 units per acre. Mr. Schmid said by his calculations the height of the proposed building is 4.stories or roughly 49 feet in height. This height will negatively impact his clients. Concluding Mr. Schmid asked the Commission to carefully consider the following points before making their decision: the unique topography of the site, the irregular shape of the site as it relates to the density of the project , the dense vegetation that will be lost as a result of this proposal, traffic safety, the overall negative impact on residential neighbors who reside in close proximity to this development, and continued support for high density developments in Edina will compromise the single family residential character of the City. This characteristic should be protected. Mr. Getsch asked if the Villa Way Road could be used as the primary egress for the site. Chairman Lewis informed Mr. Getsch Villa Way Road will be used to a certain extent but traffic generations would be too high for this road to be used as the primary egress. Mr.'Getsch said he would like to see a single entrance instead of multiple entrances. Mr. Larsen said Vernon Avenue is a Hennepin County road and subject to County permits on curb cuts. It was the County's determination where to place curb cuts and they deemed. the proposed sites as appropriate. Mr. Norman Bjornnes Jr. told the Commission he is present to answer their questions and address their concerns if they wish. He pointed out the proposal is unchanged and there have been no additions or deletions to the approved final plan. Mr. Runyan asked Mr. Bjornnes the height of the proposed building. Mr. Bjornnes pointed out there are 3 levels above grade level, each level is 9 feet equaling a total of 27 feet, plus 10 feet, which equals 37 feet. He added the building has been placed as far as possible from single family property owners. Mr. Bjornnes noted the proposal is 360 less dense than what is allowed by the Edina Zoning Ordinance, the proposal is 56% less dense than Vernon Terrace, 21% less dense than Interlachen Court, and virtually identical in density to Highland Villa. Mr. Bjornnes in responding to questions regarding vegetation said the building is designed to take advantage of the bowl effect of this site. This topographical uniqueness along with significant landscaping enables the site to retain 60% green space. Mr.Bjornnes said the various landscaping materials which will be placed on the site equal a cash value of around $150,000.00. This includes the retaining walls, boulders, timbers, plantings, additional trees, ground cover and sodding. Mr. Runyan stated this site is a difficult site to develop and has been in its present undeveloped state for many years. He added he understands the feelings of the neighbors to have this site remain unaltered but years ago this site was designated in the Comprehensive Plan for high density use. Continuing Mr. Runyan pointed out this site has been scrutinized for traffic, building placement, landscaping, and how the building relates to adjacent properties. Mr. Runyan said in his opinion the developer has developed a well thought out project. He pointed out the proposal is unchanged from the previous proposal which received Commission and Council support. He said the present proposed density of the building is reasonable. Mr. Jonason of 5300 Glenbrae Circle said he contacted a real estate appraiser who informed him his property value would depreciate as a result of this proposal. Mr. Getsch, said neighbors are very upset about this proposal and have a concern about their neighborhood and want the Commission to be aware of their concerns. He expressed frustration and a feeling that their feelings are meaningless. He asked the Commission to take into consideration the negative impact this development will have on their neighborhood in the future. Mrs. McClelland inquired as to how long this parcel has been designated for high density use. Mr. Larsen said the designation for high density use has been in place for about 20 years. Mrs. McClelland pointed out the problem may reside in the fact residents have assumed that this parcel of land would remain unaltered. She explained the Comprehensive Plan was revised in 1975 , after publication in the Newspaper and an open hearing where residents could express their views. At that time no one spoke against the plan so no changes in the plan were implemented. Mr. Getsch said residents understand this property has been designated for high density use but asked the Commission to consider lower density. Mr. Getsch further commented that it is very hard to visualize the project and neighbors worry that the structure may be as imposing as Vernon Terrace (across from Jerry's). Mrs. McClelland commented that the proponent will use the bowl effect of the site which should make the structure less imposing. Mr. Del Johnson said he understands the frustration of neighbors but noted their input has been very important and constructive. He pointed out the density has been reduced from the original proposal of 21.9 units per acre to 19.8 units per acre, traffic has been seriously studied and if warranted a traffic light will be installed, a sidewalk will be constructed at the expense of the developer -and landscaping has been increased. Neighborhood impact is needed and very useful to this process and is considered. Mr. Del Johnson added that at this time the developer has complied with recommendations of City and staff and is now within his legal right to proceed with the process. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Bjornnes.if due to the change in the voting composition of the Council he considered addressing Mr. Smith's concern of a possible reduction in density. Mr. Bjornnes replied that Namron Company has complied will all requirements placed on them by the Edina Zoning Ordinance, City staff , Planning Commission and Council and they did not consider reduction of the project. He added the Company is very committed to the proposal as submitted. Mr. Mahoney, 5309 Ayrshire, suggested that a lower density ratio can be achieved if the developer would remove the third floor. He also commented that the Comprehensive Plan states it can be amended f ' from time to time and it can be changed. He feels the plan should not be used as a crutch, Mr. Tengdin, 5241 Lochloy Drive stated he feels strongly about the increasing development of apartments in Edina. This project abutts a prime residential area and that should be considered. Mr. D. Johnson moved to recommend final rezoning and final plat approval as submitted and with staff recommendations. Mrs. McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. R M E M O R A N D U M TO: Community Development and Planning Commission FROM: Craig Larsen, City Planner SUBJECT: Z -87 -2 and S -86 -4 Namron Company R -1 to PRD -4 The City Council referred to subject rezoning back to the Planning Commission at its April 20, 1987 meeting. The specific, and only reason for the referral was to review the reasons for the approved density of the proposal. The motion to refer was made by the Council Member Smith, who did not participate in the preliminary approval of this proposal. As you are aware the Commission recommended final rezoning and final plat approval for this project at its April 1, 1987, meeting. No facts or circumstances have changed since that approval. History on this site dates back to at least 1966. In 1966 the City Council approved plans for a 7 story 175 unit apartment building on the property. The project was not constructed. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for "high density residential ". High density residential translates into a range of from 12 units per acre to over 40 units per acre when Zoning Ordinance standards are applied. By using "Type I or II" construction (concrete) density on this site could legally exceed 24 units per acre. Density Comparison Apartment Comprehensive Plan Name Designation Highland Villa Interlachen Court Vernon Terrace High Density High Density Mixed Use # Units 176 61 152 Density 18 /Acre 24 /Acre 43 /Acre Summit Point Mixed Use 29 43 /Acre Namron High Density 135 19.8 /Acre (including the private drive of the easterly side of the site, reduces the density to 18.9 units per acre) Staffsoriginal position was that the appropriate density range for this site was between 18 and 24 units per acre. Further, we maintained that the density should be closer to 18 than to 24. As a consequence, the Commission ordered a reduction from the originally proposed 21.9 units per acre. The proponents responded with 19.8 units per acre which was approved by the Commission and City Council. No facts or circumstance have changed that would warrant a change in the project. The developer has satisfactorily performed on all conditions imposed at preliminary approval. I urge the Commission to reaffirm its earlier decision to recommend approval of the project as presented. \ ` ,PLANT SCHEDULE � 1 AVAMVTV NMi • a 1WIMLL r6N !' >b fill ♦ m _RO 7laiso. nno.E�+snW u'..le - M- Y srY+.••r . e o•�w �a as a•sww wwa ww.11arw wr�ru ��\ It aad.Nw cn.m. !'. •+ _ .�+ �I •...raw. w••IS ��/ ) \•i -a _N!N•ru +riVS Tr ' ,r.. � ._*7.t"� H _ �/ _ � ,\ . .twr,vww�rreon•w- rm raj . R.^ - l K �.� _ . _ � n s-i•aa .gain- fat ... �.^.�• , •a.�w..o.. .... .rw... '_- .......• ; ,}•. V nawoar .aaii4]s.. O • • \ 4 s.ww lnY aw �rwr aww.nw,llra�` 1 .\ • V 7 wev- t _ }a � •wwm••Nwu - '111^ °• % _ :• 11nlww• wn fl • ' • b nwm m1+c� l' is ILVE cps _ 4 aMJ�[w•w Kialalwe f b f47M1!lldl � Y✓ � �TOI. �tOf •• �,ns•n w..r rr _ 1. Ivva. we 11er 1 }r„'�., aam►WY.to+: �i1• `l..I.r -.J. rYIa�J w•.a lr -d OYR I+rW OW�0 __ -. ____ �1 m Joe AJit •/1arT ,l•ny � } 1 r .e♦ �r.u.1i. -s0�r. w.�•.w �\ - M .J lar Taw. l,q ;� II 'w •�..r+•w. (%�'y�•\ +� s ry wal rawluu ref° �il 1• ± rwwwa.w 1 r1 /V1hJt r- _. ..wr ':\ I _Al1r oHrNf �- l,rl • t ?� — r� ..yam. ®• 1Y i :al / � t iaN� aK= �i ' t ' • 1�r w ^f" -'� '� . •a.a.wr. M.vMR w`+ 1wr p i� a..a.w rr _ r ww.... � -' n..o1s •"r..,�.� , ., t1 �,; tail i �� O ► e.j{ NM1aur� ..,'. aww/.r MY ~ D - - - - - - - - - -�'•�l a _•....war maool „ti:�' /” ^ y a .. 7ftl,,.,► qw 'j - - -•wN ,..a.__ .• _ .�.fO�MNw wo•.wy.,�s1s.�.r .::•y »'..».7 - -- .. (� 1� LANDSCAPE NOTES- c'.t•lwanrme "�'� "YO~ .. dzJ ! I L 1lPiWay MlL ragM O E lVW w stJ !IVlrN/C IWND nr w [JMa 1. la1Ma �p1a ala.. a s v N.nwa nvacs n..aaiww. •• . ' - J / a® aas• R w..11r ao. rlor llwAw e a Po'aD a'.PS uwa MMiN I~ " l I •aalM ofow,w.tf [alas rIMAa• wpy 1 m M II, • nmw1�. 2 7 a /Awaw•/f Ma11fYT L M,IraL AL 1Wf YlA/ MaIOP.O1 fNOFD IU1Nf1K t • . .Tlli' Ia_�• vnrrnvr•+vc MIVV vw cwrmcry 1 r•'LHIV � —� � � —� NAMRON COMPANY ger wes•eroc�� — ae ^� �� -- / 9 , .ems •Iw•arr.•,Ia.,•a�rwr .�r� r rr\ r SECOND FLOOR - A y a \•e•�• ELEV •9923233 5 E GAFIRST FLOOR RAGE FLOORfE�135 - 1 S I� • rr.. r iu r r r r r..°., ' �r-."..'• ar _ c °'+•a•••r. /\'' - ! N Am •'• I � b � \\III i I -'. / /�,,� �ll, I + I r I 1 `1111 // I+ 74, /• ,.. _ 919 •/ ... � e 908 rte. r•. �\\ �._/ �. �/ � •�'• ;' •� 1111 _ �8 , A. vh �, % s s��l b I \� •� P ?pew �4 .._.- .. _..,....... .._..... ._..... / , ...,_.... ...... .. ~:':. -- NAMRON COMPANY SITE PLAN A p III 31311 c C,,. I �tll luill l�llil IIIIIII�a � "'I r w 7107 I�� . Illlliiiiillllll ■�■ '� 1�6 ©I� 0 �� I0 `� IIIIIE�� I `_mlll ♦p — . ' �� ° 0 0� c�l HG 11 a — nllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII . IIIILiiii� ►1111 Illluullllll NOR IG 1 I� ■ 1111111 � �dllll 17 ��' I -- _ u � L1, Y 11 �I IIMMI I I IIIIIIBII h II IIIII II I III I II II I II 116!il 111 JM1L■ I I ®n „ ;�..�. _ _�, � I - I. j� u gig - rah gill Oil I GU Gil �IIILl - -1711 '�' lolls = ilj GI $ ° u " i GII i ■cu■ ■ IIIILaJiI ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■!�JIN MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON APRIL 1, 1987 AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Helen McClelland, Lee Johnson, Virginia Shaw, Phil Sked, Jane Paulus and John Palmer MEMBERS ABSENT: Gordon Johnson, John Bailey, William Lewis and David Runyan STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Mr. Sked moved for approval of the February 25, 1987 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Mr. Palmer seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. II. OLD- BUSINESS: Z -86 -2 Namron Corporation, R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -4, Planned Residence District S -86 -4 Vernon Oaks Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to recall that preliminary rezoning and preliminary plat approval for the subject property was granted by the City Council on September 8, 1986. Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the approved plans illustrated a 3 story, 135 unit apartment building. The proponent has now returned with overall development plans to support a request for Final Zoning and Final Plat approval. Plans submitted include a site plan, landscaping plan, grading and utility.plan, floor plans, unit plans, exterior elevations, and a final plat. Overall development plans for the site continue to illustrate a 3 story, 135 unit apartment building. The exterior will be brick with lap siding accents and will have a hip roof with asphalt shingles. The design and materials proposed for the building are unchanged from the plan at preliminary approval. The building exceeds all required setbacks. Underbuilding parking, 169 spaces, conforms to Ordinance requirements. Mr. Larsen pointed out the preliminary approval by the City Council included several special conditions. First, construction of a sidewalk adjacent to Vernon Avenue which would connect to the sidewalk system in the Grandview commercial area. The overall development plan illustrates a sidewalk. Second, that a storm water drainage plan acceptable to the City Engineer be prepared. An acceptable plan has been submitted. Third, in order to save existing vegetation and reduce hard'surface coverage surface parking should be reduced from the required 101 spaces. The final development plan illustrates 68 surface parking spaces. A proof of parking plan illustrating the ability to install 33 additional spaces has been submitted. A proof of parking agreement, by which the City could force the installation of the additional spaces has also been submitted. The final condition was a commitment by the developer to share in the cost of a traffic signal for nearby intersections if so warranted in the future. The developer has committed to pay a proportionate share of the cost. Mr. Larsen added the landscaping plan proposes to retain significant amounts of existing vegetation along the perimeter of the site. The site has been staked and trees to be saved have been trimmed. The proposed landscape plan conforms to Ordinance requirements. However, to provide additional year around color the developer will add approximately 10 evergreen trees. Mr. Larsen told the Commission staff recommends Final Rezoning and Final Plat approval for the following reasons: 1. Design development features of the proposal, including number of dwelling units, building design and materials, parking, and building location are consistent with preliminary approval. 2. With the exception of surface parking the plans meet or exceed Zoning Ordinance requirements. Construction of the additional 33 spaces needed to meet Ordinance requirements is assured by the Proof of Parking Agreement. 3. A proof of parking agreement acceptable to the City Attorney has been submitted. 4. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. An acceptable storm water drainage plan has been submitted. 6. A sidewalk along Vernon Avenue will be installed at the developers expense. 7. The developer has agreed to participate in the cost of signalization if signalization is warranted in the future. Mr. Larsen concluded that staff suggests the following conditions to approval: 1. Subdivision dedication. 2. Executed Developers Agreement. 3. Executed and recorded Proof of Parking Agreement. 4. Executed Assessment agreement for cost of possible signalization. The proponent, Mr. Norman Bjorness was present. Mrs. McClelland asked Mr. Larsen where the sidewalk will be located and the width of the walk. Mr. Larsen responded the sidewalk will be constructed flush with the curb and the proposed width is 5 feet. Mr. L. Johnson questioned if asphalt or concrete would be used in the construction of the sidewalk. Mr. Larsen replied the sidewalk will be constructed with concrete. Mr. L. Johnson wondered if trees would have to be removed as a result of the sidewalk. Mr. Larsen pointed out tree loss as a result of the sidewalk will be minimal adding the relocation of power poles may effect some trees. Mrs. Shaw asked Mr. Larsen who is responsible in making a decision to increase the parking capacity at the site if warranted. Mr. Larsen said the City Manager and the City Planner are responsible in making that decision. He added in his opinion the 68 visitor parking spaces adequately meet the needs of this facility. Mr. Palmer moved to recommend final rezoning and final plat approval subject to staff conditions with the further condition that the developer work with Edina City Staff in appropriately locating the proposed additional 10 evergreen trees. Mr. Sked seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. i , ,; 1 , ` ' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT APRIL 1, 1987 Z -86 -2 Namron Corporation, R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to - PRD -4, Planned Residence District S -86 -4 Vernon Oaks Generally Located: North of Vernon Avenue and west of Villa Way Preliminary rezoning and preliminary plat approval for the subject property were granted by the City Council on September 8, 1986. The approved plans illustrated a 3 story, 135 unit apartment building. The proponent has now returned with overall development plans to support a request for Final Zoning and Final Plat approval. Plans submitted include a site plan, landscaping plan, grading and utility plan, floor plans, unit plans, exterior elevations, and a final plat. Overall development plans for the site continue to illustrate a 3 story, 135 unit apartment building. The exterior will be brick with lap siding accents and will have a hip roof with asphalt shingles. The design and materials proposed for the building are unchanged from the plan at preliminary approval. The building exceeds all required setbacks. Underbuilding parking, 169 spaces, conforms to Ordinance requirements. The preliminary approval by the City Council included several special conditions. First, construction of a sidewalk adjacent to Vernon avenue which would connect to the sidewalk system in the Grandview commercial area. fhe overall development plan illustrates a sidewalk. Second, that a storm water drainage plan acceptable to the City Engineer be prepared. An acceptable plan has been submitted. Third, in order to save existing vegetation and reduce hard surface coverage surface parking shouls be reduced from the required 101 spaces. The final development plan illustrates 69 surface parking spaces. A proof Of parking plan illustrating the ability to install 33 additional I � t' ' i r� spaces has been submitted. A proof of parking agreement, by which the City could force the installation of the additional spaces has also been submitted. The final condition was a commitment by the developer to share in the cost of a traffic signal for nearby intersections if so warranted in the future. The developer has committed to pay a proportionate share of the cost. The landscaping plan proposes to retain significant amounts of existing vegetation along the perimeter of the site. The site has been staked and trees to be saved have been trimmed. The proposed landscape plan conforms to Ordinance requirements. However, to provide additional year around color the developer will add approximately lg evergreen trees. Recommendation Staff recommends Final Rezoning and Final Plat approval for the following reasons: 1. Design development features of the proposal, including number of dwelling units, building design and :materials, parking, and building location are consistent with preliminary approval. 2. With the exception of surface parking the plans meet or exceed 'Zoning Ordinance requirements. Construction of the additional 33 spaces needed to ,meet Ordinance requirements is assured by the Proof of Parking Agreement. 3. A proof of parking agreement acceptable to the City Attorney has been submitted. 4. The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. An acceptable storm water drainage plan has been submitted. 6. A sidewalk along Vernon Avenue will be installed at the developers expense. 7. The developer has agreed to participate in the cost of signalization if signalization is warranted in the future. Staff suggests the following conditions to approval: 1. Subdivision dedication. 2. Executed De* elopers Agreement. 3. Executed and recorded Proof of Parking Agreement. 4. Executed assessment agreement for cost of possible signalization. , 9/8/86 This project will provide approximately $135,000 in new tax revenues. Mr. Nick. Palaia, the architect, was introduced. He commented that the site is unique and challenging and presents great opportunities. The development will complement the adjacent developments. The most unique feature of the site is that it is extremely tree covered and severely sloped; these features would allow the developer to take a large development and depress it into a private, inward site. Essentially, the project will be below the existing developments. By lowering the number of units from 212 to 135, the setbacks were significantly increased beyond what is required; as a result, most of the vegetation around the periphery can be saved and privacy maintained from the single - family developmentAn the west and from Villa Way and Interlachen Court. A forester has been hired o help make judgments on the type of vegetation to be added to preserve the privacy during the winter months. 50% of the units are one - bedroom units; 42% are two- bedroom units; 8% are three - bedroom units.. Three stories in height was chosen because there is a very direct relationship between parking and the height of the building. There appears to be no problems with sewage and site drainage, and water coming onto and off of the site can be handled. Mr. Mitch Wanson, a traffic engineer from Benshoof & Associates, was introduced. He has examined the existing traffic situation on Vernon Avenue in the vicinity of the site and analyzed the impacts which this proposed development might have on lernon Avenue. He stated the following conclusions based upon his analysis: 1) Vernon Avenue is a minor arterial roadway. In the vicinity of the proposal, there are approximately 27 vehicles per minute during the PM peak hour. Current traffic concerns include sight distance at Ayrshire Boulevard and Villa Way and high vehicular speed; 2) The development, Vernon Woods, is expected to generate 824 daily trips and 94 P. M. peak hour trips; 3) The main access to Vernon Woods has received Hennepin County approval; and -4) It is concluded that the public roadway system can safely and effectively accom- modate development traffic with no significant impacts on existing traffic concerns. To assist in the resolution of existing traffic concerns, it is recommended that: 1) Existing understory vegetation at Ayrshire Boulevard be trimmed to improve sight lines; 2) The City monitor traffic growth in the vicinity of Eden Avenue /Vernon Avenue to determine if additional traffic signalization is warranted; 3) The City continue to enforce the speed limit on Vernon Avenue in the vicinity of the site; and 4).The City consider requesting Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation to perform a speed limit analysis for Vernon Avenue. Member Turner inquired as to whether the standing water to the west of the property proposed to be developed indicated a problem with storm water drainage. Mr. Hoffman said that the current storm water drainage system has the ability to handle the proposed development subject to modifi- cations. Mr. Bill Mahoney, 5309 Ayrshire, said that he is adjacent to this proposed complex. He is concerned that this project will change the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Mahoney reported that Mr. Bjornes does not really own the subject property as indicated in the County records. Mr. Mahoney also commented that he and the neighbors were not against Mr. Bjornes developing the property but rather they are against the concept that the development will be high density. He felt that the alternative -- single family residences - -would be more desirable and should be considered by Mr. Bjornes. This would put it on the same footing as the existing area. Mrs. Wadsworth, 5300 Vernon Avenue, indicated that her concern is the traffic hazard and pollution. Mr. Mike Bolen, 5207 Doncaster Way, implied that the heart of the issue is the changing of the original plan for the use of the land - -a shift from the residential use that was originally designed to a high density unit. He reported that currently it is very difficult exiting onto Ayrshire. Mr. Robert Vaughn, 5224 Duncraig Road, feels that crime will become a major concern with the development of this high density project. Buzz Jonason, 5300 Glenbrae Circle, questioned whether or not the traffic consultant had considered the impact of the increase in traffic generated by Jerry's. Mr. Wanson responded that his consulting firm has not accounted for additional development on the Jerry's site. Mr. Hoffman indicated that at least two years ago a study was done on the Grandview traffic area which included all potential developments in this Vernon Avenue vicinity; the City as a result has reviewed what should be done if all potential projects are begun, and Mr. Hoffman commented that there will be adequate roadways to deal with this issue. Dr. Robert Benjamin, 5205 Duncraig Road, objects to the change in zoning; this project would be at the expense of those who have single - family homes in the area in that it would be a loss of equity for them. Carol Grossman, 6616 Gleason Road, objects to the zoning change because of the potential of a traffic increase. Member Richards asked when the property was first subject to a comprehensive plan and the density of Interlachen Court, Villa Way and the Biltmore site. Planner Larsen indicated that the designation of "high density residential" dates back to the Comprehensive Plan of 1980. Prior to this, in 1966 the City Council approved a re- zoning for a seven - story, 175 unit apartment project on the same site. That project did not go to completion after the preliminary re- zoning stage, and it was, therefore, never built. The area of crime Vas mentioned, and Member Bredesen f questioned the crime impact this development would have on the area. Chief Swanson responded that at Highland Villa there has not been much of a problem. Theft, however, is more common in high- density dwellings and apartment complexes with underground garages. The neighborhood to the west of the proposed project is one of the safer ones in the City. Member Turner questioned the number of trips per unit generated by this kind of land use. The traffic consultant responded that this figure is 6.1 (three in and three out). Mr. Roy Dickman, 6424 Aspen Road, does not see how this proposed development will hurt `property values being that it will be snuggled into a hill and below Villa Way and srjuld not have any effect on homes up on the hill. Furthermore, he commented that it is on Vernon Avenue and closer to commercial road than is Villa Way. He believes that people who want to retire in Edina would favor this location. Shirley Haffner, 5244 Lochloy, expressed the concern that there should be no need for more high- density developments in Edina. Member Bredesen remarked that there are already problems on Vernon Avenue which will continue whether or not this project is developed. This development will not make traffic problems any worse. He believes that the developer has made a good attempt to create a project consistent with the surrounding land. Member Turner stated that PRD -4 zoning is appropriate for that land but has a concern about the storm water drainage. She would like to see a sidewalk be built along the north side of Vernon. She also commented that Traffic Safety should look at this issue once again. Member Kelly also had a concern about the storm sewer and believes that the development would adversely impact the existing neighborhood. Member Richards would like to see some commitment made before second reading with what the developer would do in picking up some of the cost of signalization. There being no further discussion, Member Bredesen introduced the following ordinance for first reading and moved its adoption, subject to the following conditions: 1) acceptable final development plans; 2) final plat approval; 3) subdivision dedication; 4) developer's agreement; 5) proof of parking agreement; 6) storm sewer and sidewalk approval; and 7) signalization contribution: ORDINANCE NO. 825 -All AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 825) BY ADDING TO THE PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT (PRD -4) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 6 of Ordinance No. 825 of the City is amended by adding the following thereto: "The extent of the Planned-Residence District (Sub- District PRD -4) is enlarged by the addition of the following property: That part of the following described part of Government Lot 7, Section 28, Township 117, Range 21, lying West of a line running South parallel with the East line of said Government Lot 7 from a point on the North line of said Government Lot 7, distant 845 feet West of the Northeast corner thereof to the Northwesterly right -of -way line of U. S. Highway No. 169; commencing at a point on the North line of said Government Lot 7 distant 845 feet West of the Northeast corner thereof; thence South parallel to the East line of said Government Lot 7 a distance of 708 feet to the point of beginning; thence South parallel' to said East line 190 feet; thence West parallel to the North line of said Government Lot 7 to the West line thereof; thence South to the Southwest corner of said Government Lot 7; thence East along the South line thereof to the Northwesterly right -of -way line of U. S. Highway No. 169; thence Northeasterly along said Northwesterly right -of -way line to its intersection with a line drawn East, parallel to the North line of said Government Lot 7, from the point of beginning; thence West to the point of beginning, according to the Government Survey thereof; and that part of the North 1/2 of Government Lot 2, Section 33, Township 117 North, Range 21 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian lying Northwesterly of the right -of -way of State Highway Nos. 169 and 212, all according to the United States Survey thereof." Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Turner, Courtney Nays: Kelly Ordinance adopted. Member Bredesen than moved adoption of the following resolution, subject to the same conditions pertaining to the preceding ordinance: � J r MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL SEPTE:IBER 8, 1986 Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor Courtney. UNITED'WAY RESOLUTION ADOPTED. Mayor Courtney introduced the following resolution, and Member, Turner moved its adoption: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the United Way of Minneapolis Area currently provides funding to nearly 390 programs in- ,107 agencies, many located in and serving suburban communities; and WHEREAS, in the Edina area agencies such as Storefront /Youth Action and the American Heart Association provide programs ranging from counsel-ing for physically or sexually abused adolescents to professional education;`' and WHEREAS, the efforts of thousands of community volunteers enable the United Way to maintain fundraising and administrative costs under nine cents to a dollar; and WHEREAS, in 1986 funds are being distributed to quality programs that reach more people in suburban communities; and WHEREAS, United Way works with county planning boards and private planning groups to identify gaps in services in a continuing effort to meet the comprehensive needs of people in the six county service areas. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City.-Council of Edina hereby support United Way's Salute to Small Business on Wednesday, September 17, 1986, in the Edina community and encourage local business and their employees to participate in this event. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. Member Turner expressed a "thank -you" to the City of Edina employees and the hundreds of Edina residents involved in this campaign. PUBLIC HEARING ON PERMANENT STREET SURFACING P -BA -267 CONTINUED TO JANUARY 18, 1987. As recommended by Engineer Fran Hoffman, Member Turner's motion was seconded by Member Kelly to continue the public hearing on Permanent Street Surfacing P -BA -267 (McCauley Trail from Gleason Road to 2000 feet west and Timber Trail from McCauley Trail to cul -de -sac) to January 18, 1987. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly,.Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. PRELIMINARY REZONING & PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR NAMRON CORPORATION. Planner ��oo� Larsen presented the request for preliminary rezoning and preliminary plat approval (, \./ for Namron Corporation, generally located north of Vernon Avenue and west of Villa U \lay. The zoning request was a change from R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -4 Planned Residence District. Mr. Larsen explained that the subject request was heard two times by the Community Development and Planning Commission. On July 2, 1986, the proponent submitted plans for a three - story, 150 -unit apartment building to the Commission. The request was continued by the Commission to allow the proponent time to address density, parking /traffic and site development issues. The proponent returned to the Commission on July 30, 1986, with a revised plan illustrating a.135 -unit apartment building. Density of the proposed development had been reduced from 21.9 units per acre to 19.8 units per acre. This compares to 18 for Villa Way and 24 for Interlachen Court, apartment buildings which are adjacent to the subject property. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the revised plan illustrates 169 covered parking spaces and 101 surface spaces. The spaces provided conform to the Zoning Ordinance requirement of 1.25 covered spaces per unit and .75 surface spaces. In response to comments, the plan suggests eliminating 33 of the surface spaces which would help save the existing site vegetation. Hennepin County has re- viewed the project and approved the proposed curb cut location. Mr. Larsen indicated that the Planning Commission recommended preliminary rezoning approval and preliminary plat approval with the following conditions: 1) acceptable final development plans; 2) final plat approval; 3) subdivision dedication; 4) developer's agreement; and 5) proof of parking agreement. In addition, the following recommendations should be considered: 1) trim an area of greenspace on Ayrshire Boulevard to improve the site lines to enter Vernon Avenue; 2) request that traffic counts be taken by Hennepin County at the Ayrshire Boulevard /Vernon Avenue intersection; 3) recommend if warranted that a traffic signal be erected at the Ayrshire Boulevard /Vernon Avenue intersection or a realignment of the road to better improve the site lines; and 4) reduction of the speed limit along Vernon Avenue from 40 miles per hour to 30 miles per hour. Mr. Norman Bjornes, the developer, was introduced. He explained that the project would have a brick exterior, elevators, TV security and all the amenities of a first -class home. No bond financing or subsidies will be sought; the project will stand on its own two feet financially. There will be $1 million worth of landscaping. 9/8/86 RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL NA,`fRON COMPANY 2ND ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "Namron Company 2nd Addition," platted by Vernon Woods of Edina, a Minnesota Limited Partnership, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of September 8, 1986, be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded bi; Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Turner, Courtney Nays: Kelly Resolution adopted. HEARING DATE SET FOR PLANNING MATTERS. As recommended by staff, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Richards setting September 15, 1986, as hearing date for the following planning matters: 1) Robert Hansen - Generally located north of Crosstown Highway and east and north of Vernon Court•- Zoning change from R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -2 Planned Residence District 2) Robert ' lidd - Generally located south of West 62nd Street and east'of Valley View Road.- Zoning change from R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to R -2 Double Dwelling Unit District and Preliminary Plat 3) Knutson Ventures - Generally located south of Eden Avenue and west of Soo Line Railroad track - Zoning change from PID Planned Industrial District to PRD -4 Planned Residence District r' 4) Warden Acres Dahle Replat - Generally located south of Grove.Street and west of Garden Avenue - ;Preliminary Plat 5) Edinborough - 7600 York Avenue South - Conditional.Use Permit 6) Final Development Plan - Generally located west of Parklawn Avenue and north of West 77th Street extended Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly; Richards, Turner, Courtney .Motion carried. ;t. PUBLIC HEARING ON EASEMENT VACATION CONTINUED TO 9/15/86. As recommended by staff, Member Richards' motion was seconded by Member Bredesen to continue the public hearing on the vacation of utility easements of Grandview Plateau, Lots 1, 2, 3 and 12, Block 1 to the meeting of September 15, 1986.. -,- Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AT 1400DDALE PARK. Mr. Rosland presented a tabulation of bids for playground equipment at Wooddale Park showing Earl F. Andei::,en & Associates, Inc. at $24,99.0 and Flanagan Sales, Inc. at $29,990. Member Bredesen moved award of bid to the recommended low bidder, Earl F. Andersen & Associates, Inc. at $24,990. Motion,; -was seconded by Member Richards. Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly,--Richards 'Turner, Courtney Motion carried. >� REPORT GIVEN ON GLEASON ROAD PARKING RESTRICTIONS. Mr. Rosland reported that there would be two families impacted ;.by banning parking on Gleason Road from Cherokee Trail to Balder Lane. The Arnolds at 6229 Creek Valley Road never park on Gleason Road and have no objections to the ban. The Olsons at 6224 Balder Lane also have been contacted and share the same opinion. There was no further discussion, and no action was taken. REPORT GIVEN ON MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED. Mr. Hoffman remarked that there had been a meeting of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed on August 21, 1986, attended by Council Member Kelly, Engineer Hoffman, Mrs. Francis and Mrs. Anfinson of Cascade Lane to discuss issues of concern occurring along the Minnehaha Creek in Edina. On September 5, the engineers of Minneapolis, St. Louis Park, Edina, Minnetonka, Hopkins and the Watershed District held another meeting. At that time, it was determined that there were only six or seven homes along the creek that had problems that were correctable by joint action between the City, the Watershed and the homeowners. The following olutions were discussed: 1) flood protection (berms); 2) modify operating plan; 3) Upper Watershed improvement project (Upper Watershed retention); 4) retrofit storage along the creek; and 5) floodplain filling. Mr. Hoffman indicated that staff is working with the Watershed Board to develop solutions regarding.costs and funding options. No action was taken at this time. s i I WHITE OAKS IMPRO✓✓ENENT ASSOCIATION Va. DonaZd G. McM.ittan Pne .6.ident May 1, 1987 City of Edina Planning Commission 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Friends: 4701 Meadow Road Edina, Minnezota. 55424 612- 944 -5252 044ice 612- 922 -0834 Home We concur in the objections of the homeowners of the Edina Highlands Lo Lhe placing of a 135 unit, 49 foot high apartment building abutting their -immediate neighborhood on the east at Vernon. There are already too many apartments and condominiums under construction and otherwise planned in that area. The proposed Namron project will undoubtedly contribute to an unwarranted and and unacceptable increase in traffic and crime. This project does not constitute or have an adequate buffer at that height and a 19.3 unit per acre density for this single family residential neighborhood. This ?sigh density project will also lay bare the NSP transmission line in an area where it was previously well screened on both sides. We urge you to deny the rezoning which would permit this. &.onald G. McMillan President DGM /ami -4/29/S-7 +`00pm ZY ?SZ PETITION IN OPPOSITION TO REZONING OF VERNON WOODS (West of Villa Way) TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA: The undersigned object to the rezoning of the above- described property to high density apartment use as proposed by Namron Company. NAME w Lug 9i�f 6 7 6e s g/ � ADDRESS FT/ ; lz-, 12ve zz_- - 6 7 0 S9 0 y 7-�,4�L oCl�L&-O- C L � gar � ..... � X30 ,I , • vIj 4129197 9 Do P•� r i BY -'r5Z PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, the undersigned are Edina residents concerned about: (1) the preservation of the high quality of Edina single family residential neighborhoods; (2)- . the property values of the individual' home owners, which often constitute a substantial part of such owners' savings and future retirement; and (3) the enjoyment and quality of life in such neighborhoods and Edina as a whole, as it is reflected by the well maintained homes, low crime rate, generally good traffic conditions, excellent schools, and fine park system. WHEREAS, the undersigned have become aware of the preliminary approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council of a proposed rezoning of the property along the north side of Vernon Avenue west of Villa Way (Vernon Woods) which will, if finally approved: (1) permit the placement of a very high density (19.8 units per acre) apartment building within 400 of the property fine and within 90 feet of a small park, which is only 10 yards wide at some points closest to the nearest single family home; (2) permit the construction of a 135 unit apartment building that will be exposed 49 feet high at the south facing underground garage entrance facade and a similar height at the westerly facing garage entrance facade; and (3) permit three levels of the proposed apartment building above its separate garage level and a roof peak at 962.5 elevation, which is more than 32 feet above the level of Vernon Avenue at Villa Way and more than 42 feet above the property entrance near the NSP transmission line over Vernon. WHEREAS, the undersigned understand that the 1980 Edina Comprehensive Plan and its Land Use Plan: (1) are statements of general principals as to goals and objectives and anticipated (but not required) potential uses; (2) did not contemplate on its 1980 Land Use Plan Map the additional 152 units of apartments now being constructed on Vernon across from Jerrys on the old Biltmore site, and did not contemplate the additional apartments or condos under consideration for the Lewis Engineering property to the south of the Public Works building; (3) can restrict density to as low as 12 units per acre and still be within the Ohigh densityO category of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Plan and thereby reduce the projected building heights by one floor or =2- approximately 9 to 1p feet, before any chap design reduce the roof ges in roof heights further; (4) states that "'Multiple residential allowed in uses have been proximity to some sin relativel gle family areas but at low densities. Higher density developments e ats com �Iletel h generall y been ioad rm n famil nei hborhoods,� (P• 12) and that with High Density Residential � regard to Density and height should be based on Proximity to low density uses and transportation capacities • ' (P• 18); (5) recognizes as an ob sin le detached to "'Maintain and protect g family etached dominant use in &: neighborhoods as the land Edina (6) Ado � and Adopts as one of the policies to 'Require appropriate land use transitions and extensive buffering low densit between y residential areas residential and high density _ and and areas.& WHEREAS, the undersigned have experienced or become recognize the aware of the increase and traffic safety Probable future adverse y °f other impact on present and planned future apartment, condo and retail construction on area of the or near Vernon in the immediate proposed rezoning. NOW, THEREFpREP the undersigned gned urge the Community Development and Planning the Edina City Cou Commission, pursuant to the request of ncil, to re-examine i - _ for approval of the � is initial recommendation rezoning in view of the following; -3- (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the- Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4- �iN+ PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS ol cC�- .Gp'n --1 NAME PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISST. ;-•`° AnnRFSG ,5' a .2, (,_ ,fin . PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME n nniov c c r,,- -SSy--< PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS :n . 6012 Tingdale Avenue Edina, MN 55436 May 13, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney and Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney and City Council: I understand Norman P. Bjornnes, Jr., the developer of Vernon Oaks, a 135 -unit rental community to be located on Vernon Avenue, is subject to dis- cussion with the Edina City Council. I am quite well versed with the project Mr. Bjornnes has laid out for this area and know that it would be a plus for the City of Edina. Mr. Bjornnes has developed a number of properties and I am well associated with him and know that in each case the property has been a plus for the community in which it is located. Edina could certainly use some deluxe rental units of the type Mr. Bjornnes has laid out and I frankly feel the project should be approved by the Edina City Council. It would be much more complimentary to the community than the project in process on Vernon Avenue at the present time. Very truly yours, Thor R. Lieberg� TR•L /jb Edina, MIN. May 14, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney & Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN. 55424 Gentlemen: As long time Edina residents we urge your approval of VERNON OAKS rental community which will be located on Vernon Ave. at Villa Way. This will be a valuable addition for Edina residents, such as us, who want to sell their present home and continue to live in Edina. This project is well designed and will be located on a beautiful wooded site and should provide substan- tial new property tax revenues for the city. Sincerely yours, /�7� N_"45 Robert and Patsy Schulte 6701 Rosemary Lane Edina, MN, 55435 941 -2206 ♦ ' s May 11th, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney 8 Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minn 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney Et Al: This letter is an appeal for approval of Vernon Oaks the project on which you will vote May 18th. I believe Vernon Oaks will be a valuable addition to Edina. It will be, as you are aware, a top quality luxury rental community. As the population ages and more and more people prefer renting to home ownership, this project is ideally suited to meet these demands. It is beautifully designed to take advantage of a delightful wooded site and its dramatic surroundings. Furthermore its construction will add substantially to the Edina tax base. Please give this matter thorough consideration and r vote approval so the project can move forward. Sincerel , Wm. E. Conner 7200 York.So. # 219 Edina, Minn 55435 r ® PIPER, ,JA,FFoRRAY & HOPWOOD ED� Piper Jafkay Tower 222 South 9th Street Post Office Box 1139 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 /.denfanding m you � comes /firseatt pe r, Ja/ /ray 1�opwood Scott R. Jensen�`J (612)342.5861 �s+►vc P./ _, � i� - - i /- I , /'' ® � �, }� ,.:�K,,� May 11, 1987 The Honorable Wayne Courtney Mayor, City of Edina and Members of the Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Namron Company's Vernon Oaks Development Dear Mayor Courtney and members of the City Council: I have been a homeowner in the City of Edina for the past three and one -half years. During my school years from approximately 1958 to 1973, 1 also lived in Edina. I chose to return to Edina to raise my family. I am familiar with the site of the Vernon Oaks Development as well as its surrounding neighborhood. I am also familiar with the neigh- boring Highland Villa Apartment Development having visited friends there many times. I have known the principals of Namron Company since approximately 1960 through church, social, school and business activities. I also am familiar with a number of the properties which they have developed, owned or managed and know from these personal observa- tions that they do an excellent job in all these respects. Both of the principals of Namron Company are people of the highest integrity and each of them enjoys an excellent reputa- tion. Like your Planning Commission, I have reviewed the site plan and development drawings for Vernon Oaks and, like your Planning Commission, believe that the project deserves final approval at your May 18th meeting. I understand that Mr. Bjornnes has complied with all the City's earlier requirements and has expended large sums of money in doing so. Based upon my experience as an attorney representing -cal estate developers, I think that he has gone as far or farther than is typically required in being accommodating to the concerns of the City and community. I think the project is a good one, I believe that he ought to be allowed to develop the property, consistent with the existing land use and zoning requirements and I think it would be unfair to stop the project or to require any further changes or delays given the substantial investment that Namron Company has already made. If it is allowed to.proceed, I am sure that you will find Vernon Oaks to be a quality_ development with reasonable rents which will be a credit to the City and a ben- efit to its resident. Ver trul&,,- 6 � Eric W. Ingvaldsoi 6356 Rolf Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55435 EWI:sb cc: Norman P. Bjornnes, Jr. 3630 Wooddale Avenue PO ,=ale Minneapolis 92 7 -1400 Minnesota Rubber Minnesota 55440 USA IT(L6I2) X 910- 882211 innesota 1(114A ubber Quadion Company Mayor Wayne Courtney and Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 May 12, 1987 Dear Mayor and City Council Members; The developer and his project "Vernon Oaks" has my full confidence and support. Personally, I have lived in Edina or Morningside all my life (35 yrs.) have had an interest in or lived at over 15 different Edina addresses. I believe I speak with Edina's best interests in mind, when I say that Norman P. Bjornnes Jr. has similar roots and feelings about Edina. I am aware of his background and work habits, therefore, can attest to a quality person with out- standing character. Being aware of other projects done by or managed by Namron Company I can confidently state that "Vernon Oaks" will be a quality.built, well managed project with a discriminating eye to detail. Congratulations in advance on a "Win -Win" project for the City of Edina! Very truly yours, Bruce A. Carlson 6212 Parkwood Rd. Edina, MN 55436 933 - 9735/927 -1490 ROBERT BENNETT ERIC W. INGVALDSON DANIEL McINERNY BENNETT, INGVALDSON & McINERNY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH SUITE 820 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55431 May 11, 1987 The Honorable Wayne Courtney Mayor of the City of Edina and Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Proposed development by Namron Company of Vernon Oaks Dear Mayor Courtney and City Council: TELEPHONE 16 1 21 835-0414 I have had the pleasure of knowing Norman P. Bjornnes, Jr. since we were both in junior high school in Edina in the very early 601s. Our relationship has extended through law school at the University of Minnesota and thereafter in both business and the private practice of law. I know from both a personal and an investor's standpoint that Mr. Bjornnes and the Namron Company develop and manage properties which are a credit to their commu- nities. I know also that Norm and the other principal of the Namron Company share a true fondness for the people and City of Edina where they have lived from many years. Beyond that, and more specifically, I have had a chance to review the drawings and specifications for Vernon Oaks and believe it to be well- suited to the needs of the City of Edina from both an aesthetic and physical perspective. I live at 7113 Shannon Drive which is a residential area not far from some quality rental and condominium units. It is my view that many of the problems which I' understand have been raised by the residents surrounding the project are more illusory than real. In my view, the benefits of the project together with the character of the developer are points which mitigate in favor of council approval. Very truly yours, Robert Bennett RB:sb 0 Micro Media Inc. 1615 5th Street South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 (612) 933 -1434 May 11, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN. 55424 Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council: I am writing this letter regarding the Vernon Oaks development which I urge you to support and get the project final approval. I believe the project will be a valuable addition to Edina by providing not only additional property tax revenues, but also an alternative for residents in the area who wish to sell their homes and rent rather than repurchase. The project seems to be well thought out and provide quality luxury rental housing. The developer has designed the project to take advantage of the topography and the beauty of the wooded site. Again, I urge you to support Vernon Oaks. Thank you. Since ly, Da id H. Nelson 1 May 11, 1987 TO: Mayor Wayne Courtney Edina City Council Lee and Barbara Nelson . 6421 Wilryan Avenue South Edina, Minnesota RE: Vernon Oaks Proposed Development Dear Mayor Courtney and Members of the Edina City Council: As 13 -year residents of Edina, we are writing to express our sincere support for the Vernon Oaks Development. Top quality developments are few and far between and it is our feeling that Vernon Oaks would be a great asset to the City of Edina. We urge you to support and approve this fine development. Sincerely, Lee A. Nelson LAN /la 7,T i eka-" i� ee May 6, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re:Vernon Oaks Dear Mr. Courtney: I am a resident and homeowner in Edina since 1960. I am widowed, 65 years of age and anticipate selling my home before too long. I have been watching the rental market for the past several years and in my opinion there is a shortage of suitable rental units in Edina for people in my situation. I am in favor of the construction of the apartments on Vernon Avenue that will be on the agenda of the City Council on May 18th, 1987, as stated in the Edina Sun Current of May 4th, 1987. The proposed units and location are of the nature I have been looking for for several years. Yours Truly, Mrs. Marion Wartchow 4608 Hibiscus Avenue So. Edina, NN 55435 . 1 SURGICAL SPECIALTIES. LTD. ✓ ✓ SPECIALIST IN G ENERAL VASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY W418 MEADOWBROOK MEDICAL BUILDING 6490 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD DIPLOMATE AMERICAN BOARD OF SURGERY MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55426 FELLOW AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS TELEPHONE: 925 -2343 FELLOW AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CHEST PHYSICIANS Mayor Wayne Courtney and May 6, 1987 Edina City Council Re. Vernon Oaks 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, 114innesota, 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney and the City Council: ',Ne planned on selling our home and moving to Vernon Oaks Development by the Namron Company .I attended the September Council Meeting where approval was granted for the development subject to the conditions laid down. All conditions were met. We made our plans which entailed costs and efforts on our part only to find that the approval has been cancelled. We have been owners in Edina for over 25 years. Our pride in our community and our local government has been such that we want to stay in our community now that we are past the home owning age. There are few projects that meet the quality and convenience of Vernon Oaks and Villa ay where we also rented for a short time. The older generation needs this type of convenience and quality. ' I am disturbed at this reversal of approval. It is a breach of contract and change from the steadfastness and dependability of our pastcouncils and I shall be investigating legal advice as to my costs and severe inconvenience. Y- tru - )'t-1 _ oy P1. Dickman, 6424 Aspen Road Edina, Hn. 55436 MITC�IQLL=J DONNA KIl:f::C- 6304 Kno I I Drive 9jina, M innesoto 55436 May 1, 1987 Mr. Wayne Courtney, Mayor of Edina City of Edina 4801 West 50th Edina, Minnesota 55436 RE: Namron Development Company Vernon Avenue Apartments Dear Mr. Courtney: This letter will confirm our earlier telephone conversation during which I expressed my support for the above noted project which is currently under consideration for approval by the Edina City Council. My familiarity with this project comes from two sources. First of all, I am a relatively new resident of Edina living at the above noted address, and I drive by the site regularly. Secondly, I am a senior vice president with GMAC Mortgage and my company is involved in arranging the financing for this project. Accordingly, I am quite familiar with the neighborhood as well as the plans of Namron to build a high quality, luxury apartment complex on the subject site. Based upon my knowledge of the proposed project and the developer, especially Norm Bjornnes, Jr., I give my unqualified support for this project. My basic reasons for supporting this project are as follows: I. The project fits in with the character of the neighborhood since it adjoins the Interlachen Court Apartments and the Highland Villa Apartments. 2. A high quality luxury apartment complex will be a great addition to the Edina real estate tax base. 3. Most importantly, this area definitely needs rental housing of this nature. Many of the elderly "empty nesters" from my immediate neighborhood are finding that the 3,000 -4,000 square foot ramblers are simply too much to take care of after their children are gone and perhaps one spouse has died or is incapacitated. Many of these residents have lived in Edina for many years, and would prefer to maintain a residence near their former home. The Namron Project will afford them a wonderful housing alternative by providing them a chance to stay in the neighborhood, but without the cost and effort of maintaining a large home. e. Cn Illy O CJ L) • ,^'Coll pop* ��J/ IE3138 N 0 T I C E OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL CASE FILE: Z- 86- 2/S -86 -4 TO: Property Owners Within 500 feet APPLICANT: I Namron Company PROPERTY ADDRESS: Vernon Avenue and Villa Way LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Reverse PURPOSE: Rezoning from R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -4, Planned Residence District. To construct a 135 unit apartment complex. DATE OF HEARING: May 18, 1987 TIME OF HEARING: 7:00 p.m. PLACE OF HEARING:" City Council Chambers Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street HOW TO PARTICIPATE: 1. Submit a letter to the address below expressing your views, and /or 2. Attend the hearing and give testimony for or against the proposal. FURTHER INFORMATION: City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 (612) 927 -8861 DATE OF NOTICE: May 8, 1987 / / 5 . :5 2 1` fQ flcQ�� ems' 0 May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. incerely, "V v OUR i May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, -Lae g�� .5c/p 3Z 1f/ S , May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street EDina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincer. , May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, w4st- 141m, cya w';,O 49'j /4-n - "S " May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, F1 o w Ste, NA , May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, A'1'� -�11� I `iG44 Pi -)9t LI t' M'O rl— At Ate%.' h ,4 , sue; .1 4 r May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, r �� 1 r ' May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, P May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, f� -15 P May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, X'23) May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota l 55424 l Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, 0. e May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th St. Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney; I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, 0 �vv 9769 2— eo "' A AV- S 5' X10 1 May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th St. Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, S �� 47 , "1 May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, /Y7 May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, ssy! _ .. � 9 I IV. A. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Edina City Council FROM: Jackie Hoogenakker, Planning Secretary SUBJECT: Additions to Council Packet DATE: May 15, 1987 Please find the attached items which were received after the packet was completed. Thank you. MACKALL, CROUNSE & MOORE Re: Vernon Woods Rezoning /NAMRON Our File No. 49999 Ladies and Gentlemen: STEPHANIE J. PREM JOHN R. WHEATON TIMOTHY M. BARNETT KARL K. HEINZERLING DONNA M. WATZ JEAN M.HANSKE MARY LYNN JAHNKE THOMAS C. POWER THOMAS J. LALLIER SUSAN M. SWIFT EDWARD J. CUMMINGS CINDY J. LARSON MARK A. RURIK VILIS R. INDE OF COUNSEL FLOYD E. NELSON JAMES B. HANNAH HENRY C. MACKALL (IB6S -1979) ROBERT M. CROUNSE (1693 -1974) PERRY R. MOORE (1694 -1969) The Edina Planning Commission, at its meeting on. April 29, 1987, gave little or no indication of an intent to reexamine any of the factors, old or new, which bear upon the question of degree of density. The chairman began by announcing that the Planning Commission would hear anything which was "'new.° Opponents .and proponents had a little over an hour to present their respective positions. Upon behalf of Wilma Smith and Mr. and Mrs. L. J. Jonason, I attempted to have a number of factors considered. Many of these factors are set forth in the attached petition. The petition with many other signatures was presented to the staff and made available to the Planning Commission through staff prior to the meeting. All the matters related in the petition were Onew" as concerns Wilma Smith, because she was -not given notice of the initial August, 1986, hearing. It seems apparent from the plan- ning file and the fact that neither Ms. Smith nor the L. J. Jonasons received notice of the August, 1986, City Council public hearing that the requirement of notice was not met. Ms. Smith has long been on the tax rolls at her home address as the taxpayer. The fact that Ms. Smith and the Jonasons have unlisted telephone numbers would appear to indicate that the notices were based upon the Edina telephone directory, rather than on the assessor's rolls, as required. During the course of the presentation, it appeared clear that the Planning Commission was not aware of the true building height of 49 feet at the entrance ends, one of which (the south LAW OFFICES -FREDERICK L. THORSON WINSTON E. MUNSON 1600 T C F TOWER CLAY R. MOORE CONNOR F. SCHMID 121 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET VAL M. HIGGINS LORENS 0. BRYNESTAD MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 .SIDNEY KAPLAN WOODBURY H. ANDREWS GEORGE R. A. JOHNSON TELEPHONE 612.333 -1341 ANDREW R. CLARK _ FRANK A. DVORAK - - TELEX 290904 ROBERT D. GISVOLD TELECOPIER 333 -6173 - MARVIN C. INGBER H. RICHARD KORSH - CHARLES D. REITE MARTIN V. AYDELOTT - TIMOTHY D. KELLY - - SHANE H. ANDERSON - GLENN R. DRURY - May 12, 1987 ROBERT S. LEE , JAMES T. SWENSON ERIC 0. MADSON STEPHEN F. GRINNELL - - MICHAEL S. FROST .. STEPHEN P. KELLEY MICHAEL J. DWYER. Edina City Council Edina City Offices 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Vernon Woods Rezoning /NAMRON Our File No. 49999 Ladies and Gentlemen: STEPHANIE J. PREM JOHN R. WHEATON TIMOTHY M. BARNETT KARL K. HEINZERLING DONNA M. WATZ JEAN M.HANSKE MARY LYNN JAHNKE THOMAS C. POWER THOMAS J. LALLIER SUSAN M. SWIFT EDWARD J. CUMMINGS CINDY J. LARSON MARK A. RURIK VILIS R. INDE OF COUNSEL FLOYD E. NELSON JAMES B. HANNAH HENRY C. MACKALL (IB6S -1979) ROBERT M. CROUNSE (1693 -1974) PERRY R. MOORE (1694 -1969) The Edina Planning Commission, at its meeting on. April 29, 1987, gave little or no indication of an intent to reexamine any of the factors, old or new, which bear upon the question of degree of density. The chairman began by announcing that the Planning Commission would hear anything which was "'new.° Opponents .and proponents had a little over an hour to present their respective positions. Upon behalf of Wilma Smith and Mr. and Mrs. L. J. Jonason, I attempted to have a number of factors considered. Many of these factors are set forth in the attached petition. The petition with many other signatures was presented to the staff and made available to the Planning Commission through staff prior to the meeting. All the matters related in the petition were Onew" as concerns Wilma Smith, because she was -not given notice of the initial August, 1986, hearing. It seems apparent from the plan- ning file and the fact that neither Ms. Smith nor the L. J. Jonasons received notice of the August, 1986, City Council public hearing that the requirement of notice was not met. Ms. Smith has long been on the tax rolls at her home address as the taxpayer. The fact that Ms. Smith and the Jonasons have unlisted telephone numbers would appear to indicate that the notices were based upon the Edina telephone directory, rather than on the assessor's rolls, as required. During the course of the presentation, it appeared clear that the Planning Commission was not aware of the true building height of 49 feet at the entrance ends, one of which (the south I M 1 MACKALL, CROUNSE & MOORE Edina City Council Page 2 May 12, 1987 end) will be facing toward my client's property. It was further pointed out for the first time and apparently "'new" to the Plan- ning Commission that the drawings submitted by the proponent did not meet the specific requirement of the zoning ordinance that the developer show the property within 100 feet of the borders of the property to be rezoned. Such a showing would have given the Planning Commission a much clearer picture of the potential impact of the site to be rezoned upon the surrounding property. The plans also, it should be noted, did not clearly point out the height of the building. All that was given was the floor levels up to the bottom of the second floor. Nothing was mentioned on the readable large scale plans about the height of the bottom of the third floor, the bottom of the roof, or the height of the roof on top of that. Similarly, the only elevation diagram made available to the Planning Commission and the Council apparently does not iden- tify the sections through which it was drawn. An intelligent evaluation of the elevation diagram, which may be deceptive, would require knowledge as to where the sections were located and whether the trees at those unidentified section points are real or merely an artist's conception, so that the true relationship can be examined and understood. A request of one of the opponents or some sort of model, which would enable the Planning Commission and the Council, as well as the affected residents, to understand and visualize what will be happening seems very reasonable. That request was unheeded by the Planning Commission, which seemed bent upon acting immediately without further study. Other new factors which would seem not to have been fully considered at the time of preliminary approval by the Plan- ning Commission in. the summer of 1986 were the initiation or progress of the planning and /or construction with regard to the Biltmore site, the Lewis Engineering site, and Jerry's site. Intensification of apartment and other commercial development and use as significant contributors to both traffic and density prob- lems in the general proximity of the proposed rezoning are ex- tremely important. They should be reexamined. No member of the Planning Commission commented upon or seemed to acknowledge impact of the irregular site's irregular boundary. The proposed development does not utilize the triangu- lar shape at the south end of the site to be rezoned. This creates more density visually than the same building would create on a more - regularly shaped piece, such as the 18 unit per acre density Villa Way has. , . MACKALL, CROUNSE S. MOORE Edina City Council Page 3 May 12, 1987 The chairman's comment that ffin.two years you won't even notice it"' certainly tends to indicate that the Planning Commis- sion did not intend to and did not give full and adequate con- sideration and review to the question of density. All in all, the Planning Commission appears to have accepted, without examination or meaningful comparison, the staff's report, which merely cited other densities without any comparative analysis as to context. No consideration or examination appears to have been given,to the principle of buffering by stepping down densities in areas which approach single family residential areas. The enclosed signed copies of the petition reflects the reaction of a single family resident who reluctantly permitted a slightly reduced high density to abut the rear portion of her home. This occurred on France Avenue in the 4600 block. An examination of the comprehensive plan or the Edina zoning maps will reflect that greater distances and better variation of den- sity has normally been achieved between high density use and single family residential areas and between high density and park areas. No such comparative considerations were set forth in the staff report nor discussed in the reasoning or explanation of the Planning Commission. Also, there may well have been some misunderstanding of what the developer is "'doing"' for the City. At the Planning Commission meeting, it was discovered that the developer is not doing a "'million dollars" worth of landscaping as a large part of the residents present apparently and the undersigned had under- stood. A careful examination of the plans shows that little original mature tree cover will be left. Also, the developer's storm water drainage "benefits"' are the necessary results of the acceleration of flow and substantial diminishing of natural ground absorption due to the development. The ponding in Glenbrae Park and even on the lower Glenbrae Circle is not a real problem. No homes are threatened by that. As the recent municipal well prob- lems indicate, the ponding for ground water absorption is desir- able, if not critical. We urge the City Council members, upon whose sole dis- cretion the final responsibility for this decision rests, to give this matter a reasoned independent reconsideration. A review of the concern of the Highlands residents and other single family Edina residents who can recognize and will be impacted by the problems is well deserved. We further urge the City Council to act within its powers to at the very least limit the density to 12 units per MACKALL , C R O U N S E & M O O R E Edina City Council Page 4 May 12, 1987 acre, so that the building's roof height can be reduced or setbacks increased or moved so the fragile park buffering area is afforded a proper scaled down density. In weighing the respective merits and potential economic impact as between residents and developer, nowhere has 'there been any proof that development is not feasible at the lower density, which will help reduce the harm to immediately abutting neighbors and the neighborhood as a whole. The initial 10 percent reduction in the initial review was merely a token. There was an indication by Mr. Bjorness at the Planning Commission meeting that he had communicated to Mr. Smith that $500,000 in expenses had gone into the project since the prelimi- nary approval by the City Council. Other than this reference, which may have been suggested as a veiled threat to the City of Edina, there has been no apparent other public disclosure of the nature and timing of these alleged costs. Certainly, the Highlands residents have not had an opportunity to examine and test the credibility or relevance of the alleged expenses. Fur- ther, it is our understanding that a developer does not have any right to rely upon a preliminary approval where the public body, has asked the developer to make a further modification and re- quires re- presentation of the proposed use in the modified form. If a developer were so entitled to rely, the further final public hearing before the Council would be meaningless. We hope the City Council will not be coerced by any such communication (if it was intended to be a threat) into an action which the Highland residents have good reason to believe is clearly contrary to the spirit and intent of the comprehensive plan's basic goal in protecting single family residences by com- monly accepted and utilized sound land use and planning princi- ples. Respectfully submitted, MACKALL, CROUNSE & MOORE By CFS:jw Enclosures cc Ms. Wilma Smith Mr. and Mrs. L. J. Jonason Connor F. Schmid J 1 WHITE OAKS IMPROIVEA Afi ASSOCIATION DA. Donald G. MCM.i.PPan 4701 Meadow Road Pnez.ident Edina, Minnesota 55424 612- 944 -5252 O44ice 612- 922 -0834 Nome May 1, 1987 City of Edina Planning Commission 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Friends: We concur in the objections of the homeowners of the Edina Highiand5 to cue placing of a 135 unit, 49 foot high apartment building abutting their immediate neighborhood on the east at Vernon. '"here are already too many apartments and condominiums under construction and otherwise planned in that area. The proposed Namron project will undoubtedly contribute to an unwarranted and and unacceptable increase in traffic and crime. This project doer not constitute or have an adequate buffer at that height and a 19.3 unit per acre density for this single family residential tieigiiborhood. This high density project will also lay bare the NSP transmission line in an area where it was previously well screened on both sides. We urge you to deny the rezoning which would permit this. S' ice el G %_.0 -(iOOO D onald G. �icMillan�� President 1 D� -M, amt r.. i, i ,OAF 111FA i I // v 1 � 1 T I• � 1 1 �ec��eG PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, the undersigned are Edina residents concerned about: (1) the preservation of the high quality of Edina single family residential neighborhoods; (2)• the property values of the individual' home owners, which often constitute a substantial part of such owners' savings and future retirement; and (3) the enjoyment and quality of life in such neighborhoods and Edina as a whole, as it is reflected by the well maintained homes, low crime rate, generally good traffic conditions, excellent schools, and fine park system. WHEREAS, the undersigned have become aware of the preliminary approval by the Planning Commission and the City Council of a proposed rezoning of the property along the north side of Vernon Avenue west of Villa Way (Vernon Woods) which will, if finally approved: (1) permit the placement of a very high density (19.8 units per acre) apartment building within 40' of the property line and within 90 feet of a small park, which is only 10 yards wide at some points closest to the nearest single family home; (2) permit the construction of a 135 unit apartment building that will be exposed 49 feet high at the south facing underground garage entrance facade and a similar height at the westerly facing garage entrance facade; and (3) permit three levels of the proposed apartment building above its separate garage level and a roof peak at 962.5 elevation, which is more than 32 feet above the level.of Vernon Avenue at Villa Way and more than 42 feet above the property entrance near the NSP transmission line over Vernon. WHEREAS, the undersigned understand that the 1980 Edina Comprehensive Plan and its Land Use Plan: (1) are statements of general principals as to goals and objectives and anticipated (but not required) potential uses; (2) did not contemplate on its 1980 Land Use Plan Map the additional 152 units of apartments now being constructed on Vernon across from Jerrys on the old Biltmore site, and did not contemplate the additional apartments or condos under consideration for the Lewis Engineering property to the south of the Public Works building; (3) can restrict density to as low as 12 units per acre and still be within the "high density"' category of the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Plan and thereby reduce the projected building heights by one floor or =2- approximately 9 to 10 feet, before any changes in roof design reduce the roof heights further; (4) states that "Multiple residential uses have been allowed in proximity to some single family areas but at relatively low densities. Higher density developments have generally been completely isolated from single family neighborhoods,"' (p. 12) and that with regard to High Density Residential, "Density and height should be based on proximity to low density uses and transportation capacities,m (p. 18); (5) recognizes as an objective to "'Maintain and protect single family detached dwelling neighborhoods as the dominant land use in Edina"; and (6) Adopts-as one of the policies to "Require appropriate land use transitions and extensive buffering between low density residential areas and high density residential and non - residential areas.M WHEREAS, the undersigned have experienced or become aware of the increase and recognize the probable future adverse impact on traffic safety of other present and planned future apartment, condo and retail construction on or near Vernon in the immediate area of the proposed rezoning. NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned urge the Community Development and Planning Commission, pursuant to the request of the Edina City Council, to re- examine its initial recommendation for approval of the rezoning in view of the following: -3- (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult .to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by,an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS &ta4V- S -4- :a (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on-this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS —4— (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or a detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all.the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4._ _ (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4- (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an. independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4- (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4- I (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully . resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4- G (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular- terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and . should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4- (1) the factors of building height and visibility which were not. clearly shown or demonstrated by model or detailed and understandable elevations on this irregular terrain that is otherwise extremely difficult to visualize; (2) the factors of traffic safety which are not fully resolved through County agreement to signalization and should be reviewed by an independently obtained expert survey; (3) a closer examination of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in the context of the newly disclosed and understood facts of height, elevation and distance. We, the undersigned, request that, based upon such a more detailed examination of all the presently known pertinent factors, revise its initial recommendation so as to deny the proposed high density use and prescribe a more typical buffering medium density use or at a minimum reduce density to not more than 12 units per acre and require a redesign to further minimize the roof peak height. Respectfully submitted, NAME ADDRESS -4- biN PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS a 17 /CJ -c-it� S 30 �� v NAME PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION ADDRESS —�— a-), c , -mot_ BIL . i ,- j MUNI PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION ADDRESS ■ I PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION aLA-- ukAV-ZA, -Ivvc�/ i jv,►�aw11 y--_ 1`41hUl l PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION ADDRESS 4/-;� PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS . a r v v 0 PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION �-! NAME ADDRESS .r 4 �.7r a � PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION ^ADDRESS ///,? --9, _� 3e I ..g ®a � 7x00 PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRRSS 1 PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS TO THE EDIN NG CO�iSSIpN MET AND pJ,p,NNI ADD SS 145yzr NCO, ._ 1 PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY,. DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION �Qr ,rsys.y SO (o of aw 44f-. s7rs(( PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS X7 PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS 0 ��- 6 712- s 7-6 L 13e- � 1 PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS �I m A, s Pct Ou.c. d ka j� PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION ADDRESS — l law v PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION ��`NAME ADDRESS 1� PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAMR Annvrcc A ' PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS -57 PETITION TO THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION NAME ADDRESS 41611 -5- 1• . PETITION IN OPPOSITION TO REZONING OF VERNON WOODS (West of Villa Way) TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA: The undersigned object to the rezoning of the above- described property to high density apartment use as proposed by Namron Company. NAME .11� %LFLh� �w ua� e rDIVrzw�.gc� �— zl�)V� ADDRESS i��dly i7u�rrc � s�/ �iaa� 6 70e S£� /6 67 0 F S'1 o u X' lip �•'� T"C,4 /L LE C) C L � 7.30 elvw , .a. . 6• R PETITION The undersigned have considered the detailed Petition of the residents of the Edina Highlands area and the attached letter of Councilperson Peggy Kelly reported in the September 15, 1986 Edina Sun. We urge the Council and Planning Commission to reject the proposed rezoning for 135 apartment units at Vernon west of Villa Way. NAME ew,) ADDRESS 6 zn, y � � A2 FAM tl�51-2- 62fa,,,� "I'. R. . .I Y PETITION The undersigned have considered the detailed Petition of the residents of the Edina Highlands area and the attached letter of Councilperson Peggy Kelly reported in the September 15, 1986 Edina Sun. We urge the Council and Planning Commission to reject the proposed rezoning for 135 apartment units at Vernon west of Villa Way. NAME ADDRESS � � s� � S ZZ U � kilcv, P-_� SSG D 7� Cry r A IV. A. M E M O R A N D U M TO: Edina City Council FROM: Jackie Hoogenakker, Planning Secretary SUBJECT: Additions to Council Packet DATE: May 15, 1987 Please find the attached items which were received after the packet was completed. Thank you. JA AND SONS INC. ERAL CONTRACTORS 7490 MARKET PLACE DRIVE - EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA 55344 (612) 941 -0282 May 15, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney and Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re: Construction trailer Dear Mayor Courtney and Edina City Council: We are to be the general contractor for the proposed Vernon Oaks project. Yesterday, May 14, at approximately 10:45 a.m., I was advised by Norm Bjornnes, Jr., the developer of Vernon Oaks, that he had been notified that one of our construction trailers was parked on city land near the Vernon Oaks development. We had the trailer re- moved by noon. We made two mistakes. First, the trailer was parked without a "go ahead" authorization from the developer. The project is listed in our records as "pending." Second, the trailer was unknowingly parked on city property. This trailer was moved from a recently completed job by one of our foremen without authorization by me. This foreman acted on his own initiative. We regret this error and any inconvenience to your residents. I trust you will not hold the developer respon- sible as he was not aware of and did not authorize our actions. Please call if you have any questions. Yogxj truly, Gary H. and President GHF /mh �? t IV. A. M E M O R A N D U M TO: -Edina City Council FROM: Jackie Hoogenakker, Planning Secretary SUBJECT: Additions to Council Packet DATE: May 15, 1987 Please find the attached items which were received after the packet was completed. Thank you. l Edina, MN. May 14, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney & Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, M.N. 55424 Gentlemen: As long time Edina residents we urge your approval of VERNON OAKS rental community which will be located on Vernon Ave. at Villa Way. This will be a valuable addition for Edina residents, such as us, who want to sell their present home and continue to live in Edina. This project is well designed and will be located on a beautiful wooded site and should provide substan- tial new property tax revenues for the city. Sincerely yours, N� Robert and Patsy Schulte 6701 Rosemary Lane Edina, UN, 55435 941 -2206 i � C 1 6012 Tingdale Avenue Edina, MN 55436 May 13, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney and Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney and City Council: I understand Norman P. Bjornnes, Jr., the developer of Vernon Oaks, a 135 -unit rental community to be located on Vernon Avenue, is subject to dis- cussion with the Edina City Council. I am quite well versed with .the project Mr. Bjornnes has laid out for this area and know that it would be a plus for the City of Edina. Mr. Bjornnes has developed a number of properties and I am well associated with him and know that in each case the property has been a plus for the community in which it is located. Edina could certainly use some deluxe rental units of the type Mr. Bjornnes has laid out and I frankly feel the project should be approved by the Edina City Council. It would be much more complimentary to the community than the project in process on Vernon Avenue at the present time. Very truly yours, Thor R. Lieberg�r TRL /jb t � May 11th, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney 8 Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minn 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney Et Al: This letter is an appeal for approval of Vewnon Oaks the project on which you will vote May 18th. I believe Vernon Oaks will be a valuable addition to Edina. It will be, as you are aware, a top quality luxury rental community. As the population ages and more and more people prefer renting to home ownership, this project is ideally suited to meet these demands. It is beautifully designed to take advantage of a delightful wooded site and its dramatic surroundings. Furthermore its construction will add substantially to the Edina tax base. Please give this matter thorough consideration and r vote approval so the project can move forward. Since rel , Wm. E. Conner 7200 York.So. # 219 Edina, Minn 55435 N c ® PIPER, KFRAY & HOPWOOD INCORPORATED Piper Jaffray Tower 222 South 9th Street Post Office Box 1139 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 .�.�p 7-15 i� landing first at Pi ter, R . you comes / he , Ja /(ray "Hopwood Scott R. Jensen (612)342 -5861 a'_� k� Ro er W. Schel per �� . VO A4*- Lij,7`YAtmO� May 11, 1987 The Honorable Wayne Courtney Mayor, City of Edina and Members of the Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Namron Company's Vernon Oaks Development Dear Mayor Courtney and members of the City Council: I have been a homeowner in the City of Edina for the past three and one -half years. During my school years from approximately 1958 to 1973, I also lived in Edina. I chose to return to Edina to raise my family. I am familiar with the site of the Vernon Oaks Development as well as its surrounding neighborhood. I am also familiar with the neigh- boring Highland Villa Apartment Development having visited friends there many times. I have known the principals of Namron Company since approximately 1960 through church, social, school and business activities. I also am familiar with a number of the properties which they have developed, owned or managed and know from these personal observa- tions that they do an excellent job in all these respects. Both of the principals of Namron Company are people of the highest integrity and each of them enjoys an excellent reputa- tion. Like your Planning Commission, I have reviewed the site plan and development drawings for Vernon Oaks and, like your Planning Commission, believe that the project deserves final approval at your May 18th meeting. I understand that Mr. Bjornnes has complied with all the City's earlier requirements and has expended large sums of money in doing so. Based upon my experience as an attorney representing real estate developers, I think that he has gone as far or farther than is typically required in being accommodating to the concerns of the City and community. I think the project is a good one, I believe that he ought to be allowed to develop the property, consistent with the existing land use and zoning requirements and I think it would be unfair to stop the project or to require any further changes or delays given the substantial investment that Namron Company has already made. If it is allowed to proceed, I am sure that you will find Vernon Oaks to be a quality development with reasonable rents which will be a credit to the City and a ben- efit to its resident. a Ver truly y • urs, Eric W. IngvaldsgW 6356 Rolf Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55435 EWI:sb cc: Norman P. Bjornnes, Jr. �9ZNA,j� eM tt o • f�' tiJ • CORPORi'`� .88 N 0 T I C E OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL CASE FILE: Z- 86- 2/S -86 -4 TO: Property Owners Within 500 feet APPLICANT: . Namron Company PROPERTY ADDRESS: Vernon Avenue and Villa Way LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Reverse PURPOSE: Rezoning from R -1 Single Dwelling Unit District to PRD -4, Planned Residence District. To construct a 135 unit apartment complex. DATE OF HEARING: May 18, 1987 TIME OF HEARING: 7:00 p.m. PLACE OF HEARING: City Council Chambers Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street HOW TO PARTICIPATE: 1. Submit a letter to the address below expressing your views, and /or 2. Attend the hearing and give testimony for or against the proposal. FURTHER INFORMATION: City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 (612) 927 -8861 DATE OF NOTICE: May 8, 1987 / 10 L/L-40114 (�50 (� 'f eV4 c �� 2 2 1 - 6 /�Q � ee 1--, r Minnesota Rubber Mayor Wayne Courtney and Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 360 Woodda/e Avenue 3 PO Box 1236 Minneapolis Minnesota 55440 USA Dear Mayor and City Council Members; IT(L6927 -1400 12) X 910- 882211 May 12, 1987 Minnesota Rubber A Ouadlon Company The developer and his project "Vernon Oaks" has my full confidence and support. Personally, I have lived in Edina or Morningside all my life (35 yrs.) have had an interest in or lived at over 15 different Edina addresses. I believe I speak with Edina's best interests in mind, when I say that Norman P. Bjornnes Jr. has similar roots and feelings about Edina. I am aware of his background and work habits, therefore, can attest to a quality person with out- standing character. Being aware of other projects done by or managed by Namron Company I can confidently state that "Vernon Oaks" will be a quality.built, well managed project with a discriminating eye to detail. Congratulations in advance on a "Win -Win" project for the City of Edina! Very truly yours, Bruce A. Carlson 6212 Parkwood Rd. Edina, MN 55436 933 - 9735/927 -1490 ROBERT BENNETT ERIC W. INGVALDSON DANIEL McINERNY BENNETT, INGVALDSON & McINERNY, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH SUITE 820 MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55431 May 11, 1987 The Honorable Wayne Courtney Mayor of the City of Edina and Edina City Council 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Re: Proposed development by Namron Company of Vernon Oaks Dear Mayor Courtney and City Council: TELEPHONE 16121835-0414 I have had the pleasure of knowing Norman P. Bjornnes, Jr. since we were both in junior high school in Edina in the very early 601s. Our relationship has extended through law school at the University of Minnesota and thereafter in both business and the private practice of law. I know from both a personal and an investor's standpoint that Mr. Bjornnes and the Namron Company develop and manage properties which are a credit to their commu- nities. I know also that Norm and the other principal of the Namron Company share a true fondness for the people and City of Edina where they have lived from many years. Beyond that, and more specifically, I have had a chance to review the drawings and specifications for Vernon Oaks and believe it to be well- suited to the needs of the City of Edina from both an aesthetic and physical perspective. I live at 7113 Shannon Drive which is a residential area not far from some quality rental and condominium units. It is my view that many of the problems which I' understand have been raised by the residents surrounding the project are more illusory than real. In my view, the benefits of the project together with the character of the developer are points which mitigate in favor of council approval. RB:sb Very truly yours, Robert Bennett Micro Media Inc. 1615 5th Street South Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 (612) 933 -1434 May 11, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney Edina City Council 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN. 55424 Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council: I am writing this letter regarding the Vernon Oaks development which I urge you to support and get the project final approval. I believe the project will be a valuable addition to Edina by providing not only additional property tax revenues, but also an alternative for residents in the area who wish to sell their homes and rent rather than repurchase. The project seems to be well thought out and provide quality luxury rental housing. The developer has designed the project to take advantage of the topography and the beauty of the wooded site. Again, I urge you to support Vernon Oaks. Thank you. SiFid ly, D. Nels on 1 May 11, 1987 TO: Mayor Wayne Courtney Edina City Council FROM: Lee and Barbara Nelson 6421 Wilryan Avenue South Edina, Minnesota RE: Vernon Oaks Proposed Development Dear Mayor Courtney and Members of the Edina City Council: As 13 -year residents of Edina, we are writing to express our sincere support for the Vernon Oaks Development. Top quality developments are few and far between and it is our feeling that Vernon Oaks would be a great asset to the City of Edina. We urge you to support and approve this fine development. Sincerely, Lee A. Nelson LAN /la [roger W ..Schelpe r lJoIg `U;,ZIA „9 � S '•nrY � V "� CJ 42 May 6, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney Edina City Council •4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Re:Vernon Oaks Dear Mr. Courtney: I am a resident and homeowner in Edina since 1960. I am widowed, 65 years of age and anticipate selling my home before too long. I have been watching the rental market for the past several years and in my opinion there is a shortage of suitable rental units in Edina for people in my situation. I am in favor of the construction of the apartments on Vernon Avenue that will be on the agenda of the City Council on May 18th, 1987, as stated in the Edina Sun Current of May 4th, 1987. The proposed units and location are of the nature I have been looking for for several years. Yours Truly, 7 Mrs. Marion Wartchow 4608 Hibiscus Avenue So. Edina, MN 55435 SURGICAL SPECIALTIES. LTD. 4=/ cC (-W. 1Fbi.ckman, '=-'V-2). SPECIALIST IN GENERAL VASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY W418 MEADOWBROOK MEDICAL BUILDING 6490 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD DIPLOMATE AMERICAN BOARD OF SURGERY MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55426 FELLOW AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS TELEPHONE: 925 -2343 FELLOW AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CHEST PHYSICIANS May 6, 1987 Mayor Wayne Courtney and Edina City Council Re. Vernon Oaks 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, 'Minnesota, 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney and the City Council: ''!1e planned on selling our home and moving to Vernon Oaks Development by the Namron Company .I attended the :3eptember Council Meeting where approval was granted for the development subject to the conditions laid down. All conditions were met. �;e made our plans which entailed costs and efforts on our part only to find that the approval has been cancelled. We have been owners in Edina for over 25 years. Our pride in our community and our local government has been such that we want to stay in our community now that we are past the home owning age. There are few projects that meet the quality and convenience of Vernon Oaks and Villa gay where we also rented for a short time. The older generation needs this type of convenience and quality. -' I am disturbed at this reversal of approval. It is a breach of contract and change from the steadfastness and dependability of our pastcouncils and I shall be investigating legal advice as to my costs and severe inconvenience. 7oyn. tr Dickraan, ml. D. 6424 Aspen Road Edina, Mn. 55436 MITCI I9LLand DONNA KI��Q 6304 Kno I I Drive Qina, Minnesota 55436 May 1, 1987 Mr. Wayne Courtney, Mayor of Edina City of Edina 4801 West 50th Edina, Minnesota 55436 RE: Namron Development Company Vernon Avenue Apartments Dear Mr. Courtney: This letter will confirm our earlier telephone conversation during which I expressed my support for the above noted project which is currently under consideration for approval by the Edina City Council. My familiarity with this project comes from two sources. First of all, I am a relatively new resident of Edina living at the above noted address, and I drive by the site regularly. Secondly, I am a senior vice president with GMAC Mortgage and my company is involved in arranging the financing for this project. Accordingly, I am quite familiar with the neighborhood as well as the plans of Namron to build a high quality, luxury apartment complex on the subject site. Based upon my knowledge of the proposed project and the developer, especially Norm Bjornnes, Jr., I give my unqualified support for this project. My basic reasons for supporting this project are as follows: 1. The project fits in with the character of the neighborhood since it adjoins the Interlachen Court Apartments and the Highland Villa Apartments. 2. A high quality luxury apartment complex will be a great addition to the Edina real estate tax base. 3. Most importantly, this area definitely needs rental housing of this nature. Many of the elderly "empty nesters" from my immediate neighborhood are finding that the 3,000 -4,000 square foot ramblers are simply too much to take care of after their children are gone and perhaps one spouse has died or is incapacitated. Many of these residents have lived in Edina for many years, and would prefer to maintain a residence near their former home. The Namron Project will afford them a wonderful housing alternative by providing them a chance to stay in the neighborhood, but without the cost and effort of maintaining a large home. Mr. Wayne Courtney, Mayor of Edina May 1, 1987 Page Two I realize that the adjacent property owers of the Namron Project are legitimately concerned.about issues like traffic and density, but I think that Namron has gone the extra mile to alleviate any legitimate concerns. In short, Namron is first rate, the proposed project is first rate, and I strongly urge the Edina City Council to Approve the project as proposed. The City of Edina should be encouraging high quality developments and developers, and not discouraging them. Thank you for your time and consideration. Respectfully submitted, Mitchell W. Kiffe MK :ts /00040 cc: Mr. Norman Bjornnes i May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. 4incerely, C ott� PA May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th St. Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, 41� �(O 2- S,. May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th St. Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, S /1J �� t May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street EDina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincer. , May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, D� '4V. S , May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, l May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, Sao ! C F-1 o w Ste. NA , .� S 5 `L 10 l_ • May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, LI c leO r , Ad /"n All; '1 � 5 5 `f�� l May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, � r i � V • May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. 0 Sincerely, May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, L especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, t May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, t May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, vs May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. 0 Sincerely, May 9, 1987 Mayor C. Wayne Courtney 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am in favor of the Namron Company Apartment building project on Vernon Avenue as people who prefer rentals, especially in retirement years can continue enjoying the Edina quality of life. Sincerely, A/ log XZ .,� �r - r I.V.A. To Council:. Letters received Monday, May 18 regarding Namron Corporation /Vernon Oaks Final Rezoning and Final Plat. George F. White, Jr. 2575 KASOTA AVENUE • ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55108 r S,rs r- rte, S (Pto4 �T V Q./ N o a ks O `.�. p,J U!1 r4 e L A., v des ,,, �� r A �- d r-J kAt- A,e-A alil-f- �r fs May 18, 1987 Edina City Clerk's Office 4801 W. 50th St. Edina, MN 55424 To: Edina City Council From: Paul & Jan Bordonaro RE: VERNON OAKS APARTMENT COMPLEX The purpose of this correspondence is to express our interest and support in the development of the Vernon Oaks Apartment complex. Thank you. d� ��- 45ail J. Bordonaro J ette M. Bordonaro 6009 Birchcrest Dr. Edina, MN 55436 --A61-ee all; � W-x MIN S-4 7-Z 01 zc-c_z- 5- lq -8-7 rA KENT AND SUSAN OkCHS 3936 W. 58TH STREET, EDINA, MINNESOTA .55424 MAY 16, 1987 MAYOR WAYNE COURTNEY AND EDINA:/,CITY COUNCIL 4801 W 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 DEAR MAYOR COURTNEY AND EDINA CITY. COUNCIL, WE WANT.YOU TO KNOW THAT WE .SUPPORT AND APPROVE OF THE VERNON OAKS PROJECT AND WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL APPROVE THIS ON MAY 18, 1987 AT YOUR COUNCIL MEETING. WE ENVISION THIS COMMUNITY NEEDING THIS TYPE OF RENTAL PROPERTY MORE AND MORE IN THE FUTURE AND BELIEVE THAT NOW IS AN APPROPRIATE TIME TO PREPARE FOR THE NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE LEAD A RICH AND REWARDING LIFE WITHIN THIS COMMUNITY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR GOOD WORK AND ATTENTION TO THE NEEDS OF THIS COMMUNITY. SINCERELY, 7 i KENT AND SUSAN OACHS Mayor Wayne Courtney and Edina.City Council `--7 � - may- ,� Mayor Wayne Courtney. 4801 West 5044Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 May 15, 1987 Dear Sir, We are writing this_.letter as long term residents of Edina who are extremely dismayed at the developments involving the Namron Company's Vernon Oaks project. Namron has complied with every request made by the Council and City Planning Commission. In addition, it has received Planning Commission approval each and every time it has gone before that body. The Council has also given its tentative approval to the project. Now it appears that the Council may renege on that approval even though Namron has fulfilled every request made of it. To hold up a project of this nature which we believe would be a significant plus for the community, raises credibility questions concerning the Council, and long term this could prove to be a real negative. We ask that you urge the Council to approve the project and pass our concerns onto them. Sincerely, , Michael J. Phillips Linda J. Phillips 6100 Zenith Avenue So. Edina, NIN 55410 RESOLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR VERNON OAKS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled " VERNON OAKS ", platted by Vernon Woods of Edina, a Minnesota limited partnership, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of May 18, 1987, be and is hereby granted final plat approval. ADOPTED this 18th day of May, 1987. 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 May 18, 1987 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 19th day of May, 1987. City Clerk T?T7C/1T TTTTnM WHEREAS, Vernon Avenue between Highway 100 and Gleason Road is County Road 158; and WHEREAS, citizens adjacent to and in nearby residential areas are concerned about the speed of traffic on Vernon Avenue; and WHEREAS, said citizens have appeared before the Edina Community Development and Planning Commission and the Edina City Council with their concerns; and WHEREAS, the current speed limit on C.S.A.H. L58 is 40 MPH on the majority of the roadway; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Edina City Council requests that Hennepin County reduce the speed limit on C.S.A.H. -158 from 40 MPH to a lower limit; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Edina City Council requests that the speed limit be reduced on C.S.A.H. 158 from 40 MPH to 30 MPH on Vernon Avenue from Tracy Avenue east to the existing speed limit -of 30 MPH. ADOPTED this 18th day of May, 1987. 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 May 18th, 1987 and as recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting. WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 19th day of May, 1987. City Clerk NIP • IN • . 2 9 . . . A 1 - R E Q U E S T Construct freestanding medical office building. P -86 -5 n G • General Location: Zoning District: g \ Request: Fairview Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South East of France Avenue South and north of West 65th Street Regional Medical District (RMD) Construction of new Medical Office Building Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission Fairview Southdale Hospital has appeared before the Commission on two previous occasions, most recently on January 28, 1987, with proposals to construct a new medical office building on the hospital site. In both instances the Commission voted to recommend denial of the request. Mr. Larsen added the hospital has returned with a modified plan for Commission review. The new plan reduces both the height and the floor area of the building. It also proposes removing the entire upper level of the parking ramp. Mr. Larsen with graphics compared the two earlier plans to the current proposal in terms of Zoning Ordinance compliance. The comparison is as follows: The proposed exterior materials for the medical office building remain the same as in previous proposals. The material will be glass curtain wall in gray and silver. The easterly access, at 65th Street and Drew, has been redesigned. The revised design calls for two inbound lanes and one outbound lane. Internal access to the emergency room has been improved to avoid conflict. The parking ramp as initially proposed included 3 levels on the southerly portion and 3 levels plus a basement or depressed parking level on the northerly portion. The second proposal removed 60 feet of the top level of the ramp adjacent to the Colony property line. The current proposal removes the upper level of the ramp completely. As in previous proposals the ramp would continue the 21.5 foot setback provided by the existing ramp along the easterly property line. The ramp would range from 15 feet to 18 feet in height, measured from the existing ground elevation. A 4 foot high berm is proposed along the entire length of the ramp to reduce the exposed surface area. Exposed aggregate panels will be used on exposed areas of the ramp. I 4, The landscaping plan emphasizes the easterly side of the parking ramp along the shared property line with the Colony Condominiums. Proposed materials include spruce, pine, ash and locust. The size of the proposed materials is in excess of Ordinance requirements. The plan also proposed to install a landscape screen for the westerly parking lot. Mr. Larsen pointed out that although it is not a Zoning issue, much past discussion has centered on the hospital's incinerator. Since the last Commission hearing the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has been reviewing the operation of and emissions from the incinerator. Mr. Larsen said the proposed plan requests only one variance. The westerly parking lot does not provide the required 20 foot setback from France Avenue and West 65th Street. A variance is requested to allow the existing parking lot to remain unchanged. Mr. Larsen told the Commission the current proposal offers the following changes or improvements over earlier proposals. They are as follows: 1. The building has been reduced in size by 11,900 square feet, or 19 percent. The smaller building reduces the parking requirement and traffic generation. 2. The entire upper level of the parking ramp has been removed. The ramp addition has been reduced in size by approximately 100 spaces. It's height has been reduced by approximately 10 feet. These reductions lessen the impact on the Colony. 3. The building has been reduced to 5 storys. 4. The proposal complies with all Zoning Ordnance requirements except for the setback of the existing westerly parking lot. 5. Extensive landscaping is provided adjacent to the ramp. An irrigation system will be installed over the entire site to help insure the long term survival of the plantings. 6. Internal traffic circulation has been improved to eliminate conflicts with emergency vehicles. 7. The MPCA is reviewing the operation of the incinerator. Changes will be made as ordered by the MPCA. Mr. Larsen concluded that should the Commission choose to recommend approval of the proposal staff would suggest the following conditions: *That the hospital enter into an assessment agreement ensuring financial participation in future street and traffic control improvements required on West 65th Street. The assessment should be based on the hospitals traffic generation. Douglas Robbinson, Fairview Southdale Hospital Administrator, Hospital Staff, Dr. Lund, representing physicians, Mr. Dahlgren, consultant and residents of the area were present. Dr. Lund, Chairman of the physicians group which proposes to construct the medical office building and ramp told the Commission every effort was made to reduce the impact of said structures. In an .effort to achieve an acceptable project they have retained Mr. Howard Dahlgren, as their planning consultant and he will address the changes to the plan and address your concerns. Mr. Dahlgren began his presentation by briefing the Commission on his background as a developer and planning consultant. He pointed out a major concern regarding this project is reducing any negative impact other developments may receive as a result of this proposal. Mr. Dahlgren with the aide of slides pointed out the step by step changes in the plan and measures implemented to reduce negative impact. Mr. Gordon Johnson asked Mr. Dahlgren what can be done to retard east bound traffic from leaving the hospital campus and using Barrie Road /Colony Way to reach .their destinations. Mr. Dahlgren replied the hospital has no objection to any measure(s) implemented by the City to control and re- direct traffic from using those roadways. He added the Hospital agrees to participate in and share the cost of any road improvements that need to be implemented to aide in the smooth and orderly flow of traffic in the area. Mr. Fran Hoffman, City Engineer pointed out that at the last Planning Commission meeting City staff reported that a license plate survey was conducted and the findings were that 20% of the traffic on Barrie Road /Colony Way was through traffic. Mr. Hoffman said with future road improvements and the possible elimination of left hand turns from Xerxes to Heritage Drive some through traffic may be reduced but not all. Continuing Mr. Hoffman pointed out the license survey indicated many people that use this route live in southwest Minneapolis. They may be using the residential streets to go to their doctors, go to and from work etc. and it may be impossible to change their habits. Mr. Hoffman said travel time is very important to most people and usually they opt for the quickest route. There are also many people who do not-feel comfortable using highways or major road arteries which is why they use quiet residential streets. Complete through traffic control is hard to implement. Mr. Hoffman indicated the City hopes present and future road improvements will produce some relief. Mr. Hoffman pointed out careful research is undertaken regarding road improvements. He noted all parties concerned including residents are affected by change in traffic flow. Mr. Hoffman stated road improvements have been in process in this general area for the past 4 years and road improvements are expected to continue over the next five years. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Dahlgren the total length of the parking ramp. Mr. Dahlgren said the proposed ramp would total roughly 660 feet. Mr. L. Johnson said in his opinion the long continuous channeling effect of the ramp as proposed could be aesthetically improved. He suggested variations in the continuous line and the addition of shadow lines to break up the wall like effect of the ramp. Mr. L. Johnson said a variety of measures could be implemented to create a more pleasing structure. Mr. Dahlgren agreed that it is a difficult task to develop an attractive ramp but with the proposed berming and landscaping it is their hope to create a more aesthetically pleasing structure. Mr. L. Johnson asked what is the slope of the grade for the berm. Mr. Dahlgren said the slope is 4 -1 out to the property line. Mr. Dahlgren added the hospital is not adverse to the changes suggested. Mr. Alvin Krolick, 6401 Colony expressed concern over the continued horrible maintenance of the present landscaping at Fairview Southdale Hospital. He added how can we be assured that the hospital will maintain the proposed new landscaping any better than the have maintained the present. He stressed his concern is very real that the hospital will not maintain the landscaping appropriately. Continuing Mr. Krolick noted his concern over the operation of the incinerator, possible drainage problems as a result of the additional berming of the ramp, present and future traffic problems, is there a legitimate new in Edina for a new medical office building and concluding the suburb of Edina is rapidly moving toward a urban flavor. Mr. Phil Smith, 6312 Barrie Road pointed out the hospital and the Colony were constructed at virtually the same time. He added the Colony has not changed, except for aesthetic improvements, whereas the hospital has continually changed and been expanded. Mr. Smith said the property values at the Colony will be dramatically reduced as a result of this proposal. Future homeowers at the Colony will not want to purchase a home that overlooks a 2 block long cement wall. Mr. Smith noted if landscaping is placed across the access ramp toward the crosstown highway visibility will be reduced. Mr. Hoffman commented that any potential drainage problems will be reviewed by the City and the Colony should not develop any drainage problems as a result of this proposal. This project as it stands does not have a drainage problem. Mrs. McClelland said she is uneasy discussing the questions of landscaping, drainage etc. She stated she feels the proposal has been denied twice for reasons of zoning, over development of the site, need, and unnecessary traffic complications . Mrs. McClelland said these are the real zoning issues. She said-attempts were made to remedy the problems but the issue of need has not been proven. Mr. Douglas Robbinson explained the reasons for the requested medical office building and ramp, they are as follows: 1) The age mix of the population of Edina and surrounding communities has increased, older people as a general rule require more medical services, more visits to their doctors, and many time specialty services. It is very important to the elderly to have easy access to these II services. 2) The Southdale Medical Office building has a very high occupancy rate of 98 percent. This situation has led offices to divide their space between floors in that building. The proposed Fairview project will enable practices to increase office space and add specialities that are not currently available on the Fairview campus. 3) The anticipated occupancy at the proposed building will be 50% occupation by practices that need more space, 18% occupation by practices new to the area, 22% occupation by practices that wish to return to the area and 10% occupation by shared ancillary services (i.e, lab, x -ray, pharmacy, etc.). 4) The proposed facility will enable the tenant practices to share resources, this is not possible at the current medical building. 5) Vacancy that is created at the Southdale Medical Office Building will be refilled by other offices currently in that building which need to increase their space and new practices which will be recruited to the area by the building management and Fairview Southdale Hospital. Concluding Mr. Robbinson said it is their hope this project will increase physician office capacity in the area. In turn, this will enable physician's practices to grow to better accommodate current and forecasted consumer demand and provide local alternatives for new speciality practices to the area. Mrs. Shaw asked if Mr. Robbinson if he is anticipating Southdale Hospital to operate more efficiently as a result of this proposal. Mr. Robbinson indicated it is their hope that as a result of this proposal the hospital operates more efficiently. Major changes have been developing in the medical field, the most dramatic is the change for increased out patient care. The hospital must adjust to this change and try to meet those changes. Mr. Phil Smith, asked if the hospital is planning future developments. Mr. Robbinson said expansion is not planned at this time. Mr. Del Johnson asked Mr. Robbinson if Fairview Southdale has ever considered the Honeywell site as an expansion possibility. Mr. Robbinson said the site was looked at but was found to be incompatible as a medical facility, the primary reason is parking. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Robbinson if the Hospital has any potential for expansion. Mr. Robbinson said the hospital does have some options. Ms. Polly Berg, 6320 Barrie Road stated she is concerned about the ramp, traffic and decreased property values. Mr. Murray Lowell, 6613 Cornelia Drive, stated he does not believe there is a need for this facility. He said the physicians may have a need but individual residents of Edina may not share that need. Edina is becoming more of a urban community as a result of this type of proposal. Mr. Curtis Hersey, 6320 Barrie Road said each expansion by the hospital has had a negative impact on the Colony residents. The Colony cannot withstand more negative impact. Mr. Dahlgren said Fairview Southdale has been working within the rules of the City of Edina. The Zoning has been applied and is proper. The land use plan calls for this type of use in this area. Fairview Southdale has attempted to develop a project that improves some of the existing negative conditions and have developed a fair project that conforms to Zoning requirements. Mr. Dahlgren said it is not up to the Government to establish or control need. The I_ courts have said Zoning cannot be used to create a monopoly or control free enterprise. Mr. Dahlgren asked the Commission for recommendations which would make the project function better (i.e.,undulating the ramp, landscaping,etc). Mrs. Shaw reminded the Commission at the last meeting she requested facts and figures from the hospital to support their need for constructing the proposed facility and ramp. Continuing Mrs. Shaw said perhaps it is not the function of the Commission to decide need, economics will decide if there is a need. She said the developer is working within the framework of Edina's Zoning requirements and that is how this project should be judged. Mr. Alvin Krolick,6401 Colony Way said need is subjective and from the Colony's standpoint they have need to keep their home a desirable place to live. Mrs. McClelland moved to recommend denial citing the following reasons 1) present traffic congestion of the area, 2) the additional congestion arising on France Avenue and Crosstown 62. 3) 65th Street improvements, including the realignment of Drew Avenue 4) from Planning principals the site appears to be developed at capacity and further building would be overbuilding 5) the adverse effect on the neighborhood, particularly concerning the parking ramp. Mr. Del Johnson seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote: Mr. John Bailey Aye Mrs. McClelland Aye Mr. Del Johnson Aye Mr. Gordon Johnson Nay Mr. William Lewis Nay Mr. Runyan Nay Mrs. Shaw Nay Mr. Lee Johnson Nay The motion failed. Mr. Gordon Johnson moved to recommend approval subject to conditions stipulated by city staff. Mrs. Shaw seconded the motion. Upon roll call vote: Mr. John Bailey Nay Mrs. McClelland Nay Mr. Del Johnson Nay Mrs. Gordon Johnson Aye Mr. William Lewis Aye Mr. Runyan Aye Mrs. Shaw Aye Mr. Lee Johnson Nay The motion failed. Mr. Lee Johnson explained he is a new Commission Member and has not been present at previous hearings. He said he has read all the materials regarding this proposal. He feels the proposal is a plus for the City of Edina as a whole but also pointed out Fairview Southdale Hospital has exhibited insensitivity regarding the development of the parking ramp. Mr. Johnson said he feels the ramp could be designed to be more aesthetically pleasing to residents of the Colony. He would like to see the Hospital address this issue to his satisfaction. Mr. Bailey said he is very uncomfortable with approving this proposal. He stated he is concerned the hospital may ask for future expansions. This facility is landlocked on three sides by Crosstown Highway, the Colony and France Avenue. These factors will not go away, making this proposal one that should be very carefully considered. Mr. Bailey concluded overbuilding is a factor on this site. After further discussion Mr. Gordon Johnson moved that the item be forwarded to the City Council without recommendation since the Commission was deadlocked. Mrs. McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT APRIL 29, 1987 P -86 -5 Fairview Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South General Location: East of France Avenue South and north of West 65th Street Zoning District: Regional Medical District (RMD) Request: Construction of new Medical Office Building Fairview Southdale Hospital has appeared before the Commission on two previous occasions, most recently on January 28, 1987, with proposals to construct a new medical office building on the hospital site. In both instances the Commission voted to recommend denial of the request. The hospital has returned with a modified plan for Commission review. The new plan reduces both the height and the floor area of the building. It also proposes removing the entire upper level of the parking ramp. The following table compares the two early plans to the current proposal in terms of Zoning Ordinance compliance. 12/3/86 1/28/87 4/29/87 6 Proposal Proposal Proposal Gross Floor Area 84,240 SF 75,199 SF 68,328 SF Building Height 5 Story 6 Story 5 Story Building Footprint 15,736 SF 12,096 SF 12,672 SF :al Site jor Area Ratio (Inc. Hosp.) 0.80 0.78 .077 Zoning Ordinance Limit 1.0 1.0 1.0 Park" nn Ramp Height Total Parking Parking for Office Parking for Hospital 3 Levels plus basement parking on northerly section 1345 49'2 853 Variances Requested: Ramp Setback Parking Setback West lot 3 levels but 2 levels plus 60 foot setback basement on on third level northerly section 1295 1238 442 399 856 839 Parking Parking Setback Setback West lot West lot The proposed exterior materials for the medical office building remain the same as in previous proposals. The material will be glass curtain wall in gray and silver. The easterly access, at 65th Street and Drew, has been redesigned. The revised design calls for two inbound lanes and one outbound lane. Internal access to the emergency room.has been improved to avoid conflict. The parking ramp as initially proposed included 3 levels on the southerly portion and 3 levels plus a basement or depressed. parking level on the northerly portion. The second proposal removed 60 feet of the top level of the ramp adjacent to the Colony property line. The current proposal removes the upper level of the ramp completely. As in previous proposals the ramp would continue the 21.5 foot setback provided by the existing ramp along the easterly property line. The ramp would range from 15 feet to 18 feet in height, measured from the existing ground elevation. A 4 foot high berm is proposed along the entire length .of the ramp to reduce the exposed surface area. Exposed aggregate panels will be used on exposed areas of the ramp. The landscaping plan emphasizes the easterly side of the parking ramp along the shared property line with the Colony Condominiums. Proposed materials include spruce, pine, ash and locust. The size of the proposed materials is in excess of Ordinance requirements. The plan also proposed to install a landscape screen for the westerly parking lot. Although not a Zoning issue,.much past discussion has centered on the hospital's incinerator. Since the last Commission hearing the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has been reviewing the operation of and emissions from the incinerator. This review is continuing. Copies of MPCA correspondence are included in submissions by the hospital. Variances: The proposed plan requests only one variance. The westerly parking lot does not provide the required 20 foot setback from France Avenue and West 65th Street. A variance is requested to allow the existing parking lot to remain unchanged. Recommendation: The current proposal offer the following changes or improvements over earlier proposals. 1. The building has been reduced in size by 11,900 square feet, or 19 percent. The smaller building reduces the parking requirement and traffic generation. 2. The entire upper level of the parking ramp has been removed. The ramp addition has been reduced in size by approximately 100 spaces. It's height has been reduced by approximately 10 feet. These reductions lessen the impact on the Colony. 3. The building has been reduced to 5 storys. 4. The proposal complies with all zoning Ordinance requirements except for the setback of the existing westerly parking lot. 5. Extension landscaping is provided adjacent to the ramp. An irrigation system will be installed over the entire site to help. insure the long term survival of the plantings. 6. Internal traffic circulation has been improved to eliminate conflicts with emergency vehicles. 7. The MPCA is reviewing the operation of the incinerator. Changes will be made as ordered by the MPCA. Should the Commission choose to recommend approval of the proposal staff would suggest the following conditions: that the hospital enter into an assessment agreement ensuring financial participation into future street and traffic control improvements required on West 65th Street. The assessment should be based on the hospitals traffic generation. i, J' Ul Z W V Z 4 tL LL w B5T 652 5T4EET ��I�PII a > V� tyoy i9 i 554m lLNI+�(.'c6srr�4.�b/ LDeTt�CT cr.e uw r.cuec+ • ..c fCfS wiQ,.re. I,en M�uc rcor 1 qag. e�cc 4�, t�su t+•Yic raal e5., n.l.ii �R n,5lt a.c n.• +s u.vr SCJ'P•eee n o w Q211lI i fG . .- 5Q5Ne i !�W.�. tby1E.,5•M!N•LLG• i . . A NRi . lu.as a J V - fr�Tn6 fOGYihebMP�gJK•D• cl to W ■ .W. V 4 a w- ,� w v woo Am Id utiv M 1 43 ■ qua w0• -- mill. pIII!� ea ii e� m� ofi Gq ..t0 w .c o u a. Y wp; �cOB It w ■ wvo x a- � ae wOY I T ! L l r I T I 0 Y r.• ee171 mi 4 � o uQw Y a " a W p. g W w qua a w- �wa w0• mim -- ( r / r 1.46 1 w• .wIRM \M N.,y��,w •.,.. igem Bill Bill a G T1� 4 � o uQ� Y Q w G W p- .�00 B � W ■ `ve a w- 4 wa w O • � . I Yr- - - - --i i 1a'.Y L 9 L L 3 l..4' 1.46 1 w• .wIRM \M N.,y��,w •.,.. igem Bill Bill a G T1� 4 � o uQ� Y Q w G W p- .�00 B � W ■ `ve a w- 4 wa w O • � 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Craig Larsen, City Planner FROM: Fran Hoffman, Director of Public Work j SUBJECT: Fairview Southdale Hospital - 3rd Proposal DATE: April 24, 1987 This proposal is a scaled down version, obviously, of earlier proposals. The overall site plan is much improved in terms of items that we review- ed in our department. This memorandum is intended to review the Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch, Inc. (SRF) report as it was done as a review of the earlier proposals. Information in the SRF report has been reviewed as negative in some quarters. The report did agree with the overall content of the hos- pital's consultant. The SRF report did highlight issues that should be considered in an overall city perspective. Item 1 deals with the issue of reviewing overall development in the southeast quarter of Edina. Staff believes that the comment is valid and currently is receiving attention during the I -494 corridor study and through a follow- up,report involving the Hedberg Environmental Impact Statement. However, the scope of the current hospital proposal should not be tied to those studies timewise. The intent to analyze the overall Southdale area has been a continuing effort over the years. West 66th Street east from York Avenue is currently under construction. Other transportation projects will be developed during the coming years to deal with continuing development of Southeast Edina. Item 2 refers to operational abilities of a key intersection at W. 66th Street and France Avenue. Additionally, it refers to the Crosstown 62 and W. 66th Street as areas of concern. Again, Staff has been working with Hennepin County to develop a program to improve W. 66th Street to the east from France Avenue. The hospital proposal is not a significant addition in terms of the overall total of the land uses in the area. Given the non -peak hour type of use of.the facility, the adjacent art - erial-streets will not be adversely impacted. Item 3 speaks to the need to press for continued improvements to W. 66th Street. The W. 66th Street improvement plans would certainly include improved access to the hospital site via Drew Avenue. This would lessen the impact of persons driving through the multiple residential home area. Additionally, traffic operational techniques could be used at Heritage Drive and Xerxes Avenue to further reduce traffic impacts in the neighbor- hood. Memorandum Fairview Southdale April 24, 1987 Page 2 Hospital - 3rd Proposal The remaining items, four through seven certainly merit review by the City as general concerns for development throughout the south- east quadrant of the community. The size of the current proposal in gross floor area should be balanced against the overall development of the Southeast Edina area. The remaining item is site specific improved and the actual circulation the user of the facility. to the proposal. The plan has been trip distribution will depend on Again, this memorandum was written to provide a tie between memos issued and staff positions on the pending proposal. The latest pro- posal has merit and the recommendation should be to develop an assess- ment aggrement for improvements to W. 65th Street and Drew Avenue. The agreement should be such that a proportionate share of the costs be allocated to the hospital site based on their trip generation. FH: jr AN D, U 13A1\ • INCORPORATED CONSULTING PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH SUITE 210 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 14 May 1987 612.339.3300 0 Honorable Mayor Courtney, City Council, Planning Commission, and Staff City of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, Council, Commission, and Staff: At the April 29, 1987 Planning Commission meeting concerns were raised over the view of the ramp from the Colony Condominiums; another concern was raised over drainage. We have addressed these concerns and are submitting a revised landscape plan and grading plan for your review. Residents of the Colony Condominiums are concerned about the view of the ramp from the entrance on Colony Way and from the Condominiums. The landscape plan has been intensified at points along the east side of the ramp opposite the entry walks and condominiums. The addition of shrubs and evergreens at these points will screen the ramp from the Condominiums and create an undulating appearance when viewed down Colony Way. Evergreens have also been added along the north ramp drive to screen potentially stacked automobiles. The drainage plan has been revised to illustrate the proposed berm and drainage swell along the east side of the ramp. Fran Hoffman was correct when he stated at the Planning Commission meeting that the project will not affect the drainage of the Colony Condominiums. Surface drainage from the ramp is directed internally to catch basins. Surface drainage along the east berm will flow to the swell and north to a catch basin. There will be no surface drainage from the ramp area onto the Colony Condominiums property. We are looking forward to the City Council meeting on May 18th and to a successful project. Sincerely, DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW, AND UBAN, INC. li 1 off art n, Landscape Architect GM /gms cc: Del Elness Doug Robinson warn maienai Plant Material �• »� -- s NOTES: TYPICAL EVERGREEN & DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL w �rrsrw.� . = r. :�..��r. pro --•. ^- �.��'• WILO..Y GROUND COVER PLANTING DETAIL � J YI j LL � KEY !e1IT*POSED t 1tVECA. � _' EASEAIENlPARMQ'_ it >w- 1 � �'�ARR�QiA11P • ^� � _ r- - /O G L- i 1 r. EXISTING HOSPITAL SSTN ST. l\ } Q 3 I� O # I LANDSCAP O 4' BERM POWER OPLANT 0 •o�rx r �o• oeeeeec meeeea l D, IY1Mil OCnLm I t r•Vwwwa. nzrt � i � 7 —f e it µ1'!R1 7GMVIDD V = oI :...• fl /W91WW P►L Dom- C F �y6 sy_ ED SCREEN & rl V ■ K am; v�j� w p_ Za 9oa8 J o. Sw■ U) tea a H M K P. a Z a o. O • J — L 2 LEGEND NOTES GPADING, DRAINAGE, ANO LMLrT'Y PLAN -.rAILE v lzw Jam- OF F I ICE BlCrlL d I n ■ ininneso,. Fc 11 / V MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION HELD ON JANUARY 28, 1987 AT 7:30 P.M. EDINA CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Gordon Johnson, Del Johnson, Helen McClelland, Jane Paulus, Phil Sked and Virginia Shaw MEMBERS ABSENT: John Bailey, John Palmer, David Runyan and William Lewis STAFF PRESENT: Craig Larsen, City Planner Fran Hoffman, City Engineer Jackie Hoogenakker, Secretary I. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Mr. Del Johnson moved for approval of the January 7, 1987 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Mrs. Shaw seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. II. OLD BUSINESS P -86 -5 Fairview Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South Request: Construct freestanding medical office building. Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission the subject proposal was considered by the City Council at its December 15, 1986 meeting. The Council referred the request back to the Commission for further consideration. Traffic, parking quantity, location and size of the parking ramp, and landscaping were key issues. Mr. Larsen said the hospital has submitted new, modified, plans for the Commission's consideration. A comparison between the modified plan and the original proposal follows: Building Size and Location. The medical office building, as originally proposed, contained a Gross Floor Area of 84,240 square feet. The modified plan proposes a building containing 75,199 square feet of Gross Floor Area, or a reduction of 9,041 square feet. The original proposal was a 5 story building plus basement with a footprint of approximately 15,000 square feet. The modified proposal increases the building to 6 stories plus basement, but reduces the footprint to approximately 12,000 square feet. Setback of the building from the Crosstown Highway has been increased from 60 feet to 74 feet at the closest point. Parking Parking reduction in on -site park spaces. The the hospital continues to the hospital Parking Ramp quantity has been.reduced to correspond to the the size of the medical office building. Total ing has been reduced from 1,345 spaces to 1,298 medical office building is allocated 442 spaces and 856 spaces. Parking for the medical office building comply with the Ordinance requirements. Parking for is increased by 32 spaces over what exists today. The parking ramp design has been substantially modified. Except for the most southerly portion of the ramp, the top level has been set back an additional 60 feet. Lower levels of the ramp continue to be as originally proposed. The proposed ramp conforms to Ordinance setback requirements. Other features of the development plan remain the same as in previous proposals. It should be pointed out that the proposed landscaping plan has been modified to increase the size and density of landscaping along the easterly property line adjacent to the Colony Condominiums. The plan does not, however, illustrate the required screening on the north side of the west parking lot. The hospital did indicate at the City Council meeting that this screening would be provided according to Ordinance standards. Following the City Council meeting, staff requested that the Pollution Control Agency (PCA) review the hospitals incinerator permits. The PCA has scheduled a meeting with representatives of the Colony and the hospital on February 19, 1987. Traffic Mr. Larsen said the City hired the firm of Strgar, Roscoe, Fausch, Inc. Staff concurs with the findings in the report, and will ask the City Council to consider budgeting for a study of the area. Staff continues to recommend that the hospital agree to financially participate in improvements which may be required along West 65th Street from Barrie Road to France Avenue Mr. Douglas Robinson, Administrator, Fairview Southdale Hospital, and Hospital Staff were in attendance representing the proponent. Residents of the area were also present. Mr. Larsen asked Mr. Hoffman, City Engineer to comment on traffic findings: Mr. Hoffman, reported staff conducted a traffic study and with the help of Strgar, Roscoe, Fausch compiled a report. Mr. Hoffman briefly reviewed for the Commission certain points found in the report. .1) France Avenue is one of the most developable areas in the region. A projected population increase of 20 percent and an employment increase of 43 percent are forecasted for the year 2010. The conclusion reached is that traffic demand could increase up to 40 percent for the France Avenue Corridor. The proposed redevelopment represents one of the first redevelopment initiatives in this area and it is important for this proposal to be considered within a larger context. 2) The access to the Fairview Southdale Complex must be studied and an improved access to France Avenue and 66th Street is particularly important to keep traffic off the Barrie /Heritage route. 3) Congestion on France, particularly at the C.S.A.H 62 ramp intersections must be improved,. Without improvements at the interchange motorists will continue to use local streets in order to avoid traffic congestion and its resulting delays. It is recommended that steps be taken towards an improved Drew Avenue connection to 66th Street, and a traffic signal to serve both Drew and a realigned Southdale exit (which would be the fourth approach to the signal). 4) The proposed outpatient facility located in the northwestern corner of the complex should be reviewed by Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation due to it's closeness to the interchange. Options could be eliminated as a result of this proposal for reconstructing the interchange to handle higher traffic volumes. Mr. Hoffman informed the Commission Members at their last meeting residents of the Colony reported they felt Barrie Road /Heritage Drive was being used by hospital staff to travel to and from work. Commissioner's requested that staff perform a license plate tally of vehicles using these roadways. The survey found that 20% of the vehicles using Barrie Road /Heritage Drive are through traffic. Mr. Hoffman said this amount of through traffic is a bit high for this type of local street. Mr. Robinson said hospital administrators will ask staff not to use the Barrie Road /Heritage Drive route. Mrs. McClelland said she feels very uneasy in creating possible traffic problems in this area before the upgrading and improvements for the area are completed. She also pointed out approval of this plan before measures to control and generate traffic flows are implemented could create problems for developments that may occur further along France Avenue. Mr. Hoffman said in his opinion, the system can be made to work if the City and Fairview Hospital work together closely to solve problems and implement,measures which will aid the flow of traffic. He added the proposal before the Commission is not a mega -mall or a Homart development, but a medical office building which will not generate the same amount of traffic numbers. Mr. Douglas Robinson, Hospital Administrator agreed with the findings by City Staff. He pointed out Fairview staff worked closely with Planning Staff in implementing the major modifications to this plan. The changes found in the plans reflect changes recommended by staff and residents of the Colony. Mr. Robinson pointed out the hospital is not requesting any variances or a change in zoning. The proposed building is in compliance with zoning requirements. Mr. Robinson highlighted ..the changes in the proposal. One change is the building will now be six stories.high instead of the original proposal of five. This change provides a smaller footprint which lessens the mass of the building and increases traffic circulation which should help to re-route-and re- adjust any traffic problems. Another change is that the view of the ramp from the east side will be lessened with the addition of berming and vegetation. Mr. Robinson indicated the hospital is willing to extend the vegetation area to and on the property of the Colony, if they would agree. In addition, the materials of the ramp will be constructed from exposed pre -cast panels which will tie into the trim of the building. Mr. Robinson said hospital staff share. traffic concerns and pointed out it is very important to hospital staff to have their patients and emergency vehicles reach the hospital with ease. Mr. Robinson briefly described concerns expressed by residents of the Colony and the Hospitals response to lessen those-concerns: 1) visual impact will be lessened and the negative impact will be minimized through changes in landscaping materials and the quantity of landscaping materials, 2) creative use of berming, 3) the third level of the ramp has been setback 60 feet which lessens the impact to the Colony property. 4) special lighting will be used to soften the lighting of the ramp. 5) security measures will be implemented to patrol the ramp 6.) reduction of the building footprint will increase the flow and ease of traffic in the area. Mr. Robinson concluded that Hospital staff feels the proposed addition will be an asset to the Community. He added residents in a community prefer to seek out medical services close to their home and this proposal will give residents that resource. He pointed out the proposed facility will also create new employment opportunities. Residents of the area who spoke in opposition to the proposal and their reasons are summarized as follows: Mr. Phil Smith , 6312 Barrie Road stated he opposes the proposal for the reasons of increased traffic flow in the general area and on Barrie Road and possible pollution contamination as a result of the Hospital's disposal of waste. Mr. Curtis Hershey of 6320 Barrie Road said he strongly opposes the proposal and the revised proposal. He added even with the proposed revision to the ramp, including the additional landscaping and material change; he still found the ramp to have a very negative impact on the property owners of the Colony. Ms. Polly Berg, 6320 Barrie Road expressed concern over the inadequate landscaping, the increased traffic on Barrie Road /Heritage Drive and the continuing pollution problem resulting from the burning of wastes by the Hospital. Mr. Alvin Krolick of 6401 Colony Way told the Commission residents of Colony Way have a very unique way of life. He pointed out the buildings of the Colony have been constructed with a variety of townhouses, apartments and cluster home. Mr. Krolick said this in itself is a very unique development idea. Mr. Krolick said residents of this area want to preserve it's uniqueness. He asked the Commission to seriously consider the need for the proposed facility, pointing out in his opinion the proposed facility is being constructed for financial reasons. He concluded the quality of medicine will not suffer if the proposed facility is not built. Ms. Mary Alice Reynolds, 6401 Colony Way said property values will decrease if the proposed addition is approved and constructed. Ms. Judith Dixon , 6305 Colony Way pointed out the increase in traffic on Barrie Road /Heritage Drive, a decrease in real estate values and possible pollution contamination as a result of the hospitals continued burning of wastes. Mr. Robinson told the Commission the Hospital's incinerator is licensed and meets the requirements of the State. Mr. G. Johnson asked Mr. Robinson when hospital staff will meet with the Pollution Control Agency. Mr. Robinson said a meeting has been scheduled for February 19, 1987. Mrs. Shaw wondered if there is a legitimate need for another medical building on the Southdale Campus site. She expressed concern over traffic congestion and overcrowding on the site. Commission Members agreed with Mrs. Shaw's observation. Mr. Robinson explained that during the past 10 years hospitals have undergone a change. Patients now receive more out - patient care and the hospital -stay by a patient has been considerably shortened. He added patients now request privates rooms, which decreases the amount of double occupancy rooms. He pointed out many hospitals now function with numerous support services which were not available in the past. Mr. Robinson noted professional medical staff and patients prefer close ties with a hospital which his why many hospitals are connected with medical office buildings. Members of the Planning Commission expressed concern over the general impact of this proposal. Their concerns included the impact this proposal could have on future development possibilities along France Avenue, the increase in traffic congestion, and overcrowding of the hospital campus site. It was pointed out the present site may not be able to accommodate the increased building demands requested by Hospital Administrative Staff. Mr. Del Johnson moved to recommend denial. Mrs. McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. NUMBER P-86-5 L 2 LOCATION Fairview Southdale Hospital - 6401 France Avenue R E Q U E S T Construct freestanding medical office building. EDINA PLANNING ®r-mA � a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 28, 1987 P -86 -5 Fairview Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South Existing zoning: Regional Medical District Request: Construct freestanding medical office building. Refer to: Revised plans and letter of explanation, City Council Minutes of December 15, 1986, Memorandum from Strgar, Roscoe, Fausch, December 3, 1986 Commission Minutes and Staff Report. The subject proposal was considered by the City Council at its December 15, 1986 meeting. The Council referred the request back to the Commission for further consideration. Traffic, parking quantity, location and size of the parking ramp, and landscaping were key issues. The hospital has submitted new, modified plans for the Commission's consideration. A comparison between the modified plan and the original proposal follows: Building Size and Location. The medical office building, as originally proposed, contained a Gross Floor Area of 84,240 square feet. The modified plan proposes a building containing 75,199 square feet of Gross Floor Area, or a reduction of 9,041 square feet. The original proposal was a 5 story building plus basement with a footprint of approximately 15,000 square feet. The modified proposal increases the building to 6 stories plus basement, but reduces the footprint to approximately 12,000 square feet. Setback of the building from the Crosstown Highway has been increased from 60 feet to 74 feet at the closest point. Parking Parking quantity has been reduced to correspond to the reduction in the size of the medical office building. Total on -site parking has been reduced from 1,345 spaces to 1,298 spaces. The medical office building is allocated 442 spaces and the hospital 856 spaces. Parking for the medical office building continues to comply with the Ordinance requirements. Parking for the hospital is increased by 32 spaces over what exists today. Parking Ramp The parking ramp design has been substantially modified. Except for the most southerly portion of the ramp, the top level has been set back an additional 60 feet. Lower levels of the ramp continue to be as originally proposed. The proposed ramp conforms to Ordinance setback requirements. Other features of the development plan remain the same as in previous proposals. It should be pointed out that the proposed landscaping plan has been modified to increase the size and density of landscaping along the easterly property line adjacent to the Colony Condominiums. The plan does not, however, illustrate the required screening on the north side of the west parking lot. The hospital did indicate at the City Council meeting that this screening would be provided according to Ordinance standards. Following the City Council meeting, staff requested that the Pollution Control Agency (PCA) review the hospitals incinerator permits. The PCA has scheduled a meeting with representatives of the Colony and the hospital on February 19, 1987. Traffic Attached to this report is an analysis of the Parking and Traffic analysis prepared by Barton Aschman for Fairview Southdale Hospital. This analysis was prepared for the City by Strgar, Roscoe, Fausch, Inc. Staff concurs with the findings in the report, and will ask the City Council to consider budgeting for a study of the area. Staff continues to recommend that the hospital agree to financially participate in improvements which may be required along West 65th Street from Barrie Road to France Avenue �. EAGLE ENTERPRISES 5100 Edina Industrial Blvd. Edina, Minnesota 55435 Telephone: (612) 835 -6866 January 19, 1987 Mr. Craig Larson, Director of Planning City of Edina Edina, Minnesota Re: Amended Plan Fairview Medical Office Building Dear Craig: The parking calculations for the amended plan are as follows: PROPOSED MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING • Gross Building Area 84,672 sq. ft. six story building plus basement Less: verticals, rest rooms, mechanical 9,473 sq. ft. • Gross Floor Area 75,199 sq. ft. PARKING REQUIRED - MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Spaces • Gross Floor Area 75,199 sq. ft. @ 5/1,000 376 Less: Basement 10,812 sq. ft. • Physicians Parking 64,387 sq. ft. @ 1 /1,000 66 • Total Parking Required 442 PROPOSED PARKING Spaces • Parking Ramp Addition 751 • On -site Emergency Parking 8 • Total New Parking 759 Less: Displaced Parking 285 • Net Increase 474 L, Craig Larson Fairview M.O.B. Amended Plan PARKING SUMMARY -2- • Existing Hospital Parking • Proposed Additional Parking Less: Displaced Parking Less: Medical Office Parking • Proposed Hospital Parking January 19, 1987 Spaces 824 759 1,583 285 442 856 The above analysis shows an increase of 32 spaces for hospital parking versus the 29 spaces per the previous plan submitted. Yours truly, Lance Norderhus btm Plant MatPriil o ® ®m® ©�om� D ®OD® ! OO ®O ©C�i� 1, O ®a ®® ren +Z D ®OD® � tiT 'fir' �• • ii. ii � ®O�JQLT.TS..9 G_�lY ,ice': r. M O GROIMD COVER VLANnHO DETAIL w v...►• r r. ((W O 1 k 1 �C. �1 4. - i KEY T co- 40 Oa i ;r 66TH 8T. mq4 O O f 1 u- v 3� WON mc m: Wpm Za J a a (n a a– w i wa 5 wo. ML C t } l ,�J•�'Il_t1 4�.�. O O f 1 u- v 3� WON mc m: Wpm Za J a a (n a a– w i wa 5 wo. ML ! I l� W s m v z a U. W CZT 65TM SMEET nrLlc i •..o iaR•ic� a.•c �a.l e.a n.aw / vL o 1n0 IL014 10 }L 14 u w It 01Y 10 bi r � � G ILM4 IO.bs 4T• y0.4 r4�IT hl iii+ -d � � o....•.til...T.�.PM V PA-0 � a Cd 06 .. K W a W O • we gala. 4:�' ala' Y1ila'•1' l' �:I' 1 aP•a' adr i I I nw 1 a�ta' aa'.M aaw U'.a• gar.•' a4•• aa'.r aL ' u'.a• anal•• �• •�w•C•L A; 4VL 0�4.••r44anr a��wlMwwwaar 4 ^ J a I r e \LT {LIT \TIIY •�T�T h � Y I Gy dQQ SA 4 � o uQ� p y a W p_ g PA � a x w• 16 ao. MHzL Y\ 1\ Y •\ Y T Y L I T I Y •\ \\ \ A' Y IIlII enm �� Ei! C Y; d u�66jj 4 � o uQ� p � a W D� �e oo e ga,. � w• wo. s 1�1. M..• ..r . \\ \iY \ \..1• Art t tt \t; \Y V lie �SF .1 0 4 PC m ; uA� q •� a W p^ X078 � R1 ■ tea^ IV. 0 • D STRGAR- ROSCOE- FAUSCH, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS TRANSPORTATION ■ CIVIL ■ STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS ■ LAND SURVEYORS MEMORANDUM TO: Francis J. Hoffman, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Edina FROM: Strgar- Roscoe - Fausch, Inc. DATE: January 14, 1987 SUBJECT: FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE HOSPITAL PARKING AND TRAFFIC STUDY REVIEW This memorandum summarizes undertaken at your Hospital Parking Aschman Associates and dated September th request, affic for and Tr Inc. , 1986. In general, procedures analyses. summarized we are in followed However, as follows: e results of the Study p r Fairview of our analysis, Fairview Southdale epared by Barton - Southdale Hospital, substantial agreement with the overall in the traffic and parking impact we have some concerns which are 1. We concur in Barton - Aschman's assessment that area development will continue to expand and that France Avenue in this area is one of the most developable areas in the region. In checking with the Metropolitan Council to determine the degree of development expected in the corridor, they project a population increase of 20 percent and an employment increase of 43 percent for the year 2010. This growth, together with the continuing increase in the rate of tripmaking by the region's population, leads to the conclusion that travel demand could increase up to 40 percent for the France Avenue Corridor. As a result, the proposed redevelopment of part of the Fairview Southdale Hospital site represents one of the first redevelopment initiative in this rapidly growing area. We feel that it is important for this proposed redevelopment to be considered within a larger context, one which recognizes the redevelopment potential and the presence of other potential development, particularly in the area bounded by C.S.A.H. 62, Xerxes Ave., 66th St. and France Ave. We recommend that trip generation characteristics be reviewed for this entire area. 630 Twelve Oaks Center, 15500 Wayzata Blvd., Wayzata NIN 55391 (612) 475 -0010 �I Mr. Francis J. Hoffman, P.E. - 2 - January 14, 1987 2. We find little information in the study report on traffic impacts; the report is particularly non- specific with respect to future operations on France Avenue (C.S.A.H. 17) and W. 66th Street (C.S.A.H. 53), with or without the proposed redevelopment. In view of the expected growth in the area and current peak period traffic problems (such as at the C.S.A.H. 62 (Crosstown Highway] interchange with France Avenue), we consider it essential that such an analysis be performed. Certainly, new development in the area will adversely affect the level of service at the C.S.A.H. 62- France Avenue interchange and along 66th Street. At present, the widening of France Ave. between 70th and 76th Streets to six lanes is programmed for 1990 in the County's five -year capital improvement program, but no work is currently programmed for 66th Street. 3. If the main access to the Fairview Southdale complex remains at the 65th St. and France Ave intersection and improved access from the south is not provided, more motorists can be expected to seek alternative routes such as Barrie Road and Heritage Drive, which are residential in character. The city has collected license plate origin /destination data which indicates that approximately 20 percent of the traffic on these local streets is through traffic. We believe this amount of traffic is high for this type of local street and. this number has the potential to increase in the long run unless improved access is provided to France .and 66th Street. Most of the motorists now using these roads as a short -cut are likely to be regular employees in the medical complex who are familiar with the area. For that portion of the 20 percent through traffic destined to the northeast, improved access to France Ave. and 66th Street is particularly important to keep traffic off the Barrie /Heritage route. 4. Future development will require that 65th Street be widened at and near France Avenue, and added left turn capacity and signal modifications are probably justified at the signal. Some additional vehicular storage can then be provided to reduce the likelihood that that vehicles waiting at the signal will block the west hospital driveway. This is important because the report states that total vehicular movements at the hospital west entrance outnumber east entrance movements two to one. We did not analyze in detail the .operation of this signal, but recommend that such work be performed. Mr. Francis J. Hoffman, P.E. 3 - January 14, 1987 5. A major reason that motorists heading north of C.S.A.H. 62 divert from the arterial street network to local streets like Barrie and Heritage is congestion on France Avenue,. particularly at the C.S.A.H. 62 ramp intersections. Without improvements at the interchange and, ultimately, added capacity on C.S.A.H. 62 itself, the lack of improved access to 66th Street will continue to attract motorists to local streets in order to avoid traffic congestion and its resulting delays. We recommend that steps be taken towards an improved Drew Avenue connection to 66th Street, with a traffic signal to serve both Drew and a realigned Southdale exit (which would be the fourth approach to the signal). 6. The report recommends a parking ratio of 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of medical office. The current city requirement is 6.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The 4.5 rate is probably adequate for typical operation of the facility. However, this rate was a result of limited field observation and is likely not to represent a design day and certainly not a peak day. We recommend that the 6.0 rate be maintained as the city's position subject to additional analysis or data that deals with provision for peak days and /or other design consideration. 7. As proposed, the outpatient treatment facility to be located in the northwestern corner of the complex would be built very close to the interchange; so close, in fact, that it would foreclose some options with respect to reconstructing this interchange to handle higher traffic volumes (e.g., added right -of -way may need to be purchased). It is essential that discussions concerning the ramifications of the redevelopment proposals be undertaken as soon as possible with both Hennepin County and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (which may assume responsibility for C.S.A.H. 62 in the future). 8. The internal circulation roadway of the hospital complex drives better than it looks on paper, but we found the parking lot layout and connections to the circulation road confusing and tight geometrically. We recommend that the internal circulation and connections to future garages be further examined. We would be pleased to further expand on these findings and conclusions at your convenience. PAF:bba FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE PHYSICIAN MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING PROPOSAL January 28, 1986 tP• ao. /. V ' coo • 1 •� W V z t N VA n f r �1 wG T 69TM BTCEET c ISM~L .. YJ �qq n� ae.�.l.L roT o•,e�R ns �l.r.. In• w�.c � 1 Wi ' y.e CS�•SV. R•"r•ura i o,u+ u.w• wo u..• aai "� u1 • M. RO \• IT. � � C It pL M.YL .m IL.11. nr1 U A . LTM RI�`L -L fi=r e Jc_°.R9..C..KNiSt:G!Tfl m.r. w.n.R *•e�..•w.c• W p= erg i eA e S PI • ;; U a 0a6 0. u. v w0• o® o u.. a :• /..' —.11_. Os ■ �, ► A 17 1�1 i e rT a y. _ , �I•�� } I 11 t �y!y' �, � � ; I:;;�,.:,r� � Imo■■ �•� `'° �� III 111 10 65TH 6T. eo nae Lim, IJI 1'r 1 I y+ 1 li alp Y� 0 � V • .c p w a ap_ e o. sw■ 4 u 6 u_ N 2 K n. v S nTTo • _ FL F, I CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW OF FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE PHYSICIAN MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING Iii 1st Proposal Submitted to City of Edina - Dec. 1986 I : Current Proposal Submitted to City of Edina - Jan. 20, 1986 It r iiiii�i�ii j j �I� 1st Proposal Submitted to City of Edina - Dec. 1986 I : Current Proposal Submitted to City of Edina - Jan. 20, 1986 It r 21' --.#- ,er • Y• {• I.l. •{. T KV •ITiTi T .• „ r,lftb'1' hLLvA,1'lUN Uk' FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE PHYSICIAN MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING 1st Proposal Submitted to City of Edina - Dec. 1986 Precast Concrete Panels Current Proposal Submitted to City of Edina - Jan. 20, 1986 w 27' �- Precast Exposed Aggregate Panels 15' G YV/ 4;�Vyy w,ry G -17110 , M11. /3 r- t-'WWdr 1 7 oR,(f�GE e, k,VIF eviWAI'lle y A/itf�ot AA0 1.46 E'D /NA al,00fg- Y 8, , war bTmit , MAY• SS yt y Gt7YTGEMt'7+� ; I Ivalt m- *venew forcwptr -E Arel7#*r- Avd&vwoyr Awl 70 8u/`,P If Mey/G!Z- a*-wcC RCW I y Vv Ire GRog„rp f . J */E t7rdwia Two lftFnaGf P,-- r�v ltow lm- fiy P ONE- 1letF'71K6 or W C1;7" aY -M5- fu4 ?EZr . M- 4177 lomiYG/ L M I-161) 771`£ 4)"'SOa✓ 8/ /4--A -AXAYC 7-#`6 1WA r7-`X die 10 7 � A^IY146 Ccmiwt Sf /a�Y - Tiff fl,f**,16 70,OV 4 7)a 1&-P 701' 1vw1�1`��G /161OP/M AcP'e ESr P;t>R VF fEzcaw.P 71lwE �. Tw po/r, kll7 all'OvIlwovS . 44q- 79 tvME• 7o T 4W"f1a1'1 fY.vy &T 73,v A« 9)nM7, 4-T1ffif 14Y1 a6Nr3 m 777- owrelere N►amm dFi14_67 -FN/cAiir4 7`t DFi �eD INPA 477oN 7MIT N.4iy% PXV -7V4f iNn wp ry 7 YSF£iL ,WoM AIC 7v 7W Nt'w V u/G PIN44 . 7?r f wAc17 y of Af6714iY C- -' w/ t t *97- 5 9FFtR / f 71YC Afe1l-1 7y /,f Nor ( 'Z) MF 7RtFF 1c- 6AWS07-101Y w1 < < IF- *d Mrh7-I"D /A 741� PAC A /3 PC0 9 7 4 TR FAOAr KRaI.lK ro c RAW eVlOelL ?`11 -17Y if FHIAT 7,,YF vwY EXG�Nt�xiist� F /L,�r P/1�3r�YTtD .Vq'a 4R4pll of 7.ff 77WOOClc pt7S" /7 / J)ak1j(6 AKS/1 .OMAf /N 77r ,WAYINti ofWP �FHi�� 7�tl�� /c /Yvw is /.y 7 C .ny� a " 6F W#lC // /S RAlo/K" TY4W 4M 06rk SCZCHD oiY 6S T( INCAfiS E 677s1TTED Iy 1,s�iT.7L E- �Qi�Yb�r2 fn�t- Tom— /yczv F*c/L /Ty /S 3"DO C41-1-5 Im ;�VjrR CA ^0/71tX 8.2 C,t� eEll M /Nw fr t*Ci nN ti oN 6.S -/# fn&fET , (3) IS E7iH� rv2 0431Pt7413 ? 7AF- cmA-oYy of 01W o'AeT�.�ys /( WOHDE7LF"L P44-wy A4 xIfE , (Pim po for Dr;roNifff 7')YIs f*A- qur�✓ �if� sry�r� ��- nor-- co�o.�y FifM1LY. W r LsoK AP-A?L EKff 407;MN A(A1,y7fir1V OKR 4/Pu/! Df WJ77Y -8 f A'ki7 %u/. p1-tN ?jiY CjS Of fit PWOE -5 / 7Atl"3' / ?3 &As^-5 . IN CoNiAlf? T , 7j/F M*- lA1Ti?t 1hWPf001�Y4 oOYP AW1Y7Z- YXiYCC of 4 AouiYDS Wli 72P B E Pt3i /c &V . (Y) ryxe Is .4 v/skeL 1iy/4-c-T , me" Is x iAirrivc 11-foe er '*Tft !s rE Sfif R S E� 1y /isl P� T rfGL 7D 7t' ! -owa7� -ice C� Of Cot -V YY /!1Y /HT�G�GE�YT � FCft/ DN /N 7jYjS is�lit'T � , yoK" -172Kt-y, Roster of Physicians, who reside in the City of Edina, which have indicated support and interest to become either an owner /tenant or tenant within the proposed medical office building project on the Fairview Hospital Camnus_ Ekrem Gozum, M.D. Richard R. Lund, M.D. Craig Nystrom, M.D. Sheldon M. Lagaard, M.D. Thomas J. Raih, M.D. Richard D. Schmidt, M.D. William T. Simonet, M.D. Sheldon R. Burns, M.D. E. Duane Engstrom, M.D. Mumtaz Kazim, M.D. Freeman Kovack, M.D. Ronald J. Peterson, M.D. Richard J. Stafford, M.D. Richard J. Aadalen, M.D. Gordon M. Aamoth, M.D. James Breitenbucher, M.D. Lester W. Carlander, M.D. David A. Fischer, M.D.' Mark E. Friedland, M.D. William Maierhofer, M.D. J. Patrick Smith, M.D. James Somerville, M.D. Thomas F. Carroll, M.D. Robert J. Fink, M.D. Martin B. Kaplan, M.D. John Nilsen, M.D. Paul O. Sanderson, M.D. Robert D. Wohlrabe, M.D. Richard E. Golden, M.D. Harrison Farley, M.D. John B. Muldowney, M.D. Charles A. Haislet, M.D. Russell Wavrin, M.D. Carlos A. Fernandez, M.D. Allen Van Beek, M.D. David Grube, M.D., Kenneth Hodges, M.D. Gary Brunkow, M.D. William Flory, M.D. Richard J. Frey, M.D. Charles Kolars, M.D. Richard Larson, M.D. Paul Benn, M.D. Louis C. Lick, M.D. Howard Saylor, M.D. Donald Bell, M.D. Robert Burmaster, M.D. Harry Rogers, M.D. Bruce Sundberg, M.D. Stephen Sundberg, M.D. Elmer Salovich, M.D. Jan Tanghe, M.D. Bruce Nydahl, M.D. Wayne Hoseth, M.D. Henry Meeker, M.D. Rodger Lundblad, M.D. Bruce Linderholm, M.D. Thomas Rivers, M.D. Ronald DeCesare, M.D. Richard Carlson, M.D. William Chandler, M.D. Dwight Hager, M.D. Robert S. Lund, M.D. James D. MacGibbon, M.D. Frederick Drill, M.D. Joseph Tambornino, M.D. Gene Hartmann, M.D. Jeanette Lowry, M.D. Paul Lowry, M.D. George Morrison, M.D. n and development which was never contemplated and which is out of character with the neighborhood and its unique plan. Also speaking in,opposition to t proposed subdivision were: Gayle Davis, 4507 Arden Avenue; Lorie Engel, 450 Arden. Avenue; Ed Clausman, 4544 Meadow Road; Michae Feldman, 4083 Sunnv- side ad; and Chris Johnson, 4103 Sunnyside Road. N further comment being heard, vor Courtney closed the hearing. Member T ner asked if Lot 9 would be develop ble under present ordinances and for clarification on require- ments for co ervation easements. Mr. Larsen plained that Lot 9 does meet all zoning req 'rements for buildable lots b that because it is in the marsh area it would nee a lot of improvement to ake it buildable. He said that no conservation res iction is- required " this area because it is not defined as a lake or pond beca e it is under .5 acres. Member Richards commented that he felt an economic cision i eing made here that adversely impacts an established neighborhood, de roys the integrity and symmetry of the area, that because of the topography it is non - buildable lot, that he could see no justification for overturning e stablished density and could not support the proposed subdivision. P ber R bards added that contrary to the recom- mendation of the Planning ommission felt there were sufficient reasons for denial: Member Richards hen made a mot'on to refer the matter to staff to prepare findings for d ial based on these easons: 1) the symmetry of the lot approaches a necklot onfiguration, 2) chara er of the neighborhood, 3) preser- vation of the mars area, and 4) encroachment setbacks.on the slope. Motion was seconded by M ber Bredesen, who commented th t he did not feel the proposed subdivision fit he definition of sound public poli that the parcel is being reconfigured t make it buildable and that it is inc o istent with the neighbor- hood and tha it approaches the definition of a necklot. Rol" call- Ayes: redesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney Motio carried. Member ichards suggested that the draft findings to be prepared y staff be submitted to Mr. Monroe, the proponent, and to Mr. Schmidt for conveyance to the White Oaks Improvement Association. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE HOSPITAL REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING Wk M 66 WN EUR RECOMMENDATION ON ISSUES RAISED. Affidavits of Notice were presented, Cam. approved and ordered placed on file. Member Bredesen stated that, because Fairview b Southdale Hospital is a large shareholder in his company, to avoid any appearance �$ of conflict of interest he would not participate in the public hearing on this matter and excused himself from the meeting. Planner Larsen said that the subject property is the campus of the Fairview Southdale Hospital containing 13.24 acres. It is developed with a 374,000 square foot hospital building and a 11,469 square foot power plant building. The site contains a total of 824 parking spaces, 308 of which are contained in a two level parking ramp located along the easterly boundary of the campus. Mr. Larsen advised that the hospital has submitted a request for final development plan approval to construct a new medical office building with a gross floor area of 84,240-square feet. Medical office buildings are a permitted use in the Regional Medical District. The building would be located north of the hospital in an area which is now utilized for surface parking. The . building would be 5 stories high and would be connected to the hospital by a tunnel. Parking to support the building and to replace existing parking lost to construction would be provided by adding a third level to the existing ramp and by adding a new, four level ramp to the north of the existing ramp. Total on- campus parking would increase from the present 824 spaces to 1,345 spaces with 493 spaces allocated to the new office building and hospital parking increasing to 853 spaces. The proposed building would have an exterior of reflective glass panels and pre- finished metal; the materials conform to Zoning Ordinance requirements. Mr. Larsen pointed out several issue areas relative to the proposed development and the overall impact on the campus and surrounding streets and properties as follows: Building Setbacks - The Regional Medical District requires that buildings provide A minimum setback from streets of 35 feet or the height of the building, which- ever is greater. The proposed office building complies with this requirement. The hospital building maintains a non - conforming setback of approximately 25 feet along West 65th Street. Variances have been granted in the past to continue this setback. Parking Setbacks - The Ordinance requires that parking and drive aisles maintain a 20 foot setback from any street right of way. Non - conforming parking setbacks occur along West 65th Street, France Avenue and County Road 62 rights of way. The non - conforming setbacks for the parking areas west of the hospital are proposed to remain. The non- conforming surface parking which encroaches on the Crosstown right of way in the northeasterly portion of the campus would be removed by the new ramp. The Ordinance requires that accessory parking structures provide a minimum setback of 20 feet or the height of the structure from any interior property line. The existing ramp conforms; however, following the expansion of the ramp its height would range between 25 and 31 feet and a variance is requested. Since the proposal was heard by the Planning Commission an altered plan has been submitted for the easterly property line which essentially builds up the level of earth at the base of the ramp. Since the height of the structure is measured from the ground level by using; the altered plan the necessity of a variance along that property line adjacent to The Colony would be removed except for a variance of approximately 7 feet along the Crosstown Highway right of way. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) - Floor Area Ratio is defined as .the ratio of the total building area to the total .land area. The Ordinance allows a FAR of 1.0 in the Regional Medical District. Currently the FAR for the campus is approximately .65 and following the addition of the office building the FAR will increase to 0.79. The power plant building and parking ramps are not in- cluded in the FAR calculations. Landscao_inQ /Screening - The Ordinance requires that all parking areas located within 50 feet of a street be screened to a height of 4 feet. Less than adequate screening exists around the westerly park- ing lot. The proposed plan would provide the required screening adjacent to the West 65th Street and France Avenue rights of way. However, the proposed screening has not been extended to areas adjacent to the Crosstown highway right of way. At the Planning Commission meeting the proponents did agree to rectify that and to bring the landscaping up to Ordinance requirements. Staff would suggest that an analysis of existing landscaping materials be made to insure that the overall landscaping does conform. The proponents further proposed to heavily landscape the easterly property line with oversize stock. Parking - The Ordinance require- ment for a medical office building is based on 5 spaces per thousand square feet, plus one space -per doctor, resulting in a requirement of 492 spaces for the pro- posed building. The 492 spaces will be allocated to the building. The Ordinance requires one space per bed plus one space per employee or volunteer on the major shift for hospitals. The hospital contains 390 licensed beds and has 430 employees on the major shift resulting in a parking requirement of 820 spaces. Following construction of-the new parking facilities 853 spaces will be allocated to the hospital. A Parking and Traffic Analysis, prepared by Barton Aschman, in support of the proposal has been submitted. Mr. Larsen concluded that the proposal complies with the Zoning Ordinance requirements in most respects. By eliminating the need for a setback variance along the property line adjacent to The Colony, the only non - conforming features will be the setback variance along the Crosstown Highway right of way and the existing non - conforming setback of the parking west of the hospital. The hospital has agreed to increase the landscaping generally on the property and to increase the screening to Ordinance requirements for all parking areas. Also, heavy landscaping will be provided along the easterly property line. On -site parking will be improved after the construction. Mr. Larsen stated that traffic in the area is and will continue to be a problem. Part of the key is the capacity of the Crosstown Highway and the ability of vehicles to get on the Crosstown at the France Avenue interchange. The I -35W Study which is now underway may offer some additional capacity by improvement of the Crosstown /I -35W commons. He pointed out that the additional traffic generated by the new medical building and the additional parking, together with use by emergency vehicles, will put an additional burden on the intersection of West 65th Street and Drew Avenue. The intersection may need some redesign to accommodate the increase in traffic and a traffic signal may be warranted in the future. Staff would recommend that the hospital participate to a large degree in the cost of such improvements. Mr. Larsen stated that the proposal was heard by the Community Development and Planning Commission at its meeting of December 3, 1986, and first voted to continue the hearing on the proposal to the next meeting to allow addi- tional time to study the issues that were raised. Douglas Robinson, Adminis- trator of Fairview Southdale Hospital, had then asked if there was a way to proceed with the proposal directly to the Council. He was advised that in order to do that the Planning Commission would either have to recommend approval or denial. The Commission thereupon recommended denial based on the variance required. Mr. Robinson then presented the following additional comments. The hospital is proposing to build a 75,000 square foot medical building and a contiguous parking structure that will replace surface parking displaced by the project. Other options for siting the building were examined and it was con- cluded that there was no better site than the one proposed because of setback requirements-. Mr. Robinson said the project is a joint venture between the I and the medical staff. The land is owned by the hospital and will be leasing the land to a partnership of physicians that will be occupying the building which they will own and manage. Early in the project they had identi- fied concerns of the staff and others as to potential siting options and traffic that this project may generate. They had engaged the firm of Barton Aschman, a traffic consulting firm. to help identify options for traffic patterns in the area. `Ir. Robinson said the request was for Council consideration and approval of the final development plan for the project. He noted that since the original plan was submitted they have revised it and have come up with a workable scheme that will eliminate the need for variances and will make the presentation to The Colony residents more, attractive. With regard to the non - conforming setback on the westerly side of the property, Mr. Robinson said that the hospital was in compliance prior to the taking of additional right of way by Hennepin County for France Avenue. As part of the planning of the project he said they had identified the need to be sensitive to the concerns of the residents of The Colony. Thev_ have tried to provide for a structure that would have minim:aL affect on The Colonv and had met c,ith their Homeowners' Association Board on . ;ovemhur 24 to review the project with. them. :Sr. Robinson said that as a resuLt of that meeting and in reflecting on comments made by members of the Planning Coinmissio n they had identified the following four issues: 1) Visual Impact - The plan has been modified to lessen the visual impact by raising the ground elevation adjacent to the building by approximately 4 feet; 2) Traffic Impact - The concerns of The Colony residents regarding traffic cutting through on Barrie Road have been addressed by the traffic study; 3) Safety /Security - The hospital's security service would be extended to patrol the new office building and the parking ramp; ramp lighting would also be provided; and 4) Pollution Impact - In per- spective, approximately 116,000 vehicles per day travel on the Crosstown Highway with approximately 40- 60,000 vehicles per day on France Avenue. The proposed project is estimated to .add 500 to 1,000 car trips per day in the immediate area. James Cooperman, architect for the project, then reviewed the project design, landscaping plan and lighting for the ramp. David Koske, of Barton Aschman, explained the methology used in conducting the Parking & Traffic Evaluation for Fairview - Southdale Hospital. Based on the figures complied in the study, it was concluded that the current level of traffic operation on France Avenue at West 65th Street is satisfactory and basically operates at a level of Service C which means that traffic generally clears the intersection in each green traffic light period and does not queue up substantially. Backup does occur sporadically caused by the m ^trred entrance onto the eastbound Crosstown Highway and the limitation on the left turn phase to travel westbound on the Crosstown. The analysis of traffic generation and parking demands for the Southdale Medical Building was used to project traffic and parking for the proposed project. Mr. Koske stated that as a result of the study it was the general conclusion that the proposed medical building would not have significant impact on the current traffic operations at the intersection of France Avenue and West 65th Street, nor on France Avenue and that the traffic signal at the intersection would adequately handle the peak traffic generated by the new building. In conjunction with the study, Mr. Koske said they were asked to review the poten- tial for transit access into the hospital campus. The conclusion was that it was feasible to route a bus through the area. With regard to the air quality and air pollution issue, it was concluded that the proposed addition would not be a significant contributor to deteriation of air quality in the area. Dr. Richard Lund, 7203 Gleason Road, said he represented the 70 physicians and 35 medical practices who were listed on the roster presented.to the Council which have indicated support for the project on the Fairview Hospital campus. Dr. Lund explained that the health care delivery system has changed rapidly over the past few years and that many practices want to merge or associate and share facilities. This has resulted in a need for a different physical plant which is more in the nature of a clinic with central waiting areas, shared facilities and closer association. By.doing this it is hoped to provide more office space for those that need to expand and also bring in more specialists and sub - specialist to upgrade the quality of care delivered to the area and to Fairview Southdale Hospital to keep it as one of the best hospitals serving the Edina /Richfield /Bloomington area. Mr. Robinson concluded the hospital's pre- sentation with these points: 1) No variances or zoning change is requested, 2) the public review process has resulted in a better design for the project, and 3) the project will be a fine addition to the community and will serve to enhance the medical services to residents of Edina. Phillip Smith, 6312 Barrie Road, stated that he was the president of the Colony Condominium Association and made these comments. The Colony consists of 308 single family residences and is immediately adjacent to the Fairview Southdale Hospital complex. He stated the concerns of The Colony residents as follows: 1) the proposed four level parking ramp and addition to the existing ramp would be a visual blight to the ten buildings on Colony [Jay facing the ramp, 2) increase in traffic to the hospital complex using Barrie Road and impact on-West 65th Street, 3) mainte- nance of the earth berm adjacent to The Colony, 4) impact on property values, and 5) pollution from the power plant. Also speaking in opposition to the proposal were: Jack Kratzer, 6309 Colony Way; Alvin Krulik, 6401 Colony Way; Curtis.Hirschey, 6320 Barrie Road; Polly Berg, 6320 Barrie Road; Mary Ellen Reynolds, 6401 Colony [Jay; Judy Dixon, 6305 Colony Way and Carlton Helming, 6825 Southdale Road and owner of a unit at The Colony. It was noted that letters in support of the project had been submitted from W. Daniel Flory, M.D., Bruce C. Nydahl, ;i.D. and Thomas J. Raih, M.D. There being no further public comment, motion was made by *Iember Kelly, seconded by Member Turner to close the hearing. Motion was carried unanimously. Member Richards commented that this is a major development and may be important and very necessary from the public sector, but that he was concerned that this is something that has been on the drawing board for some time and has not gone through the normal process of the Planning Commission addressing all the issues. He said we should make certain that the Planning Commission and staff address all those issues and that it would be premature to ask the Council to vote on this proposal now. Member Kelly said she shared the concerns expressed by Member Richards and would like to see more numbers regarding the traffic on West 65th Street and the pollution concerns. `fember Turner said she agreed and that the matter of traffic to the hospital complex shortcutting through Barrie Road should be examined. ifember Richards then made a motion to refer the matter back to the Communitv Development and Planning Commission for further consider and recommendation. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly, Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney / Motion carried. *LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR LOT 6, BLOCK 1, INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITIOU/ Motion was made by Member Turner and seconded by Member K/southeasterly r adoptio of following resolut'i n: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, th following described property is at pr sin a tract of land: Lot 6., ock 1, INDIAN HILLS 2ND ADDITION WHEREAS, the o ers have requested the subdivision d ract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels ") described as fol That part o Lot 6, Block 1, Indian Hills 2nd ion, Hennepin County, Minne ota, lying southeasterly of a lwn from a point on the N rth line of said Lot 6 distant feet south- easterly of the Northwest corner of said Lot point on the South line o said Lot 6 distant 41.63 fetheasterly of the Southwest corn r of said Lot 6 and said 1re terminating, and That part of Lot 6, loc' County, Minnesota, ly g. westerly extension dra Lot 6 distant-64.57 feet said Lot 6 to a point on 41.63 feet southeasterly c 1, Indian Hills northwesterly of from a point on southeasterly o he South line o o the Southw st and said line there termina WHEREAS, it has been determined t Regulations of the City of Edina w Parcels as separate tracts of land Subdivision and Zoning Regulations Nos. 801 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resol U h 2 d Addition, Hennepin line and its south - e North line of said the Northwest corner of said Lot 6 distant corner of said Lot 6 t comp lance with the Subdivision and Zoning 1 cr ate an unnecessary hardship and said /ontained t interfere with the purposes of the as in the City of Edina Ordinances the City Council of the City of Edina t at t e conveyance and ownership o sal Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the re/qe ents a d provisions of Ordinance Nos. 801 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby to all w said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land bunot wai d for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, bject, ho ever, to the provision that no further subdivision be made o Parcels u less made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the C Edina or th the prior approval of this Council as may be provided fo hose ordina es. Motion carried on rollcall five ayes. ORDINANCE NO. 825 -A14 (ADDING DAY CARE AS PERMIT D USE IN POD DISTRICT) ADOPTED: SECOND READING WAIVED. Af idavits of Notice were resented, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner arsen stated that staff s received a.request to permit day care in.the P anned Office District. Da care is currently allowed in all residential distr cts and in all commercial districts. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance would add day care o the office and indus- trial districts as a p rmitted use. The Community De elopment and Planning Commission.recommende amendment approval at their mee ing of December 3, 1986. The amendment. would low the placement of day care fac'lities near large employ- ment concentrations. No comment being heard, Member Tu ner introduced Ordinance No. 825 -A14 as follows and moved adoption with waiver of Second Reading: ORDINANCE NO. 825 -A14 AN ORD /1N ANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE NO TO ADD DAY CARE AS PERMITTED USE IN PLANNED OFFI THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Section 1. ubparagraph No. 825 is amen ed by adding . "9. Day c re." OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: B. Principal Uses. of Section the following thereto: 825 DISTRICT of Ordinance Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effec upon its passage and publication. First Reading: December 15, 1986 Second Reading: Waived ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor C � P -86 -5 Fairview Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South Mr. Larsen reported that the subject property is the campus of Fairview Southdale Hospital. The campus contains 13.24 acres and is developed with a 374,000 square toot hospital building, and a 11,469 square toot power plant building. The site contains a total of 824 parking spaces, 308 of which are contained in a 2 level parking ramp located along the easterly boundary of the campus. mr. Larsen told the Commission the hospital has submitted a request for tinal development plan approval to construct a new medical ottice building with a Gross floor Area of 84,240 square teet. Medical ottice buildings are a permitted use in the Regional Medical District. The building would be located north of the hospital in an area which is now utilized for surtace parking. The building would be 5 stories high and would be connected to the hospital by tunnel. Parking to support the ottice building and to replace existing, narking lost to construction would be provided by adding a third level to the existing ramp and by adding a new, 4 level ramp to the north of the existing ramp. Total on- ,campus parking would increase trom its present 824 spaces to 1,345 spaces. the new ottice building would be allocated 492 spaces and hospital parking would increase to 853 spaces. The proposed ottice building would have an exterior of retlec.tive glass panels and pretinished metal. The proposed materials contorm to Zoning Ordinance requirements. Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to reter to the memo trom Douglas Robinson, administrator of Fairview Southdale which provides intormation relative to existing conditions and the proposed improvements. The intormation provided appears to be accurate except for employee count. 'he employee count of 350 appears to be an average of the 3, 8 hour shitts. According to the Barton Aschman, study the major shitt consists of 430 employees. The Zoning Ordinance reters to the number of employees on the major shitt when determining parking demand. Mr. Larsen recommended that the Commission review several issue areas relative to the proposed development and the overall impact on the campus and surrounding streets and properties. mr. Larsen brieted the Commission on each issue: building Setbacks Mr. Larsen pointed out the Regional r-Iedical District requires that buildings provide a minimum setback trom streets of 35 teet, or the height of the building whichever is greater. The proposed ottice building complies with this requirement. The hospital building maintains a non - conforming setback of approximately 25 teet along :Vest 65th Street. Variances have been granted in the past to continue this setback. Parking Setbacks k1r. Larsen said the Ordinance requires that parking and drive aisles maintain a 20 toot setback trom any street right - ot -way. Von- conforming parking setbacks occur along the :Vest 65th Street, France Avenue, and County Road 62 rights -►ot -,way. The non - conforming setbacks for the parking areas west of the hospital are proposed to remain. The non -- conforming surtace parking which encroaches on the Crosstown right -ot -way in the northeasterly portion of the campus would be removed by the new ramp. The Ordinance requires that accessory parking structures provide a minimum setback of 20 teet or the height of the structure trom any interior property line. The existing ramp contorms. However, following the expansion of the ramp its height would range between 25 and 31. teet. Thus a variance is requested. Floor Area Ratio (IAR) Mr. Larsen told the Commission the Ordinance allows a FAR of 1.0 in the Regional medical District. Currently the FAR for the campus is approximately .65. following the addition of the ottice building the FAR will increase to 0.79. The Power Plant building and parking ramps are not included in FAR calculations. Landscaping Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to note that the Ordinance requires that all parking areas located within 50 teet of a street be screened to a height of 4 teet. Less than adequate screening exists around the westerly parking lot. The proposed plan would provide the required screening adjacent to the West 65th Street and France Avenue rights "otrway. However, the proposed screening has not been extended to areas adjacent to the Crosstown highway right of way. Parking :�Ir. Larsen intormed the Commission the ordinance requirement for a medical ottice building is based on 5 spaces per thousand square teet plus one space per c' -)ctor. This results in a requirement of 492 spaces for the proposed building. According to information provided 492 spaces will be allocated to the building. The Ordinance requires 1 space per bed plus one space per employee or volunteer on the major shitt for hospitals. The hospital contains 390 licensed beds and has 43o employees on the major shitt resulting in a parking requirement of 820 spaces. Following construction of the new parking tacilities 853 spaces would be allocated to the hospital. The Parking and 'Trattic Analysis prepared by Barton Aschman calculates a demand of 80 spaces for the :iospital and approximately 38:f spaces for the orrice building. Trattic mr. Larsen told the Commission that in support of their request the hospital has submitted a trattic analysis which concludes that the existing trattic situation will not be aggravated by the additional trattic generated by the medical ottice building. The report does note, however, that sporadic queuing does occur at the on -ramp trom north bound France Avenue to eastbound Crosstown Highway. Mr. Larsen concluded his summary by outlining each issue: Parking: At a recent hearing betore the Board of Appeals considering an addition to the Same Day Surgery Center, a parking demand of 859 spaces was established for the campus. This higher nu ;nber is the result of the changing tunction of the hospital, i.e. more out - patient, clinic type uses and less ins- patient use. `ihis trend will probably continue. The Barton Aschman Parking study concludes that the hospital generates a parking demand of 8io spaces. 1rheir parking surveys indicate at least 52 vacant spaces at the peak times. Notwithstanding these conclusions, start reels the hospital is at or nearly at it parking capacity. The proposal will provide a net increase of 29 spaces, to a total of 853 spaces. This should be sutticient for current conditions but this may change as the hospital changes the way it delivers services to the community. The proposed medical ottice building provides parking that contorms to Ordinance requirements. Based on the Barton Aschman study of Southdale medical Ottice Building, the new Fairview Medical Ottice building will need 4.5 spaces per 1000 square teet of tloor area or approximately 380 spaces. The proposed allocation of 492 spaces should be adequate. In addition it could provide a cushion for the hospital demand. Trattic: The `i'rattic Study concludes that the addition of the medical ottice building to the Fairview Campus would cause "...no signiticant change in the level of service" at the intersection of 55th Street and France Avenue. The report does note congestion on the Crosstown on- ramps, especially north bound France to east bound Crosstown in the atternoon peak hours. The report suggests that this gueuing problem may increase, but would not be signiticant due to its short duration. Statt remains concerned about potential congestion in the area. The increased trattic may require new or additional trattic control measures in the area. A trattic signal may be warranted at 55th and Drew Avenue, the easterly entrance to the ca::1pus. Additional stripping, lane delineation, or improvements to 65th Street may be needed. Statt recommends that the hospital participate to a large degree in the cost of these improvements. Eighty percent of the parking and all emergency vehicles will use the easterly entrance. The entrance as proposed is only a two «lane, 24 toot wide curb cut. Statt believes that this entrance should be redesigned and enlarged. Landscaping and Screening: Statt's main concern here is the screening of the westerly parking area. The proposed screening is acceptable, but should extend to screen the lot trom the Crosstown on -ramp. The landscape plan should be subject to tinal statt approval prior to issuance of the building permit. Landscaping is proposed on County right -ot -way. This is subject to Hennepin County approval. Setback Variance for Parking Ramp: The proposal requests a variance to continue the setback provided for the existing ramp. This is necessary to etticiently provide the required amount of parking. Adjacent to the ramp, on Colony property, is a row of parking, a two way drive aisle and then buildings. Distance trom the ramp to t-he closets building is approximately 6:1 teet. Landscaping materials substantially larger than the Ordinance requires is proposed along the east side of the new ramp. Existing plant materials would be retained adjacent to the old ramp. The ramp could be designed to meet Ordinance setback requirements by stepping back the upper two levels. This would not signi.ticantly reduce the impact of the structure on the Colony. It would, however, have a signiticant impact on the tunction and capacity of the ramp. Additional ettorts should be made to screen the lot trom the Colony as a condition to this variance. Statt recommends approval of the variance. Mr. Douglas Robinson, Vern Knuston and Kurt Hamann of Fairview Southdale Hospital, ;•;r. James Cooperman, Architect, i•tr. David Kirch, Landscape Architect, and rtr. David Koske of Barton Aschman were present representing the proponent Fairview Southdale Hospital. Concerned-residents were present. Mr. Robinson _began his presentation by intorming the Commission that 3 major sites were examined for the proposed medical ottice building betore the tinal site was agreed upon. He added the hospital has signiticant parking demands and ramp location was important. ':'tie proposed ramp location met hospital needs and was located where minimal setback encroachment would occur. Using graphics "01r. Robinson explained the proposed ramp. mr. Robinson said he is very aware of the parking and trattic concerns expressed by City Statt and added the hospital has retained the tirm of Barton Aschman to conduct trattic studies. mr. Robinson explained that the Hospital is very conscious of the . . non- contorming landscaping along France Avenue ,mr. Robinson indicated the hospital has every intention of raising landscaping levels to ordinance standards. Mr. Cooperman, using graphics explained the proposed medical ottice building. He added the building will consist of 5 stories plus a basement. Due to grade levels a portion of the basement will be exposed allowing window placement. The basement area will be used for meetings and an employee lunchroom and locker area. The building will be constructed of a concrete system and exterior materials will be reflective glass curtain walls with butt joint connections. mr. Krolick of 6401 Colony 'play asked ,qtr. Cooperman it the heating and cooling plant for the hospital would be able to provide utility service for the newly proposed building and ramp. fie also expressed concern over the possibility of the glass windows popping out, causing damage and possible injury. mr. Cooperman said the hospital's energy plant should be able to provide adequate heating and cooling for the proposed structures. He added the proposed structure would be sate. Mr. Cooperman continued his presentation by informing the Commission the proposed ramp is located 89 teet trora the Colony. He added materials for the proposed ramp would match materials used on the existing ramp. mr. Cooperman told the Commission hospital and development statt met with the Directors of the Colony and listened to their concerns. A major point of concern was the obstruction of their site lines as a result of this project. Residents of the Colony expressed a need for additional landscaping. Mr. Kirsh, landscape architect, submitted a revised landscape plan adding the new landscaping would exceed ordinance requirements. Mr. Krolick of 6471 Colony 'Nay asked mr. Kiish it the proposed landscaping and building construction would intertere with the sunset that is now enjoyed by Colony residents. Mr. Kirsh answered that at a point there may be a reduction in sun levels. ms. Judith Dixon comriented that she Celt the emissions of cars and tume's trom the hospital's energy plant could cause severe damage to all vegetation. :pis. Dixon continued adding she has a grave concern that these emissions may be harmtul to the health and well being of the residents of the Colony. She asked that a study be conducted to check the carbon monoxide levels. In answer to ' -Is. Dixonsconcern over automobile emissions Mr. Robinson said as a result of this proposal emission levels would be increased by under 1 percent. sir. David Koske of Barton Aschman reported to the Commission his tindings concerning trattic. One of the results of their study tound that the intersection of 55th and France does not have a trattic problem, it tunctions satistactorily. He added the drawback at this intersection is the access to the eastbound ramp for Crosstown Highway ;p62 and the lett turn to westbound Crosslown.Highway #62. Mr. Koske pointed out ramp lights cause congestion. 1:oske said during peak hours south bound France Avenue operates at around 1,000 vehicles per hour. North bound France Avenue operates at 1,500 vehicles per hour. At the 65th and Prance entrance 45o vehicles enter the lot per hour with 376 vehicles exiting per hour. ':his is an increase of around 80 vehicles entering /exiting or roughly a 20 percent increase. mr. Koske concluded no signiticant negative trattic impact would be generated as a result of this proposal. Mr. ::rollick of 6401 Colony May expressed concern that trattic levels would be increased in an already severely congested area. He added he was unsure it an emergency vehicle would be able to reach the hospital during peak trattic hours. Mr. Koske reported during his study he tound emergency vehicles did not have a problem gaining access to the hospital. He added the recommendation by City Statt to add a lett turn lane would tacilitate that process. Nis. Judith Dixon of 6305 Colony play reporte3 that hospital statt, patients and emergency vehicles already use the residential streets to gain access to the hospital campus. She added this increase in trattic tlow creates congestion on the private and residential streets of the area. qtr. Robinson said to his knowledge he has not round that emergency vehicles have a problem gaining access to the hospital. He added the hospital would never propose an addition that ;could be detrimental to them as a whole. Mr. Robinson said he is aware that this proposal will poise changes that will ettect residents of the Colony. He pointed out he met with members of the Colony and revisions have been made in landscaping and in the ramp. Landscaping will be increased and the protile of the ramp will be decreased by berming up the earth around the ramp and planting vegetation on top of the bermed earth. mr. Robinson concluded that in his opinion the proposal will be a tine addition to the community. M:r. Del Johnson directed a question to 'sir. Robinson on the need for constructing a new medical ottice building.. Mr. Robinson responded the building is being constructed due to the need to provide additional space for doctors and their statt. He added there is high deiiiand to provide space for medical providers on hospital campuses. Ottice placement directly adjacent to the hospital will best serve the needs of both the medical personal, their patients and the community as a whole. mr. Robinson commented that it is also more attractive trom a economic standpoint for physicians to own their own ottice rather than rent it. rO..r. Johnson said he is aware of the national trend for low bed demand in hospitals and wondered it it be possible to convert excess hospital bed space to medical ottice space. mr. Robinson said the hospital does not have adequate space to make the project teasible but did look into the possibility of adding a mirror image tower on the east end of the building. It was round that this space would be inadequate due to design restrictions as medical ottice space and access to this tacility would be a problem. rvir. Robinson pointed out that Fairview Southdale has a higher than average occupancy rate and it is their hope that this addition will be help maintain that high level of occupancy. Ile added the occupancy rate runs at around 6i percent and indicated the trend for shorter stays and reached the bottom side of the trend and some stays are increasing. Mr. Skagerberg asked hospital statt to clarity it the present power tacility would be able to service the new medical ottice building and ramp. :';ir. I:urk Hamann, Director of [wilding and Grounds for Fairview Southdale Campus said at this time the power plant has excess boiler capacity and chiller capacity. mr. Krolick asked mr. Hamann it the power plant burned PCB's. Pvir. Hamann answered that they do not burn PCB's. mrs. :.:cClelland recommended that it the public has a concern that the power plant may poise a health problem they should report it to the City Health Otticer, Mr. David Velde. rirs. McClelland said she is very concerned with the trattic issue and overbuilding on the site. Mrs. Paulus, ,sir. Johnson, and mr. Sked expressed agreement that overbuilding may occur on the site as a result of this proposal. Mrs. �tilcClelland continued adding that she would like to tind out it the private road Colony Way is being used by hospital statt. She stressed trattic is a major concern and the projected increase of 20 percent in trattic may create impossible conditions at an already congested area. qtr. Paulus agreed with 'irs. i`icClelland that trattic is a major problem. She added hospital statt run double shitts so peak times occur more trequently due to the hospital shitt changes. Mr. Paulus said an important concern is public satety. The emissions of automobiles and the ramp itselt may poise satety problems. She pointed out it she parked in the ramp at night she would want it to be adequately lighted. She added the lights may impact residents of the Colony. Mr. Robinson said the ramp would be patrolled by security guards and every ettort to ensure satety would be initiated. He added lighting would be constructed to have minimal impact on tenants in the Colony. Ms. ;nary Alice Reynolds of 64471 Colony Way added she telt their property values would be decreased as a result of this proposal. Mr. Larsen intormed the Commission that the revisions made in the design of the ramp would reduce the variance. mrs. McClelland recommended continuance of this item to the January 7, 1957 Community Development and Planning Commission meeting to allow additional time to study concerns registered by the residents of the Colony. mrs. Paulus seconded the motion. mr. Palmer abstained. All were in tavor. The motion carried. Mr. Robinson asked the Commission it thane was a way to proceed with this project to the Council. He was intormed to proceed directly to the Council the Commission would either have to recommend approval or denial. mr. Skagerberg recommended denial based on the variance required to construct a new ottice building and ramp. mars. PicClelland seconded the motion. mr. Palmer abstained. All were in tavor. The motion carried. C0;- I-JJ'ZI'1 Y Dr Vi LOP E: :i A "D PL;�r ? 'Ii:G C— C :'iISSION P -86 -5 Existing Zoning: Request: Refer to: STAFF REPORT DECE,1137R 3, 19136 Fairview Southdale Hospital 6401 France Avenue South Regional Medical. District Construct freestanding medical office building. Attached plans, Temo froir Douglas Robinson, Barton Aschman ?arking an3 traffic study. The subject property is the campus of Fairview Southdale Hospital. The carrous contains 13.24 acres and is developed with a 374,000 square foot hospital building, and a 11,469 square foot power plant building. The site contains a total of 824 parking spaces, 308 of which are contained in a 2 level parking ramp located along the easterly boundary of the campus. The hospital has submitted a request for final development plan approval to construct a new medical. office building with a Gross Floor Area of 84,240 square feet. medical office buildings are a permitted use in the Regional Medical District. Thy building would be located north of the hospital in an area which is now utilized for surface parking. The building would be 5 stories high and would be connected to the hospital by tunnel. Parking to support the office building and to replace existing parking lost to construction would be provided by adding a third level to the existing rain and by adding a new, 4 level ramp to the north of the existing ramp. Total on- campus parking would: increase from its present 824 spaces to 1,345 spaces. The new office building would be allocated 492 spaces and hospital parking would increase to 653 spaces. The proposed office building would have an exterior of reflective glass panels and prefinished metal. The proposed materials conform to Zoning ordinance requirements. The attached memo from Douglas Robinson, adainistrator of Fairview Southdale provides information relative to existing conditions and the proposed improvements. she information provided appears to be accurate except' for employee count. The emoloyee count of 35" appears to be an average of the 3, 3 hour shifts. According to the 3arton Aschaan, study the gajor shift consists of 439 eaoloy2es. The Zoning Ordinance refers to the nuaber of eaployees on the aajor shift when deteraining parking deg and . There are several issue areas that warrant Cogmission review relative to the proposed developaent and the overall iapact on the caapus and surrounding streets and properties. A brief discussion of each follows: Building Setbacks The Regional `edical District requires that buildings provide a ainigua setback frog streets of 35 feet, or the height of the building whichever is greater. The proposed office building complies with this requireaent. The hospital building maintains a non - conforming setback of approxirately 25 feet along West 65th Street. Variances have been granted in the past to continue this setback. Parking Setbacks The Ordinance requires that parking and drive aisles aaintain a 20 foot setback frog any street right- of -way. Non- conforming parking setbacks occur along the :-pest 65th Street, France Avenue, and County Road 62 rights -of -way. The non - conforming setbacks for the parking areas west of the hospital are proposed to regain. The non - conforming surface par;cin, which encroaches on the Crosstown right -of -way in the northeasterly portion of the caapus would be reaoved by the new raap. The Ordinance requires that accessory parking structures provide a ginigua setback of 20 feet or the height of the structure frog any interior property line. The existing raap confor;is. However, following the expansion of the rasp its height would range between 25 and 31 feet. Thus a variance is requested. Floor Area Ratio (FAR) The Ordinance allows a !AR of 1.0 in the Regional Medical District. Currently the '?AR for the caapus is approxigately .65. Following the addition of the office building the .�'AR will increase to 0.79. The Power Plant building and parking rasps are not included in 7 AR calculations. Landscaping The Ordinance requires that all L)arkin_; areas located within 50 feet of a street be screened to a height of 4 feet. Less than adequate screening exists around tie westerly narking lot. the proposed plan woula provide the required screening adjacent to the :;est 65th Street and France __venue rights- of- •,,;ay. However, the proposed screening has not been extended to areas adjacent.to the Crosstown highway right of way. Park i -19 The Ordinance requiraaent for a :Tedical office building is based on 5 spaces per thousand square feet plus one space per doctor. This results in a requireTent of 4912 spaces for the proposed building. According to inforaation provided 492 spaces wi 1 l be al l ocatea to the hui l d i,,g . The Cr l inance requires l space per bed plus one space per ea pl oyee or volunteer on the aajor shift for hospitals. The hospital contains 390 licensed beds and has 430 eaployees on the aajor shift resulting in a parking requireTent of 823 spaces. L- 'ollo,,,:ing construction of the new parking facilities 853 spaces would be allocated to the hospital. "he Parking and Traffic Analysis prepared by ?artcn Aschaan calculates a deaand of 810 spaces for the hospital. and anproxiTately 360 spaces for the office building. Traffic In support of their request the hospital has subafitted a traffic analysis which concludes that the existing traffic situation will not be aggravated by the additional traffic generated by the Medical office building. The report does note, howaver, that sporadic queuing does occur at the on -raTp fro[ north bound-France Avenue to eastbound Crosstown Highway. Recoaa end ation Parking,: At a recent hearing before the Board of Appeals considering an addition to the Saae Day Surgery Center, a parking deaand of 859 spaces was established for the caapus. This higher nuaber is the result of the changing function of the hospital, i.e. core out - patient, clinic type uses and less in- patient use. This-trend will probably continue. The Barton Aschaan Parking study concludes that the hospital generates a parking deaand of 810 spaces. Their parking surveys indicate at least 52 vacant spaces at the :peak tines. ?:otwithstanding these conclusions, staff feels the hospital is at or nearly at it parking capacity. The )roposal will provide a net increase of 29 spaces, to a total of 853 spaces. This should be sufficient for current conditions but this aay change as the hospital cha,. es the way it delivers services to the coaaunity. The proposed ae(_-ical office building provides parking that confor:rs to Crainance re,uireaents. 3ased on the Barton .Aschaan study of Southdale "edical Office Luilding, the new i7airview '.odical Office. iuilding will need 4.5 spaces oer 1000 square feet of floor area or approxiaately 380 spaces. i'he proposed allocation of 492 spaces should be adecuate. In addition it could provide a cushion for the hospital derrand. - raffic: The traffic Study corncludes that th_- addition of the aedical office building to the Fairview Caapus would cause "...no significant change in the level. of service" at the intersection of 65th Street and France !Avenue. The report does not` congestion on the Crosstown on- raaps, especially north bound France to east bound Crosstown in the afternoon peak hours. Tile report suggests that this- gueuing problea aay increase, but would not be significant duo to its short duration. Staff retrains concerned about potential congestion in the area. Tile increased traffic aay require new or additional traffic control aeasures in the area. P,, traffic signal aay be warranted at 65th and Drew Avenue, the easterly entrance to the caapus. ;Additional stripping, lane delineation, or iaproveaents to 55th Street aay be needed. Staff recoaaends that the hospital participate to a largo degree in the cost of these i7proverrents. Eighty percent of tze parking and all eaergency vehicles will use the easterly entrance. The entrance as proppose6 is only a two -lane, 24 foot ;aide curb cut. Staff bel.iev--s that this entrance should be redesigned and enlarged. Landscaping and Screening: Staff's ;rain concern here is the screening of the westerly parking area. The proposed screening is acceptable, but should extend to screen the lot frog the Crosstown: on- rain). -he landscape plan should be subject to final staff approval prior to issuance of the building perait. Landscaping- is proposed on County right -of -way. This is subject to Hennepin County approval. Setback Variance for Parking Ra;rp: The proposal requests a variance to continue the setback provided for the existing raap. This is necessary to efficiently provide the required arrount of parking. Adjacent to the raap, on Colony property, is a row of pari;ing, a two way drive aisle and then buildings. Distance frog the raap to the closets building is approxiaately 60 feet. Landscaping :iaterials substantially larger than the Ordinance requires is proposed along the east side of the new raap. existing plant aaterials would be retained adjacent to the old raap. 'ihe ra,ip could be "Iesicned to -Test or:linancu, setback requireaents by stepping back the upper two level s. This would not significantly reduce the iapact of the structure on the Colony. It would, however, have a significant iapact on the function and capacity of the raap. Additional effort: should be cfade to screen the lot fron the Colony as a conaition to this variance. Staff reconRends approval of the variance. rM, or d.9 Fairview 6401 France Arennte Sotab Douglas N. Robinson Southdale Hospital Edina JIN 55-65 Vice President and 612-924-5000 Administrator A Division of Fairview Fax 612 - 924.5012 Date: November 21, 1986 Memo To: Mr. Craig Larson Director of Planning, City of Edina From: Douglas N. Robinson Gz"' Vice President & Administrator, Fairview Southdale Hospital Subject: Fairview Southdale Physician Office Building - Fairview Southdale Campus The following information is being submitted to supplement the application for final Development Plan for the Fairview Southdale Physician Office Building. FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE HOSPITAL DATA ° Land Area 13.24 acres ° Gross Floor Area - Hospital 374,000 sq.ft. ° Gross Floor Area - Power Plant 11,469 sq.ft. Beds 390 Employees per shift 350 ° Existing Parking 824 PROPOSED MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING ° Gross Floor Area 76,620 sq.ft. 5 story - Base Building ° Basement 15,324 sq.ft. ° Total Gross Floor Area 91,944 sq.ft. The proposed building is to be constructed with a 4 -level parking ramp - - one- level sub grade and 3- levels above grade. This ramp will be attached to the existing 2 -level parking ramp and one -level of parking will be added to the existing ramp. da PROPOSED PARKING Spaces ° New Ramp (4- level) 616 ° One additional level - existing ramp 182 ° On -Site emergency parking 8 ° Total new parking 806 ° Less: Displaced parking (285) ° Net increase 521 MQUIRED PARKING - M)ICAL OFFICE BUILDING Spaces ° Gross Floor area (including basement) 91,944 sq.ft. • Less stainaells, elevators Niechanicals & electrical area 7,704 sq.ft. • Adjusted gross floor area Q 5/1,000 GSF) 84,240 sq.ft. 421 • Physician parking N 1 /phys.) 71 • Total additional parking required 492 PARKING SUAZARY ° Existing hospital parking 824 ° Total new parking 806 Subtotal 1,630 ° Less displaced parking (285) • tedical office building parking (492) • Resulting hospital parking 853 The above analysis shows an increase of 29 spaces for hospital parking. we feel this should provide adequate parking to meet visitor and patient needs. Our plans for parking during construction are found on the attached two pages. Please refer to them as needed. DR:pb attachments FAIRVIEW SOUTHDALE HOSPITAL MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TEMPORARY PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPITAL STAFF CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Phase 1: Add third level to existing par•King ramp with speed ramp access. Completion time: 1 -2 months. Parking spaces "lost" during phase 1 construction: 150. Options to replace 150 parking spaces: 1) Lease 150 spaces from neighboring office buildings on 65th /66th streets. 2) Lease 150 spaces from City of Edina municipal swimming pool parking lot (L. Cornelia Park) and provide shuttle service to the hospital. 3) Lease 150 spaces from Grace Church of Edina and provide shuttle service to the hospital. Phase 2: Begin construction of new Medical Office Building and 4 -level parking ramp. Completion time (ramp): 6 -8 months. Parking spaces "lost" during phase 2 construction (270 - 150 spaces added in existing ramp): 120. Options to replace 120 parking spaces: 1) Lease 120 spaces from neighboring office buildings on 65th /66th streets. 2) Lease 120 spaces from City of Edina municipal swimming pool parking lot (L. Cornelia Park) and provide shuttle service to the hospital. 3) Lease 120 spaces from Grace Church of Edina and provide shuttle service to the hospital. 4) Possible incremental occupancy of new parking ramp. PAGE TWO ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Phase IA: Begin construction of Meoical Ortice Building only. Completion time: 1U -12 months. Parking spaces --lost-- during phase lA construction (continue to use east halt of N.E. surtace lot, approximately 12U spaces): 150. Options to replace 150 spaces: same as Phase 1. Phase 2A: Begin construction of new 4 -level parking ramp (phase lA start plus 4 -6 months). Completion time: 6 -8 months. Parking spaces "lost" during phase 2A construction: 120. Options to replace 12U additional spaces: same as Phase 2. Phase 3A: Add third level to existing parking ramp with speed ramp access scheduled to complete with 4th level of new parking ramp. Completion time: 1 -2 months. Parking spaces "lost" during phase 3A construction (second level of existing ramp): 150. The 150 "lost" spaces during phase 3A would be met in the newly completed M.O.B. parking ramp. VK 10/22/86 W ��T 6STM 3T4EET • 1 T • • Y DIlili Y� lip il n.oc.� f.4.ca�uzwd Ml.ly OYOr+.� YpJW P•rtlR. LL WC�O Y1P�� I.O . •O•• A �.••l� (R1 /Lt�� WI•Y�O M•t w/ Il14 1••w 1M0 I7lIM I.•.e 1"� u • Mo Ie1N IMO � A O •n nn. I ole m I)fN I.o.o 919N / ntta d • Y Q • J O .�.m.e w•,ol.�td e�o�urc•mg q B W ■ wM_ w0• e IIH ��li 11 Y� Ell 9 9'1 1 GRA=c pRAIIVAGE, AND UTL PLAN aw opoltet bt ! It f I IL • d 1 r • Mills Ci Plant Material •..:..- T -- xEr NOTES: TYPICAL EVERGREEN A DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL oo -V w • r• ~ ' w ~ ..... _GROUND COVER PLANTING DETAIL NET —r s 66TH ST. ..t 1. �1� ="_— ':;•:gib':'. - i r �.:.:':1 ►J O I I 1 1 I 1 — I .+ �e i Y� wl V • � in O V A � W p. In °• 3 R.O. fL M2 0 ae�ae�aaa® a ocISOoea® o p ®O�® ®orra® ®ov® ®pe0® Plant Material •..:..- T -- xEr NOTES: TYPICAL EVERGREEN A DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING DETAIL oo -V w • r• ~ ' w ~ ..... _GROUND COVER PLANTING DETAIL NET —r s 66TH ST. ..t 1. �1� ="_— ':;•:gib':'. - i r �.:.:':1 ►J O I I 1 1 I 1 — I .+ �e i Y� wl V • � in O V A � W p. In °• 3 R.O. fL M2 •.M., MIA � i . PIl - I - L P - 14i 0 0 euuu oil 01111 Hill .4%3 a 04 U ot 03 a O ti L4 r PIl - I - L P - 14i 0 0 euuu oil 01111 Hill .4%3 a 04 U ot 03 a O Y —. -.-- — - — . — W", ! We, wmr.0 IitbT .'••a ••a9 I-T • ;;tea —---__~ mill malts ri so le al Nv a 6 b �� . .... .. Y� — c e f �iA Y �OAo uQ• q�+a �ooB sw. w0• I +e ue• L n�i • • v v M IIIn Bill em W a �C ■ o uQ� p•+a 01 p Sw■ 0 rala�.a la.n •.• tttralia. a Y� 4� P 0 .+ u ■ 04 R e uQ� qua �D= X •7 e S W ■ W Y • M Pa w a- �Me a0• �I t* Barton- Aschrnan Associates, Inc. 1610 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 October 28, 1986 Mr. VexTxm A. Ifinutson Director of Facilities Fairview C==ity Hospitals 2312 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 Re: Estimated Traffic Generation for Proposed Developnent at Fairview Southdale Hospital - Dear Mr. 10wtscn: 612 - 332 -0421 In accordance with your telephone conversation with John Mullan, and my recent communication with Mr. Craig Larsen, Director of City of Edina Planning, it is understood that the City of Edina desires a projection on traffic generation for proposed Fairview Southdale Hospital development as indicated in the parking and traffic study prepared for Fairview Southdale by Barton- Aschman. Traffic generation data for medical facilities (hospitals, clinics or medical office buildings) is very sketchy both nationwide, and within this Minneapolis /St. Paul metropolitan region. Consequently, trip generation data provided in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual may not be representative of the actual trip generation characteristics for a medical facility in the Southdale area. Analysis of the data collected as a part of the Fairview Southdale Hospital traffic and parking study confirms that the ITE trip generation data is not representative. It appears that the ITE trip generation factors are substantially higher than those we actually observed at the Southdale Medical Office Building complex Methodology for Estimating Traffic Generation As part of the Fairview Southdale Hospital traffic study, Barton - Aschman counted all of the vehicular traffic entering and exiting the Southdale Medical Office Building area on West 65th Street between the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. on December 4 and 5, 1985. Subsequent observations indicate that the Southdale Medical Office Building complex traffic characteristics are similar to Fairview Southdale Hospital in that the majority of the people entering and exiting come from and go to the north primarily to Hennepin County Crosstown Highway 62 and further that approximately 75 percent of the total ingress and egress to the complex is via West 65th Street. The Southdale Medical Office Building is 215,000 0 Barton- Aschman Associates, Inc. Page 2 gross square feet. For purposes of developing trip generation rates for the Southdale Medical Office complex, it was assumed that the medical clinics and office buildings located east of the Southdale Medical Office Building along Drew Avenue South are approximately 15,000 gross square feet. Based on the observed ingress and egress traffic for the Southdale Medical Office Building complex and on the gross square footages of the buildings involved as indicated, a series of trip generation factors for the A.M. and P.M. peak hours for the Southdale Medical Office Building and rush hours on France Avenue south were developed. These trip generation factors were then applied to the proposed Fairview Southdale Hospital Medical Office Building and outpatient clinic development to determine an estimated traffic generation by the facilities. It was assumed that the observed trip generation factors at the Southdale Medical Office Building complex would apply directly to the proposed' Fairview Southdale Hospital development. The estimated new traffic generation from the Fairview Southdale Hospital development is indicated on the attachment to this letter. Conclusion If all of the new traffic generated by the proposed Fairview Southdale Hospital Medical Office Building and outpatient clinic development were imposed on the intersection of France Avenue South and West 65th Street with today's traffic volumes, there would be no significant change in the existing level of service. Sporadic queueing does occur for northbound France Avenue at the on -ramp to Hennepin County Highway 62 due to lack of capacity through the ramp metering device and for the northbound left turn onto Hennepin County Highway 62 due to lack of capacity of the signal at that intersection to accommodate left turns. It is assumed that the traffic characteristics for a new medical office facility on the Fairview Southdale Hospital campus would be the same as the existing Fairview Southdale Hospital with the majority of the traffic entcring from and exiting to the north. Thus, there is potential for increased queueing at the northbound ramp intersection. However, that queueing is of short duration and the impact would not be considered to be significant. Please contact me if further information or clarification is required on this estimated traffic generation matter. S' David R. Kpski .E. Senior Associate fit: jkc Barton - Aschman Associates, Inc. ESTIMATED TRAFFIC GENERATION FOR PROPOSED FAIRVIEW SCUIfDAIE HOSPITAL DEVETJJPMENT 1. Medical Office Building - 75,000 GSF Time Trite Generated - Enter Exit A.M. Peak Hour (France Avenue) 35 8 P.M. Peak Hour (France Avenue) 80 82 A.M. Peak Hour (Fairview MOB) 107 104 P.M. Peak Hour (Fairview MOB) 107 85 2. Radiation MIeraPY Unit (Existing) - 4,200 GSF Time Trips Generated Enter Exit A.M. Peak Hour (France Avenue) 2 1 P.M. Peak Hour (France Avenue) 4 5 A.M. Peak Hour (Radiation Facility) 6 6 P.M. Peak Hour (Radiation Facility) 6 5 3. Special Treatment Facility - 30,000 GSF Time Trips Generated Enter Exit A.M. Peak Hour (France Avenue) 14 3 P.M. Peak Hour (France Avenue) 32 33 A.M. Peak Hour (Special Treatment Facility) 43 42 P.M. Peak Hour (Special Treatment Facility) 43 34 ?IzC/ 7z.-",-Cg ,4-e d -UoDcr� SP�A--c &-� Ian . _ .- - 3.30 May 14, 1987 Edina City Council City Council Chambers City H11 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Ladies and Gentlemen of the Council: I am not able to attend the City Council meeting on Monday, May 18 because of an accident which has me homebound. However, I want to register my protest against the proposed Fairview Southdale Hospital.expansion plans, as I have in two previous planning commission meetings and one City Council meeting. . Fairview Southdale considers itself to be within its rights to expand as long as it does not violate existing restrictions. That is much too narrow a view of the problem. Fairview Southdale's proposed office building and parking ramp will impact on a residential area to'the definite detriment of the homeowners in the area. In purchasing residences in the Colony, homeowners did not expect or anticipate the commercialization of adjoining properties. We felt that the hospital would be a good barrier between France Avenue and its attendant congestion, noise and other problems. However, now those problems are threatening to come to the very boundaries of our homes and the land they sit on. My bedroom windows overlook the hospital parking lot. I am on the second floor and am able to see people moving innocently about the parking lot as they go to and from their cars. However, the scope of the proposed parking ramp will hide the actions of people using it. Theft and vandalism, first in the ramp and eventually in our garages, parking spaces and homes, becomes a real possibility. With the commercial development proposed, my property will lose value; very few people want to live in a congested, high traffic, densely- crowded urban area such as will result from the expansion. I feel very powerless- -the hospital has purchased the time and expertise of those who minimize the obvious problems and maximize the "importance" of having a multi -story office building and concrete slab parking ramp in Edina. Edina, however, has always been a top - quality residential community. This may be the first clash of the new, urbanized Edina with its present "good neighbor" values. I do not want to be the one who has to pay the price, financially and aesthetically, of Edina's swing to urbanization and commercialization. City Council May 14, 1987 Page 2 As a taxpayer, voter and Edinan, I ask that you not destroy my suburban home by urbanizing the area. The Colony has been here as long as the hospital and should not be victimizrd by Fairview Southdale's need to lock local physicials in to its services. Please vote NO on the Fairview Southdale proposition. Sincerely, Ma Mlice Reyn Ids 6401 Colony Way, #2D Edina, MN 55435 929 -1948 (h) 925 -3901 (w) May 14, 1987 The Honorable C. Wayne Courtney Mayor of Edina City Hall Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney, I am very concerned regarding the diminished quality of life we here at the Colony of Edina will face if the Physician's Association is permitted to continue its plans for another office building in this residential area. Having been a member of this Association since its inception, I know that many of us are retired and have planned to enjoy our "golden years" quietly in this mature community with its lovely grounds, buildings and private roads that we have maintained with great care and pride. The increase in pollution, noise, and traffic in our proximity will be inevitable. No amount of landscaping and shrubbery can hide the fact that we will be alongside a stockade -like wall. These negative aspects will mean a significant loss in property values for the Colony and its owners. We do believe in projects that have not only a good business purpose, but also ones that benefit the greater community. In my opinion, this project is unnecessary and will only benefit a few at the expense of the many, namely, the nearby residents. Sincerely yours,, XR,t,� q ! / , na"Ld-el Lucille M. Mahnke 6409 Colony Way Edina, MN 55435 , " --Ii- AICL ` G.--�- t n � � C 6 Tlle� 92 4., ark �--V-LOA- cep 4��OZ f.J wj4-064VOC Lam/- � -�•�.� '�Y -�ti- -c E • � �Ld. -rr'�4 e ' {vlt.t ~T':"�l`."g� �i�- �E ` / Y� �� %� �r��l I (�/ 1 `��lt.�L �.(.� • �. Bob & Lila Wiggins 6421 Colony Way 1A Edina, MN 55435 .S /,2-/7 -- - - -- - - - - - -- - ---- - - - - -- x AL Al- a- 3 May 11, 1987 Case File P -86 -5 Purpose: To construct a new five story Medical Office Building and Parking Ramp Dear Edina Council Members: I hereby submit that the proposed building not be built. In the first place a reason for it has not been put before the Council. All doctors have offices in the adjacent Medical Arts Building, or in the hospital itself. Furthermore, I do not think the traffic on Barrie Road would decrease. It would increase! There is enough traffic on this road as it is without adding more to it! Just ask any pedestrian how hard it is to cross the road in early morning or rush hour evening, and they will tell you you can literally get run over. Just ask me,.I am a pedestrian of the Colony. Thirdly, the hospital has done us no favors in putting emmision gases into the air which we do not need to breath! As a resident of Edina I would like to breath clean air! Drainage would be a great problem since all drainage would flow directly into the colony causing the apartments adjacent to the proposed building much harm. I also would detest having to look out onto a two city block of cement:: What are you really trying to prove by blocking us in like that. I enjoy the view of the hospital and could not accept a 660 ft. wall in front of those apartments. Lastly, as I stated before, there is no need for this high rise office building. If you can show the Colony staff sufficient cause to build this, it may be thought about. I hate to think of all the people the Colony would lose because of this site going up. Please think of the public needs also:: Sincerely, n Cpl Laure[ K. Curtis 6355 Barrie Rd. Edina, MN 55435 May 12, 1987 Mr. Fred Richards 7225 Fleetwood Drive Edina, Mn. 55435 Dear Mr. Richards: I am writing this on behalf of myself as a homeowner and resident of the Colony of Edina ( "Colony ") and as a member of the board of directors of the Colony Condominium Association. On Wednesday, April 29, 1987 the Edina Planning Commission ( "Commission ") heard, for the third time, a proposal to build a large office building and parking ramp on the Fairview Southdale Hospital ( "Fairview ") property. The Commission had unanimously voted against the proposal at the first two meetings. The April 29 vote was a 4 -4 tie and, as I understand the procedure, will come to the council for review and decision on that basis. Fairview acknowledged in writing last fall that this project would have a negative effect on the Colony. At the same time they proclaim that they are and have been good neighbors. They and their consultants have said a lot of words, but they lack conviction, based on their actual disregard for the Colony todate: trash blows in from their property onto the Colony grounds where we have to pick it up, they talk about all the landscaping they plan to do, but have done very little so far to enhance the area next to their existing parking and trash burner areas (they have allowed an originally scrubby hedge to die and the other plantings are sparse). They brought in refuse from outside sources on a contract basis to burn in their incinerator, causing excessive vibration, noise and sub- stantial visible pollution for Colony residents. The hazards of the invisible gases and dioxins are not known and Fairview does not care. We had to initiate action to curb the growing noise and pollution caused by their incinerator. A good neighbor would have been far more sensitive to the health and comfort of their residential neighbors. Only when we went to the Pollution Control Agency did they acknowledge some of what they were doing. The above are examples of their professed concern for their residential neighbors. The fact is that Fairview has gone ahead without regard for the Colony at all, and has only backed off a bit when forced_to. One would think a hospital, of all entities, would show leadership in areas of trash, noise, smoke and other emmissions and visual pollution. As a professed leader in health care, why would they have not have been mindful of the potentially serious health aspects of what they have done before subjecting people to significant discomfort and health hazards? Page 2 May 12, 1987 Fairview in their presentations of the project has spent a great amount of time, with fancy artist drawings and abundant verbiage, to try to convince people as to how concerned they are with aesthetics and beautification of the area. Their actual deeds and actions over the years clearly demonstrate exactly the opposite. They have had a chance to prove their professed good faith and have failed. If this factor is important in your decision, then I felt you must know the truth as it exists. Fairview has implied during the public meetings that they have met with the Colony and that we are fully informed and satisfied with what they are doing. This is not true! They have. made almost no effort to keep us informed. Everyone agrees, including Fairview, that there will be a negative impact in the Colony from a visual, traffic, safety/ security and pollution standpoint. On the visual aspect, they are proposing a very unsightly 660 foot parking ramp. I can't think of a ramp that long in the whole city of Minneapolis. Is it proper to put a structure like that right next to a fine residential area? The Colony and Fairview were started at about the same time. In the intervening 20 years or so, they have received several variations and made many additions. Each of these added some to the problems cited above, and the cumulative negative effect on the Colony has been significant. We now reach the point where it appears that the Fairview site is fully built and has access from only one side. What is the sense of now trying to squeeze a large office building and parking ramp on a land area that cannot accomodate it without substantial negative impact on the neighborhood? If this were a modest project specifically to enhance the hospital services, I (speaking for myself only) would look upon it more favorably. This would be more in keeping with prior additions. Now we- come to a large parking ramp and office building to be developed by and for the benefit of outside people. There is no documented evidence that the hospital needs more space, nor that the overall medical services of the community will be enhanced. In fact, Fairview to -date at the open forums has refused to specify their occupancy. I have learned::from= the - Metropolitan Council that at the end of 1985 Fairview Southdale Hospital had 390 official registered beds, with 54.52 occupancy. It appears that the hospital has a huge surplus of beds and space. And from general reading, this is presently true of the entire metropolitan area. One could easily conclude that this area has a surplus of medical services available. This is probably why Fairview has been so reluctant to cite specifics re need. They have preferred Page 3 May 12, 1987 to skirt the issue with generalities and plethora of words (not supported by action from the wonderful opportunity they have had for several years) about being good neighbors and landscaping. I am not familiar with the tax status of the hospital or the proposed office building and parking ramp. I hope there is no favored tax treatment either direct or indirect. I do know that we at the Colony pay full taxes on 308 units. Edina is a fine community. There is a good balance among residential, commercial, industrial, retail, services etc. It appears that Fairview has reached its practical maximum building density for that site. I suppose that a well thought through plan and documented need for small additional hospital services in the future would merit consideration. With occupancy currently so low, that does not seem imminent. While the land area seems filled to capacity now, small potential expansion of the hospital , per se, would be in keeping with past additions. A large office building and parking ramp do not fit that concept. Finally, must people in their own homes be subjected to growing impingement on their health and safety and property values by outside forces that could be controlled? A hospital is one thing, but a large office building and huge parking ramp ? ?? The Colony is a highly desirable living area for over 500 good, tax paying, spending Edina citizens. The Colony property was developed for all practical purposes at the time as Fairview. We have lived in harmony for these two decades, although Fairview has added to its complex several times and caused some impingement on the Colony - especially traffic and pollution (air, visual, noise, trash). The Colony has maintained very high standards of repair and maintenance through painting, caulking, resurfacing, and replacement when necessary. The Colony has A STATED OBJECTIVE OF MAINTAINING and enhancing property values. Beyond good maintenance, an additional many tens of thousands of dollars have been spent toward this end: sprinkler system, new and additional flowers, shrubs and trees, beautiful pool and common room. But more and more we are being overwhelmed by Fairview - by the cumulative effect of their many additions over the years, and now the breaking point: a large office building and huge cement parking ramp. Once a neighbohood turns down, it seldom revives, or only at a great cost. For the kind of complex the Colony is, the balance is quite delicate. If the impingement continues, it could easily tip over to the downside and in 20 years become 27 acres of run -down, unsightly housing. An area of this size has the potential to become a serious blight in,Edina. I believe the Commission re- cognized this in the first two meetings; but the last meeting re- Page 4 May 12, 1987 sulted in a divided opinion. It is hard to understand the change in thinking. Perhaps it was the Fairview consultant's great emphasis on beautification through landscaping. There were no new facts presented. Perhaps we did not tell our story as well as we could - we came as voluntary community service directors and individual citizens, without the benefit of highly paid staff, consultants and slide presentations. Some of the new members of the Commission did not have the perspective of the earlier meetings to grasp fully what is going on here. The magnitude of what Fairview is proposing must be carefully evaluated. This is not a minor addition; it is a large project. Fairview says they have reduced the size of their plan "to accomodate the Colony and others in the area ". This is a straw man concert. The true fart remains that a five -story 65,000 square foot building is big, and especially so relative to the existing density of the area. And on top of that, Fairview wants a 380 foot extension of the existing 280 foot parking ramp for a 660*(more than two football fields long) concrete eyesore over 15 feet high right up against the Colony's western border. Many thanks for "hearing" me out; and please show this to the other Council members if it is appropriate. Si erely, Curtis Hirschey - �-�..� cif 6��- QG- - ,_. -�C�LC i�3 r zo a-w � �z~ „� /� % � —off �� w�� _ „� emu, c�a�,� WIV aL I May 112 1987 City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, Mn. 55424 Gentlemen: We are unable to attend the meeting on the 18th in regard to the above, so we are submitting our names as opposed to ths. We are residents of the Colony (for 20 years) and feel this would definitely decrease the value of our property, as well as adding much traffic to the Colony area. Thank you. Yours truly, Ralph ana Rose Marie Broom 6316 Barrie Road 1B Edina, Mn. 55435 CONKEY ASSOCIATES, INC. May 11, 1987 Edina City Council City Council Chambers Edina City Hall 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55436 Re: Fairview Southdale Hospital Medical Office Building Parking Ramp Dear Council Members: It is my understanding that you are to consider a variance to allow the reference construction which is adjacent to property which I own -- Condominium Unit 3F, 6423 Colony Way. I consider that the construction of such unscheduled buildings, which require a variance to height and set -back restrictions, is unfair to the adjacent property owners. It will only put pressure on the market price of my unit. Assuming that the decrease could range,up to 5%, this will then cost me in the neighborhood of $2,200. Why should I be subjected to such a devaluation? I doubt seriously that the applicant would state that my property value would be enhanced by their proposed building. I urge that the Edina City Council deny the variance to the current height and set back restrictions. Very Aruly yours, Ddvid -R. Conkey 4360 Brookside urt, #205 Edina, MN 5543 DRC:ea Mary K. Galvani 6409 Colony Way - Apt. 2B Edina, MN 55435 May 14, 1987 Members of Edina City Council Edina City Hall Dear Council Members: My daughter, an original renter of our apartment, purchased this property in 1979. She was married to a New York man in 1982. She tried unsuccessfully to sell her apartment for the next four years. Although other apartments in the Colony sold easily the 325 foot cement wall parking ramp directly across from her only two windows made sales impossible. She lost money during the next four years and to relieve her of the burden we purchased the apartment from her. She was cheated by Fairview Hospital of her property value. If you grant Fairview Hospital the right to construct a new five story office and 350 foot additional cement wall parking ramp as requested, you are cheating the other owners out of their property value. This project will become a ghetto that will cost millions in police protection. The hospital itself will live to regret your decision when it finds its patients molested, its corridors violated, its employees resigning and its neighbor- hood degenerated. These citizens have paid for the education of these Doctors who now wish to cheat them. They pay the high expense of poor coverage medicare. They realize that most of their savings will be lost in their terminal illness. Do they deserve during productive years to live in an environment where the air is polluted by the wastes of other hospitals, the grease and debris of an oversized parking lot and the sky blocked out by cement structures that elevate its pollution at all levels. In this day of enlightenment what kind of a hospital would finance this plan to the detriment of a community? It is highly questionable that the level of its services would be of any value to its patients. I do hope that you have the great courage to reject their sophisticated campaign as hazardous not only to the immediate neighborhood but to the community at large. Thank you for your time and consideration. Mary K. Galvani May 14, 1987 To: Members of Edina City Council Case File: P -86 -5 - (To construct a new five story medical office building and parking ramp in the Fairview Southdale Hospital complex) Dear members of Edina City Council: My concerns and questions regarding the above proposal are as follows: (1) Thefe will be a great increase in population density. (2) More pollution (water, drainage and litter). (3) Less pedestrian safety in and out of the colony area. (4) Costly sewer and water requirements would be necessary. (5) Is the Fairview Hospital considered a non - profit organization, thereby possibly receiving tax concessions? (6) The granting of a Doctor's Office Building site by the property owner would be in violation (as I see it) of the land approval status given to Fairview (they would be granting permission for a commercial development to be built for a profit organization). (7) We have been told that this building and increased parking ramps are required to update or improve the hospital facilities. This I do not understand. (8) Currently there are many office buildings in the Southdale- Cross -Town area that are vacant and many more being built without prospects at present of being completely occupied. There are many large buildings (five that I have counted) along the west side of France Avenue from 65th Street to 76th Street that are either for rent, lease or sale. Many of these could be revised for Doctor's offices. Why then must another "White Elephant Building" be built where there is insufficient space? (9) I understand that since 1964 or 1965 when Fairview Southdale Hospital was build there have been three variants requested by them and all had been granted. At the rate of these variants is there any indication that future requests will not be made? (10) What I see happening would be the conversion of a number one desirable home owner areatoa %condary less desirable area with decreasing property values. (11) The City of Edina Health Department should request the state to make an Environmental air quality impact study from two standpoints. (a) Incinerator odor and fly ash emissions and (b) carbon monoxide and lead oxide concentration emissions from the congestion of auto traffic in the Southdale and Cross -Town highway area. May 14, 1987 Members of Edina City Council Page 2 (12) In the fall of 1979 my daughter bought the apartment I now own. At that time she was able to look out of the west bedroom windows to see and enjoy the open green spaces over France Avenue and the Cross -Town highway. In 1982 or 1983 when the present second level parking ramp was built, 100% of this enjoyable view was replaced with a 325 foot cement wall. With the current proposal of another 350 foot second level ramp extension the small view of Cross highway I now have would become a solid cement wall. This would shut us out of the open green spaces cherished by all suburbanites. Thank you, Vincent J. Galvani 6409 Colony Way - 2B Edina, MN 55435 IV. B. To Council Letters received Monday, May 18 regarding Fairview Southdale Hospital Final Development Plan. 10 /f �,- / Y- ff 7 f ' Z e 17 ell May 14, 1987 The Honorable C. Wayne. Courtney Mayor of Edina 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Mayor Courtney: As my work schedule prevents me from attending the Monday evening meeting of the Edina City Council I welcome this opportunity to express my concerns in regards to the Fairview Southdale Hospital building proposal. Background: I purchased my patio home in 1979 and, of course, the hospital was already there. When I.sold my home in Edina, I wanted to remain in Edina for a variety of reasons. The location of the Colony is ideal for a single woman who may be coming home at late hours unescorted. Townhouse complexes tended to be.located farther out and as I have never lived in an apartment I did not want to buy a condo of that variety. Friends asked if I wanted to live across the street from a hospital parking lot but I felt the advantages outweighed the disadvantages. My home is directly across the street from the current parking -ramp. At the most recent Planning Commission meeting the hospital outlined revised plans which included .improving the exterior appearance of the existing ramp. Even though-those improvements would aesthetically improve the view from my home I still appose their plans. Overall those plans are a disaster for the neighborhood. Basically, the hospital should recognize that they have outgrown their "campus" and there is no more room for expansion. Since I moved in the Mortenson Construction equipment has.been located on their property almost continually. I am sure you are aware of the many projects and there is no need for me to list them all but I am sure I can name them all. The hospital property is completely "landlocked" as they are bounded on the east by the Colony, on the north by Country Rd 62, on the west by France Av. and on the south by 65th St. With the only access to this vast and busy complex being from 65th Street that thoroughfare is called upon to carry a large.burden. It cannot handle any more traffic and allow ease of access to the Colony, the Southdale Medical Building, the hospital itself and the many other medical offices located near by. I realize the Colony is tucked into a small residential area in an otherwise commercial neighborhood but it is an attractive neighborhood and everyone has worked to keep it that way. It meets the "Edina image" for multiple housing. The hospital project can only harm our neighborhood. I didn't buy my patio home as an investment. I bought it as my residence. I have made some improve- ments to my private patio -- redwood deck, antique brick /patio block /ground ivy surface, and many plantings, both annual and perennial. I don't have any plans to sell in the near or distant future but I cannot afford to take a big loss if I do find it necessary to sell. I fear this whole corner of Edina will suffer if this project goes through and all property values-will drop. The proposed ramp is as long as two football fields and will be an eyesorg- even with the planned "improvements" to its exterior. There will be addition pollution from the increased number of cars and the area will be more vulnerable to lurkers. No matter how many security guards the hospital employs the ramp will be a big problem. Given their track record I cannot believe that the hospital will not be back asking for that additionAa-eck on the parking.ramp if this project is approved. If their new office building is the success they envision, they will need more parking stalls and the only place they have to go is up. Another level on that ramp would cut off more of our light and it would afford everyone a wonderful view of both my patio and my living room. I would have no privacy at all. Currently my bedroom windows, which face the ramp, are protected by mini - blinds. While these are closed tightly.at night when I am in the room, they can be tilted up or down during the daylight hours to allow both privacy and light. With another level to the ramp I wouldn -'t be able to have them open at any time. The west end of my living room is plate glass and I would be living in a gold- fish bowl without heavy draperies. This would cut my view of the lovely patio I have worked to hard to plant /build. You may feel this is borrowing trouble but please look back at the requests the hospital has made over the years. None of us at the Colony trust them because.of past experience. Please do not destroy our neighborhood. Please deny their request. Have they really and truly proved their "need" for this building? While we might be able to live with the proposed building, the traffic and the parking ramp we cannot. Thank you for taking the time to read this. I anxiously await the council's decision. Sincerely yours, Helen R. 'McNulty 6409 Colony Way #lA Edina, MN 55435 May 15, 1987 6437 Barrie Road Edina, MN 55435 City of Edina Planning Department 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN 55424 Dear Planning Department: I am deeply concerned with the Fairview Southdale Hospital wanting to construct a five story medical building and parking ramp. I just recently bought a townhome at the Colony of Edina. Then.I find out about this situation. If I knew that this expansion was developing, I would not have purchased a unit in that vicinity. There will be far too much traffic, and I'm sure that much of it will filter through the Colony; not to mention the pollution and the additional burning of refuse. I find that even now; the burning of refuse from the hospital leaves a terrible order and eminents discolorations into the air - which I am sure is not fit to breath. Please, help us keep our homes as we bought them - in a nice, easy neighborhood - clean and traffic to a minimum. And, I am concerned about anyone that is trying to sell their unit. What will happen to the value; . especially those that will face and units touching the border line of the hospital property. What a shame that would be to those owners. Try to put yourself in our places and see what your answer would be to this project. Thank you for reviewing my point of view on this matter. Sincerely, Susan K. Grohnke rvs E F00 L; '• ? IC FIE�Zr i PICN AREA ARENA I a PAVI ION r- L TRAIL AND PIST RANG w� f f f� 2E � NUMBER S -87 -6 L O C A T 10 N 7777 Washington Avenue REQUEST Rearrangement of property lines CLUE Goff F Cc Mile f EDINA PLANNING DEPAR i'VIENT S -87 -6 Preliminary Plat Approval U.T.F.C. Addition Cherne, Corporation General Location: East of Washington Avenue and north of Highway 494 Mr. Larsen informed the Commission the subject property is zoned Planned Industrial, PID and is developed with a 3 story building on the easterly portion of the property. The south property line is the Bloomington -Edina border. The proponents own this site and the southerly adjacent site in Bloomington. The Bloomington property is undeveloped. Mr. Larsen said the proponents seek to rearrange property lines for the two sites to create a more desirable building site on the Bloomington property. Outlot A of the plat would be attached to the Bloomington site. The Bloomington land east of the creek would be attached to the Edina site. Mr. Larsen pointed out the new building would be constructed on the Bloomington side. Outlot A would be used for a driveway and possibly some parking. The owner will give the City a conservation easement over Outlot A to prevent attempts to develop the site independently in the future. Mr. Larsen concluded staff approval is conditioned on: 1. Final Plat Approval 2. Executed and recorded conservation easement. The proponent, Mr. Bill Cherene was present. A brief discussion ensued between Commission Members and Mr. Cherene. Mr. Runyan noted that as far as Edina is concerned there will not be any changes. Mr. Cherene answered that is correct. Commission Members questioned whether the City of Bloomington was aware of this proposal. Mr. Cherene said the City of Bloomington was aware of the proposal. Mrs. McClelland moved to recommend preliminary plat approval subject to staff conditions. Mr. Runyan seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT APRIL 29, 1987 S -87 -6 Preliminary Plat Approval U.T.F.C. Addition Cherne, Corporation General Location: East of Washington Avenue and north of Highway 494 The subject property is zoned Planned Industrial, PID and is developed with a 3 story building on the easterly portion of the property. The south property line is the Bloomington -Edina border. The proponents own this site and the southerly adjacent site in Bloomington. The Bloomington property is undeveloped. The proponents seek to rearrange property lines for the two sites to create a more desirable building site on the Bloomington property. Outlot A of the plat would be attached to the Bloomington site. The Bloomington land east of the creek would be .attached to the Edina site. The new building would be constructed on the Bloomington side. Outlot A would be used for a driveway and possibly some parking. The owner will give the City a conservation easement over Outlot A to prevent attempts to develop the site independently in the future. Recommendation: Approval conditioned on: 1. Final Plat Approval 2. Executed and recorded conservation easement. i W Z W a Ib \ Z O I ~ Z N N 3 I I i i .e , CD `4 �e C �\ t SeLee \ O of III1--- i------ - - - - -- - - - - --� �= \ - - -� —_ -- �� z 1I \\ ONS� A. — - '' - \ _ ,. I Qom- --- T � � o -- •— T-- 16 116 x1 2 00 \\� i \ T� Z 18 116 21 2 DDJ ' DMELARD 4Yi ADDITION" OJ m i US HIGHWAY NO 494 j SITE LOCATION MAP 1 ,I CHERNE CORP SKETCH OF PROPERTY RON KRUEGER 6 ASBOCIATEB, INC. w, 4 -1 OWNER-DEVELOPEMCHERNE CORP. Co NITH Scale: V-30' GA 0 O O oil -L-584 915 z Z 94,087 SO. FT. X/1 LOT 41 t' SITU Mo.. 29�ka SQ.FT. BLOCK OUTLOT A OWNER-DEVELOPEMCHERNE CORP. Co NITH Scale: V-30' GA 0 O O oil r LSCA730M NA;) rV. D. FULAAL DEVELOPMENT NUMBER P -87 -4 PLA74 L O C A T 10 N 5000 Normandale Road and 5075 Arcadia Avenue REQUEST Construct new office building EDINA PLAIINING DEPARTMENT U- P -87 -4 Regis Corporation 5000 Normandale and 5075 Arcadia 0% Request:' Construct New Office Building Mr. Larsen informed the Commission Regis Corporation has its corporate headquarters at 5000 Normandale. They own the one -story office building at 5075 Arcadia and the bowling alley. Their stated intent is to redevelop this 4.2 acre site as their new corporate headquarters. Redevelopment would occur as their space needs increase. This application is for Phase I of the redevelopment. Mr..Larsen continued Phase I calls for the demolition of the 4100 square foot building at 5075 Arcadia and the construction of a new 3 story building containing a gross floor area of 23, 765 square feet. The new building will be connected to their existing building. Total office area will be 41, 265 square feet. Mr. Larsen added the Zoning Ordinance requires 206 parking spaces for a building this size. Regis is proposing 137 spaces and projecting 167 employees. This parking count does not include the 86 spaces provided for the bowling alley. Regis is proposing a proof of parking agreement to solve any future parking shortages. Mr. Larsen pointed out office buildings are required to provide a 20 foot side yard setback. Portions of the lower walk -out level encroach into this setback. Also, because of the building height, the northeast and southeast corners of the upper level fail to provide the required setbacks. Mr. Larsen said exterior materials of the new building will be glass curtain wall and stone trim. These materials comply with Ordinance standards. The exterior treatment of the existing building would remain unchanged. Regis has indicated that in approximately 5 years they will either tear down the existing building or reskin the building to meet Ordinance requirements. Currently, Arcadia Avenue splits the site north to south. This proposal suggests that the north portion of Arcadia be vacated and incorporated into the Regis site. This vacation is consistent with recommendations made by BRW for the Grandview Area. Mr. Larsen concluded Regis is willing to encumber all of the properties with a proof of parking agreement. We will be able to cure any future parking shortages. He said he does not expect a shortage. The bowling alley is complementary to the office use. The spaces can be effectively shared. The building setback variance is at the least obtrusive portion of the site. It also allows for a more efficient parking arrangement. Due to the elevation of the site, however, the building will be very prominent when viewed from the east. The proposed landscaping is excellent, but some existing landscaping is substandard. Trees missing from the front of the bowling alley should be replaced and the northeast parking area should be screened. Staff recommends plan approval with the following conditions: 1. Staff approval of a. revised landscaping plan. 2. Recorded proof of parking agreement. 3. Vacation of Arcadia right -of -way by City Council. 4. That the variance for exterior materials be temporary, for a period of five years. Mr. Mike Suppes, and Mr. Fox representing the proponent, Regis Corporation were present. Mr. Suppes said the proposed 3 story office building is relatively small. He added the use of this building is strictly for use by Regis. He pointed out the design of the proposed building is contemporary in flavor and materials used will be different colors of curtain wall glass and polished stone. Mr. Runyan asked how the proof of parking would be satisfied if it is warranted. Mr. Suppes said parking will be satisfied by vacating the use of the bowl. The 86 spaces used at that function would then be incorporated into the parking for the proposed facility. Mr. Suppes clarified that Regis Corporation owns the bowl which is why vacation would not be a problem. The bowl site is included with the redevelopment of this site, and long term plans are for its demolition. Mr. Fox, Regis Corporation stated Regis Corporation is growing at a rate of 75 new stores, per year and now employs 9,700 employees. Expansion is needed to accommodate the projected growth. Mr. Suppes said the proposed buildings construction would take place on a step by step basis. Mr. Lee Johnson asked Mr. Larsen how staff would enforce the five year variance limitation. Mr. Larsen said temporary variances for mostly aesthetic reasons on a legal basis may be very hard to enforce but are possible. Mr. Fox said within the existing ordinance this site would fall under the grandfather clause. Regis Corporation has every intention of having their Corporate Office remain in Edina and want a aesthetically pleasing facility. Regis Corporation is committed to develop the total site. A brief discussion ensued regarding the needed variances. Mr. Fox stated Regis would like some flexibility in making developmental decisions. Mr. Runyan pointed out the proposed building faces the freeway where the structure will not impact residential neighborhoods and a sense of spacing is retained. Mr. Bailey commented that the structure will be very prominent on the landscape and this particular area is very populated with office buildings. Mr. Runyan moved for approval subject to staff conditions. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. • A COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT APRIL 29, 1987 P -87 -4 Regis Corporation 5000 Normandale and 5075 Arcadia Existing Zoning: Planned Commercial PC -2 Request: Construct New Office Building Regis Corporation has its corporate headquarters at 5000 Normandale. They own the one -story office building at 5075 Arcadia and the bowling alley. Their stated intent is to redevelop this 4.2 acre site as their new corporate headquarters. Redevelopment would occur as their space needs increase. This application is for Phase I of the redevelopment. Phase I calls for the demolition of the 4100 square foot building at 5075 Arcadia and the construction of a new 3 story building containing a gross floor area of 23, 765 square feet. The new building will be connected to their existing building. Total office area will be 41, 265 square feet. The Zoning Ordinance requires 206 parking spaces for a building this size. Regis is proposing 137 spaces and projecting 167 employees. This parking count does not include the 86 spaces provided for the bowling alley. Regis is proposing a proof of parking agreement to solve any future parking shortages. Office buildings are required to provide a 20 foot side yard setback. Portions of the lower walk -out level encroach into this setback. Also, because of the building height, the northeast and southeast corners of the upper level fail to provide the required setbacks. Exterior materials of the new building will be glass curtain wall and stone trim. These materials comply with Ordinance standards. The exterior treatment of the existing building would remain unchanged. Regis has indicated that in approximately 5 years they will either tear down the existing building or reskin the building to meet Ordinance requirements. Currently, Arcadia Avenue splits the site north to south. This proposal suggests that the north portion of Arcadia be vacated and incorporated into the Regis site. This vacation is consistent with recommendations made by BRW for the Grandview Area. Recommendation Regis is willing to encumber all of the properties with a proof of parking agreement. We will be able to cure any future parking shortages. I do not expect a shortage. The bowling alley is complementary to the office use.. The spaces can be effectively shared. The building setback variance is at the least obtrusive portion of the site. It also allows for a more efficient parking arrangement. Due to the elevation of the site, however, the building will be very prominent when viewed from the east. The proposed landscaping is excellent, but some existing landscaping is substandard. Trees missing from the front of the bowling alley should be replaced and the northeast parking area should be screened. Staff recommends plan approval with the following conditions: 1. Staff approval of a revised landscaping plan. 2. Recorded proof of parking agreement. 3. Vacation of Arcadia right -of -way by City Council. 4. That the variance for exterior materials be temporary, for a period of five years. RGGIS corporation , 5000 NORMANDALE ROAD • MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55436 • 612.929.6776 April 15, 1987 City of Edina Community Development & Planning Commission 4801 West 50th Street Edina, MN. 55424 Re: Regis Corporation Proposed New Office Building 5000 Normandale Road Dear Commission Members: At the request of Mr. Craig Larson, I would like to provide you with an overview of our company and our thoughts regard- ing the short -term and long -term office development potential of our corporate headquarters site and its adjacent lands. Regis Corporation owns and operates a network of high - quality, full- service hairstyling and hair care salons throughout the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico. The Company now operates more than 650 salons under the trade names "Regis Hairstylists," "Your Fathers Mustache," and. "MasterCuts," and is growing at the rate of approximately 75 new salons each year. The Company's stock is traded on the NASDAQ Exchange under the symbol RGIS with the majority of the shares held or controlled by the Kunin family. The Company's President and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Myron Kunin, has grown the Company from a tiny chain of beauty salons within department stores over the past 35 years to its present 'size and sales volume in excess of $175,000,000. Regis moved from Downtown Minneapolis to Edina in 1969. The Company leased the building at 5075 Arcadia from Kansas City Life Insurance Company and officed within the building until the mid -70s. To accommodate continuing growth, the Company acquired the 5000 Normandale Building and gradually expanded the headquarters staff to the present size, 104 employees. Our five -year growth plan forecasts continued steady growth in both sales and earnings. We believe that our headquarters staff will increase by approximately fifty employees during the next five years and that our long -term growth needs, 15 -20 years, can be accommodated by future development on our existing site and the Biltmore Bowl property to the west. As land is needed for parking or future buildings, we plan to demolish the bowl building and consolidate the sites. City of Edina Community Development & Planning Commission April 15, 1987 Page 2 We are owners and occupants of our buildings. It is our intention to occupy 100% of our existing headquarters facility and "grow into" our new proposed building. We will finish space within the new building as we need it rather than leasing the space to small tenants, etc. We plan to remain in this location for many years and hope to build several build- ings, as needed and appropriate to accommodate our growth, which will eventually produce a small, high - quality headquarters campus. We would like to thank the Planning Commission and the City Staff -in advance for your help and cooperation. Respectfully, CORPORATION Christopher A. Fox Vice President, Rea Estate CAF:ns m r L i ZO 7 y ✓Y 7L�lE IN fEEi o c.a. IUI. 4m... a Vl..l ; ..1. �w..n ✓Y 7L�lE IN fEEi loci �0 FM u E • t fl �I C •0 f--1 O ' ^^ V VJ • aj 0 y " e a i v o o < u • 1 I Vernon �, . T L -1ss I aa! Extsting Offl • p 1 �I l.Ey 9.9.0 1 -1 ' HE S. S' N. TO I i 11 BE ON9TqUCTED I 0 , cr TC 30. T ` W Imo/ �,•n .9 .� It Existing Retail I e I �\ & owng Alley wo o B li I � I� Q II 1p TC 1 I i oie.■ qo ' I 11 1 I TC 960. A sMOONEO) �'Vf�V--- -69 --- Li XISII g 4c -_ - Ull l I \ s y_cd4l �� I t•— _ IB.BOO 1 . Utilities Plan II ®� I O >a p I. I I ii u E • t fl �I C •0 f--1 O ' ^^ V VJ • aj 0 y " e a i v o o < u o n .... . - / `uc it n U Q '1 1 O H !! I .............. r i � r \� 4 �.� ffke I I I i� 1 FIN First Level B Grade Level r" r,, A Y e1Mr �1 \ � �- nroo•nr !n• :•P akp. ( ,� I _7— i— i— 'Ij'' o7�4i1 - -,\ 1 I . 1 I ; I \' I , .Lower Level i t 1 III s`S iQ n� S UI N �z z C�i Q OW J a Q O S V ° O O W) V w o � o b � s y o a p � o o u � .,l�. I I I 1 B Grade Level r" r,, A Y e1Mr �1 \ � �- nroo•nr !n• :•P akp. ( ,� I _7— i— i— 'Ij'' o7�4i1 - -,\ 1 I . 1 I ; I \' I , .Lower Level i t 1 III s`S iQ n� S UI N �z z C�i Q OW J a Q O S V ° O O W) V w o � o b � s y o a p � o o u � ptllllll ;npo "molmi.imm-7 — vlv�m','r . 'gill Sect on A Building Sections i East Elevation West Elevation Building Elevations i I n u: i,. N O � o C'd a J a 4 O� V 0 bA v =e a<se iv.E AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 21 of ORDINANCE NO. 8 ?R Mr. Larsen informed the Commission Section 21 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates and controls activities-within the designated flood plain. Regulation of activities in the floodplain is mandated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the agency responsible for federally backed flood insurance. Our Ordinance was taken from.a model Ordinance provided by FEMA. Mr. Larsen pointed out from time to'time FEMA audits our rules and the administration of those rules. Continued eligibility or Edina property owners to receive flood insurance depends on our performance. The attached letter indicates the results of the most recent audit. In order to comply Section 21, paragraph F.I. (ii) must be amended to delete references to flood proofing methods other than structurally dry methods. Mr. Larsen asked the Commission to refer to their packet and read the following addition: must be floodproofed by structurally dry methods as certified by a registered engineer. A brief discussion ensued. Mr. Runyan moved to recommend the amendment to Section 21 of Ordinance No. 825. Mrs. Shaw seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried. IV.E M E M O R A N D U M TO: Community Development and Planning Commission FROM: Craig Larsen, City Planner SUBJECT: Amendments to Section 21 of Ordinance No. 825 Floodplain Overlay District DATE: April 24,-1987 Section 21 of the Zoning Ordinance regulates and controls activities within the designated flood plain. Regulation of activities in the floodplain is mandated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the agency responsible for federally backed flood insurance. Our Ordinance was taken from a model Ordinance provided by FEMA, From time to time FEMA audits our rules and the. administration of those rules. Continued eligibility of Edina property owners to receive flood insurance depends on our performance. The attached letter indicates the results of the most recent audit. In order to comply Section 21, paragraph F.I. (ii) must be amended to delete references to flood proofing methods other than structurally dry methods. Proposed Deletion: (i) all residential structures shall be constructed so that the basement floor, or first floor if there is no basement, is above the regulatory flood protection elevation; and (ii) any nonresidential structure with a basement floor, or first floor if there is no basement, not elevated above the regulatory flood protection elevation must be floodproofed in accordance with the floodproofing regulations made a part of the Minnesota State Building Code as, and to the extent, adopted by the City. Proposed Addition: .....must be floodproofed by structurally dry methods.... Federal Emergency Management Agency Region V 300 South. Wacker, 24th Floor, Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 353 -1500 April 7, 1987 Mr. Gordon Hughes Assistant City Manager City of Edina - City Hall 480 W. -50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 Dear Mr. Hughes, We appreciate the cooperation shown to Jeanne Millin during the Community Assessment Visit (CAV) held on March 25 1987. We hope this meeting was informative to participating City officials. As you know, an important aspect of this meeting was the review of local floodplain management regulations and enforcement practices. Edina's practices and regulations demonstrate an awareness of floodplain matters. Our assessment determined that the community has qualified staff adminis- tering the flood hazard areas. As was discussed at the meeting, you will need to amend your floodplain ordinance to change Sectiom 21.F, "Additional Restrictions ". This section permits the construction of floodproofed residential basements below the base flood elevation and allows floodproofing of non - residential structures to FP 1 and FP 2 levels, The language allowing floodproofed residential basements must be removed. In addition, FEMA allows only structurally dry floodproofing, e.g. dams, dikes and levees are not allowed. Section 21*F.ii should reflect this restriction. Please provide this office with a copy of the watershed regulations used for administering the designated floodway and a copy of the amendments prior to June 1, 1987. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Jeanne Millin at (312) 886 -72870 Sincerely, tuart A. Rifkind, Chief Natural Hazards Branch Natural and Technological Hazards Division V.A. CITY OF EDINA 4801 W. 50th Street Edina, Minnesota 55424 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON VACATION OF EASEMENT FOR UTILITY PURPOSES IN THE CITY EDINA HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Edina, . Hennepin County, Minnesota, will meet at the Edina City Hall, 4801 W. 50th Street on May 18, 1987, at 7:00 p.m., for the purpose of holding a public hearing on the proposed vacation of the-.following easement for utility purposes: -` The North 5.00 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, WINSOR ADDITION All persons who desire to be heard with respect to the question of whether or not the above proposed easement vacation is in the public interest and should be made shall be heard at said time and place.. The Council shall consider the extent to which such proposed easement vacation affects existing easements within the area of the proposed vacation and the extent to which the vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning or controlling electric or telephone poles and lines, gas and sewer lines, or water pipes, mains, and hydrants on or under the area of the proposed vacation, to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such easement area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise attend thereto, for the purpose of specifying, in any such vacation resolution, the extent to which any or all of any such easements, and such authority to maintain, and to enter upon the area of the-proposed vacation-,-shall continue. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL. Marcella M. Daehn City Clerk Dated May 1, 1987 r� wr:sr Itne of the SE 1/4 of the SW 4 w y.••.� •t • 1. +� ,� \ to ' , s..• '1 � ! ��-, } ; J! L - u 1 •A �; w'1 .. i'1 :f.b ty.l :-•i 1. .. � i l�y�j :y , I rr ti ra ..�� '',i � ',g_. r�� it i -Yw r•. - i � , ... 't - r � J.v+;• ROAD 3 Lo Co — 157.42 m �O i•y�'fry• ?1Vy, 120 _ 0 1 Op ``7 w — O rn I N ' O N fV i 2 N rn A j' 1 ' 1 4� I � � r7l w C 3 ' O 2 I w i line porollei the West line U W / \of the SW I/4 of Sec. 8 r. o ~ 0 148.6 ---- _ s, . .`. 276.61 _ — - ;r 148 8 line porollel with the West line of t I o he SE I/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec 8 REOUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Francis J. Hoffman, City Engineer VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000 DATE: May 14, 1987 Material Description (General Specifications): VII.A W. 50th St. Construction from Edina Court to Halifax Avenue - BA -265, WM -362 & SS -376 Engineer's Estimate - $355,057.45 Quotations /Bids: Company 1. Bury & Carlson, Inc. 2. Alexander Construction Co., Inc. 3. Hardrives, Inc. Amount of Quote or Bid $369,000.00 $394,084.22 $399,668.60 * No other bids - We were not expecting many due to nature of job scheduling. Department Recommendation: Bury & Carlson, Inc. $369,000.00 P»hlit Wnrkg - FnginPering Signatur Department Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is is not within the amount budget for the purchase. ohn Wallin, Finance irector Ci�Manager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: l� K nne Rosland, City _ nager REQUEST FOR PURCA4SE TO: Mayor and City Council ?ROM: Francis Hoffman, Director of Public Works VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000 DATE: May 14, 1987 Material Description (General Specifications): 2 Reversible Front End Snow Plows for Trucks Funded tl Quotations /Bids: Company 1. La Hass Mfg. & Sales 2. Little Falls Machine 1. No other comparable bids Department Recommendation: $6,350.00 La Hass Mfg. & Sales $6,247.00 Public Works - Streets SigrXture,, Department Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is is not within the amount budget for the purchase. a4, �") John Wallin, FinanciiDirector City Manager's Endorsement: 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: Irk Ken eth Rosland, City Manager REQUEST FOR PURCHASE TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Francis J. Hoffman, Dir. of Public Works VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE OF ITEM IN EXCESS OF $5,000 DATE: May 14, 1987 Material Description (General Specifications): Replacement of Well Motor - 200 H.P. Pleuger -TRW Submersible Motor Emergency Purchase (Sole supplier in South Carolina) Initially Funded by Utility Funds Quotations /Bids: Company 1. Layne Minnesota 2. 3. VII.0 Amount of Ouote or Bid $15,169.00 * Motor Damaged by Contractor - City placing claim. However, motor must be replaced immediately due to nature of this dry Spring. Department Recommendation: Layne Minnesota Finance Director's Endorsement: The recommended bid is is not City.- Afanager's Endorsement: $15,169.00 J Public Works - Utilities Signat re Department within the amount budget for the purchase. Q,t, Wa-t & ('9"") Jo Wallin, Finance D' ctor 1. I concur with the recommendation of the Department and recommend Council approve the purchase. 2. I recommend as an alternative: Kenneth Rosland,((, City Manager * Mayor will ask for assistance from time to time to serve on this committee.. ** Commitee will be dissolved in the reasonable near future. VIII.A. Recycling Commission Heritage Preservation Board Board of Appeals & Adjustments Citizens Committee for Braemar Sports Comples Centennial Commission City /School Liaison Regarding liaison to the City's advisory boards /commissions, it is not necessary for the Council members to attend every meeting. However, they should keep abreast of what they are doing and respond to any questions.or issues raised. COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITIES Mayor Courtney Fred Richards Leslie Turner Peggy Kelly * Personnel (City Manager) Park Board Community Development & Art Center Mayor's Cable Program Building Construction Planning Commission Human Relations Commission Special Appearances Appeals Board SHHSC Board Member Community Health Services Mayor Pro -Tem ** Council representative to Advisory Committe Centennial Commission - I -494 Corridor Study Edinborough Development Advisory Boards /Commissions SWSCC Chair Liaison Council representative to Appointments Chair LMC: Program Planning Municipal Legislative Strategic Planning process Centennial Commission Committee Government Affairs Commission Centennial Commission Member Community Action for Committee ** Co -chair - Edina School Board Suburban Hennepin (CASH) AMM: Government Affairs Community Services Task Force AMM: Revenue Committee Committee School liaison AMM: Board Member Housing_..Committee Chair. Metropolitan Task Force re Effects of Baby Boom on Housing Market * Mayor will ask for assistance from time to time to serve on this committee.. ** Commitee will be dissolved in the reasonable near future. VIII.A. Recycling Commission Heritage Preservation Board Board of Appeals & Adjustments Citizens Committee for Braemar Sports Comples Centennial Commission City /School Liaison Regarding liaison to the City's advisory boards /commissions, it is not necessary for the Council members to attend every meeting. However, they should keep abreast of what they are doing and respond to any questions.or issues raised. VIII.B. MEMORANDUM TO: KENNETH ROSLAND, CITY MANAGER FROM: MARCELLA DAEHN, CITY CLERK SUBJECT: APPLICATION FOR ON -SALE BEER LICENSE - �3�RESTAURANT DATE: MAY 14, 1987 The City has received an application for an On -Sale 3.2 Beer License from the Good Earth Restaurant, 3460 West 70th Street. The license application is being processed through the Police and Health Departments now. This should be placed on the Council Agenda for May 18 and Council approval should be conditioned on final clearance and approval by those departments. VIII.0 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor & City Council FROM: Leslie Turner, I -494 PMT Fran Hoffman, I -494 P SUBJECT: Public Hearing .(5/6/87) & Freeway Alternatives.: Attached are documents pertaining to the Public Hearing held on May 6th at the Edina Community Center. Attachments A and B are for your information which you may wish to discuss.: Attacjment C is the first "cut" on narrowing the potential alternatives for the freeway. This narrowing of alternatives was completed by the core group repre- senting the RTB, Met Council, MNDOT and consultant. Please read Page 3 re- commendations for discussion Monday evening. The project management team has not taken any action on these recommendations.. However considerable discussion occurred over the long range strategies for the I -494 Mainline. LT: FH:lm 5/15/87 Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area 300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Streets St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612 291- 6359/TDD 291 -0904 DATE: May 12, 1987 TO: I -494 Project Management Team FROM: Connie Kozlak SUBJECT: Report on I -494 Public Meeting The public meeting held May 6 at the Edina Community Center was attended by about 90 -100 people. From the addresses on the sign -in sheets, the majority were from Richfield and Bloomington, with about 10 people from Eden Prairie and Edina and two people from Minnetonka. Gary Peterson welcomed people to the meeting and introduced the project management team members, staff and consultant. Dick Wolsfeld presented the study area, plan components, population and employment forecasts, and traffic forecasts. He then explained the alternatives being considered. We did not show the video due to the size of the crowd, but we did announce that it would be shown on local cable channels. Katie Turnbull then presented the transit and travel demand management concepts that are being considered. The meeting was opened to comments and questions, which were answered by Dick Wolsfeld. These were: - How will these improvements be financed? - Does metering freeways work? - Can you meter directional interchanges? - How many of the trips on I -494 are through trips? - How does the cost of these improvements compare to other roads and what is the priority of I -494 with Mn/DOT? - If you eliminate flyways (directional interchanges) you lower the cost. These flyways block the view of adjacent property, lowering property values. - Would the presence or absence of LRT do anything? - Has controlled development been considered? - Has the impact of added lanes on noise and air been considered? - Richfield is getting a bad deal with the closing of interchanges. - Will it be necessary to close 80th between France and TH 100? - There is no where for cars to go, we need 16 lanes like they have in Toronto, the sane lane is a joke. - A 35 year resident of Richfield said he has watched Mn /DOT screw -up one highway after another; travel demand management puts expense and inconvenience on individual drivers; we should have a grid of streets instead of funneling all the traffic to freeways. - Concerned about the expense of freeways. Will interchanges be built to accommodate extra lanes? - What about businesses, especially franchises, lost due to the improvements on 24th Ave. South? Establish a monorail or subway to reduce trips on freeways. Does this cost estimate include a new, rebuilt freeway or just the extra lanes? How much disruption will there be? Does the sane lane really carry more people? At nine o'clock all questions were answered and Gary Peterson closed the meeting. Comment cards were distributed at the beginning of the meeting for those who did not wish to speak from the floor. One written comment was turned in, stating that for TH 77 to be any good I -494 must be widened and 77th St. must be widened too. One written comment was also received by the Metropolitan Council prior to the meeting expressing an urgent need to improve I -494 highway lighting between France Ave. and Highway 5 and continuing up Highway 5 to the airport. AGN494 /PHTRN1 @5 `y I -494 CORRIDOR STUDY PUBLIC MEETING MAY 6, 1987 AGENDA 1. Introduction : Gary Peterson - Project Management Team Chair 2. Study Background : Richard Wolsfeld - BRW, Inc. 3. Geometric Alternatives : Richard Wolsfeld 4. Transit and Travel Demand Management: Katherine Turnbull - Regional Transit Board 5. Questions /Comments 1-5 Institutional Structure Land Development I -494 CORRIDOR PLAN COMPONENTS Roadway Capacity 1 -494 Corridor Study Travel Demand Managemen l MUNICIPAL COMPARISONS OF POPULATION 1 -494 CORRIDOR STUDY 300 280 260 240 220 200 Z- 80 Op i c ISO i i 140 ot 120 ID0 80 60 40 20 n WIDE 2010 -A 2010 -8 ANALYSIS DATA BASE PERIOD 3 2.8 2.6 2.4 21 2 1.8 A� o. Z o I.6 IL 1.4 F 11 I 0.8 0.6 0.4 01 n MUNICIPAL COMPARISONS OF EMPLOYMENT 1 -494 CORRIDOR STUDY 300 280 260 240 220 200 Z 1 180 W9 } 0 160 03' o p 140 t W v 120 100 80 60 40 20 n ODSTRIG 2010 -A 2010 -8 ANALYSIS DATA BASE PERIOD MUNICIPAL COMPARISONS OF TRIP ENDS 1-494 CORRIDOR STUDY EXISTING 1010 -A 1010 -8 ANALYSIS DATA BASE PERIOD I -494 CORRIDOR STUDY UNIVERSE OF ALTERNATIVES MAY 5, 1987 The alternatives for improvements in the I -494 Corridor have been separated into four categories: mainline alternatives, system interchanges, access inter- changes, and parallel arterial alternatives. This memo presents all the-alter- natives which remain after the preliminary screening by the Project Management Team. I. MAINLINE ALTERNATIVES A. Alternative 1: Existing situation plus metered ramps, preferential access, and Travel Demand Management (TDM). B. Alternative 2: Add one general purpose lane in each direction throughout the corridor plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TDM. C. Alternative 3: Add one high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction throughout the corridor, plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TDM. D. Alternative 4: Add two general purpose lanes in each direction throughout the corridor, plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TDM. E. Alternative 5: Add one general purpose and one HOV lane in each direction throughout the corridor, plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TDM. II. ALTERNATIVES FOR REGIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM INTERCHANGES A. CSAH 62 Interchange (See Baker Road Area Alternatives) 1. Existing situation /No build - Full diamond interchange. 2. Improve interchange and CSAH 62 /Clearwater Drive access. B. Washinqton Avenue /CSAH 18 /West Bush Lake Road /East Bush Lake Road Area 1. Existing situation /No build - Full diamond interchange, no access to I -494 at Washington Avenue or West Bush Lake Road. 3. Interchange at Baker Road /I -494 (alternatives discussed below). No change at Clearwater Drive /CSAH 62, and no change at CSAH 62/ 1-494. a. Existing situation /No build - No access to I -494. b. Modified diamond interchange - Existing Baker Road alignment. c. Diamond interchange - Existing Baker Road alignment. d. Diamond interchange - Baker Road realignment east of I -494 on the C &NW railroad ROW. e. Half- diamond interchange - Baker Road realigned on the C &NW railroad ROW. f. Split- diamond interchange between the existing Baker Road alignment and the C &NW railroad alignment. 4. Interchange at Baker Road /I 494 (alternatives discussed above), reduce the emphasis on access at Clearwater Drive /CSAH 62 (close median, overpass with no access, etc.). 5. Combination of improvements described in both Alternatives 2 and 3. B. Area Between Nicollet and TH 77 1. Existing situation /No build 2. Full diamonds at Nicollet and Portland, remove access at 12th. Provide additional overpasses as necessary. 3. Full diamond at Portland, remove access at Nicollet and 12th. Provide additional overpasses as necessary. IV. FRONTAGE ROADS /DETACHED FRONTAGE ROADS /PARALLEL ARTERIALS A. CSAH 62 to TH 169 1. Existing situation /No build. B. TH 169 to TH 100 1. South side a. Existing situation - 78th between West Bush Lake Road and TH 169, none between East and West Bush Lake Roads, Green Valley Road between East Bush Lake Road and TH 100. b. Add frontage road between East and West Bush Lake Roads. 2. North side a. Existing situation - Edina Drive /78th b. Connect 78th with the existing frontage road on the east side of CSAH 18. c. Connect 78th to Viking Drive across CSAH 18. C. TH 100 to Xerxes 1. South side a. Existing situation - 79th /80th 2. North side a. Existing situation - 76th /77th D. Xerxes to I -35W 1. South side a. Existing situation - 80th b. Two -way 80th and one -way Southtown Drive 2. North side a. Existing situation - 78th b. 76th Street. c. 76th between Penn and I -35W and 78th between Xerxes and Penn. d. Two -way 76th and one -way 78th between Xerxes and Penn. E. I -35W to TH 77 1. South side a. Existing situation - 79th /80th b. Construct bridges at TH 77 and I -35W 2. North side a. Existing situation - 76th /77th b. 77th Street Transit Strategies o Crosstown Service. Two crosstown routes would serve the I -494 corridor from the Bush Lake Road area on the west to the Airport on the east. One route would serve the area from slightly west of Bush Lake Road to the Airport South area connecting with the transfer stop proposed for 82nd Street and I -494. A second route would serve the area from the airport on the east to approximately Southtown on the west connecting with the Airport South area and the proposed transfer stop at 82nd Street and I -494. Both would be local all day service. o Reverse Commute Service. Minneapolis Route 5G would be extended to serve the Airport South area. This would provide local all day service between the Airport South area and downtown Minneapolis, serving neighborhood areas in South Minneapolis, Richfield and Bloomington o Reverse Commute Service. A new route would provide all day express service between the Airport South area and downtown Minneapolis, utilizing I -35W, Crosstown and T.H. 77. o Reverse Commute Service. A new route would provide service from downtown Minneapolis to major employment concentrations along I -494 in the area between France Avenue and Bush Lake Road. This would be a peak hour service. o Express service from the Burnsville area to employment concentrations along I -494 west of I -35W. A new route would provide peak hour express service from the areas along 35W south of the river to major employment concentrations along I -494 to the west of I -35W. Connections would be made with the existing park- and -ride lot at Highway 13 in Burnsville and the proposed stop at 82nd Avenue and I -35W. o Local Service Extension. The MTC has extended Minneapolis Route 77C from a local shuttle operating between Eagan and Apple Valley to peak express route operating from Eagan to downtown Minneapolis. In the future, this service could stop in the Airport South area o Timed - Transfer Concept. One of the alternatives being tested in the I -35W study is a timed- transfer bus network. Timed - transfer service provides greatly improved levels of service by coordinating multiple routes through a common transfer point. Service on the different routes and "pulsed" to insure that transfer are quickly and conveniently made. The I -35W network has stations in the area north of the crosstown to Diamond Lake Road and at Highway 13 in Burnsville. The transfer connection proposed at 82nd Street and I -35W is being coded into the I -35W study network. Travel Demand Management Strategies Low Scenario o Minnesota Rideshare o Ramp metering and HOV bypass o Land use mix o Variable work hours Medium Scenario o On -site support for ridesharing o Preferential parking o Low key TDM ordinance o Ramp metering and HOV bypass o HOV lane o Land use mix o Variable work hours Medium -High Scenario o Rideshare subsidy o Preferential parking o TDM ordinance o Ramp metering and HOV bypass o HOV lane o Land use mix o Variable work hours High Scenario o Rideshare subsidy o Parking management (pricing, free carpool parking) o TDM ordinance o Ramp metering and HOV bypass o HOV lane o Land use mix o -Variable work hours TASK C 0 c ■ J B i 0 LL i t= N C :e —o cV o u� z u, �o a0 icy .O os • _o•E 0 Oa u� C O. as t — P 'C 0 • L� ra ■c• .• C D <u N — a 's D o e °u Ei E ■ O oci? ooe- auo_o• vi ■E OF 1 -494 CORRIDOR STUDY WORK TASK SCHEDULE TIMETABLE APRIL 1987 E.istn land -use nven:ory Comprehensive plan and zoning review — Vacant land — Underdeveloped land — Maior current proposals 2010 Land Use I " Modified future land use I I Corridor Zone System / Land Use File E.st tratkc volmesAran9t rider6hO odified 2010 traffic volumea /Iransil ridership Year 2000 1Year 2010 traffic vobmes / transal ridership a oacilv restrained ass' rments Feedback to land -use scenarlos/Develo menI constrains h sisal Conslfanls Current capacity map Eeist 1494 ROW ma OW availabilil /cost tercharipe spacing evets of service options ransll sfxvice levevtype oplons nvrormental coreileralions Socio-economic rnpacla Development Framework Polices Roadwav s slern consr, nls — Interchange spacing and other TPP polices — Metropolitan highway system needs — NoRmetropollm highway system Heeds — Hphway /Trarsil Policy considerations and weds — Funding avalabily /sources — System continuity and balance Current design slap i ids Relationship to other re9pR'd sys,. .sling and COlRlitled system Status of dudes in 1-494 Cpnidor Wes r'ith HOV 7 with other transit opllorq (local circulation. metednp. ridesharnp LRT, etc -) — without HOV or Other Irensil options Transportation system nrlenagerflenl the a and trerlsildeslgl optbrq Other meropoltain highways wets corridor Nonmel! occftzin hklhways vetlin corridor PRODUCTS vaklabon C 1fam Dme1wrient Evaluation of Adematrves ABASE MAPS I I Des4u Concept DevebPrrlert S TRAVEL FORECAST MEMO mcnl •n Strate C DESIGN ALT. MEMO D ALT. EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATION MEMO pall Rcparl LvldlJse RewnmlBrdatim.5 E DRAFT REPORT I F FINAL REPORT rpl Revew JULY I AUGUST ISEPTEMBERI OCTOBER I NOVEMBER I DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL I MAY JUNE I JULY s Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area 300 Metro Square Building, 7th and Robert Streets St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Tel. 612 291- 6359/TDD 291 -0904 DATE: May 6, 1987 TO: I -494 Project Management Team FROM: Connie Kozlak SUBJECT: Process for Narrowing Alternatives As we move toward the conclusion of this corridor study, it is necessary to begin to narrow the universe of alternatives. Dick Wolsfeld and I have talked to Gary Peterson about an appropriate process to follow in narrowing the alternatives - should the Core Group make recommendations to the PMT for reaction, or should the committee go through the alternatives in a group setting to reach conclusions? Gary suggested that having the PMT react to core group recommendations would be a more efficient use of the committee's time. The Core Group has previously made recommendations to the PMT on transit and TDM strategies. The attached memo presents recommendations for the mainline alternatives for discussion on May 139 although we do not expect action that day. AGN494 PHTRN105 DATE: May 6, 1987 TO: I -494 Project Management Team FROM: Core Group RE: Preferred Mainline Alternative BACKGROUND The Project Management Team has conducted preliminary sreening of the mainline alternatives for I -494. The following five alternatives have been chosen to continue through the evaluation process: Alternative 2: Existing situation plus metered ramps, preferential access, and travel demand management (TOM). Alternative 5: Add one general purpose lane in each direction throughout the corridor plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TOM. Alternative 6: Add one high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction throughout the corridor plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TOM. Alternative 8: Add two general purpose lanes in each direction throughout the corridor plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TOM. . Alternative 9: Add one general purpose and one HOV lane in each direction throughout the corridor plus metered ramps, preferential access, and TOM. This memorandum will present further alternative screening and recommendations for the I -494 mainline preferred alternative. The study has considered two, very different land use forecasts; one based on regional forecasts prepared by the Metropolitan Council and one prepared by each municipality. There has not yet been a concensus on which forecast to use as the basis for the I -494 Corridor Plan. The preliminary traffic forecasts showed that the difference between the two forecasts generally amounted to the capa- city of an additional pair of freeway lanes. For this reason, it has not been appropriate to develop a compromise forecast. Therefore, two separate screening matrices have been prepared based on the two land use forecasts. FURTHER SCREENING The screening matrices attached include the five alternatives discussed above. They have been given a rating for each of the five top- ranked goals and objec- tives. Other goals were not useful in differentiating between the mainline alternatives. A discussion of the assumptions used for each of the goals follows. Goal 1: To provide a level of mobility on I -494 consistent with its functional classification as an interstate freeway. I -494 Project Management Team May 6, 1987 Page 2 Since each of the alternatives included ramp metering, none of the alternatives was given a negative score. Metering rates could be adjusted to maintain mainline mobility. The evaluation is more positive for alternatives with increased capacity, because they improve mobility. Goal 2: To develop a system of support roadways in the corridor which provides direct and continuous routes between major origin and destination points within the corridor. None of the alternatives addresses the issue of support roadways, so each was given a neutral score of zero. Goal 3: To provide sufficient.capacity in the I- 494 corridor to serve existing and forecast demand. The ranking for this goal was related to the actual capacity of the roadway because this has an impact on how much traffic would be diverted to other streets in the corridor. It also reflects the analysis which showed that for a multi -lane freeway, capacity may actually be reduced by restricting a lane to HOV operation. It should be remembered that the reduction was small and depended on several unknown factors, such as reduction in capacity caused by increased weaving.. Goal 4: To provide transit and travel demand management to make the most effi- cient use of capital investments. Ranking of this goal included both the actual transit and TDM strategies included in the alternative, as well as the ability to encourage use of these measures because of insufficient capacity of the roadway. Goal 5: To achieve the above goals in the most cost effective manner possible. This ranking considered both the rankings given for the above goals and the cost of the alternative. It can be seen from the attached matrices that the alternative which best fulfills the goals established by the Project Management Team depends on the land use forecast assumption. Several issues need to be considered in deter- mining the preferred mainline alternative for I -494. Foremost among these are: o The uncertainty (and differences between agencies) over the amount of deve- lopment which will actually occur. o The regional policy to promote better management of facilities to make more efficient use of the infrastructure. 0 The tight funding situation for highway improvements. r I -494 Project Management Team May 6, 1987 Page 3 o The timing of implementation of the preferred corridor plan as it is affected by both funding and the development process for this type of pro- ject. The plan for the I -494 Corridor must represent a balance of land development, transit strategies, travel demand management, and roadway improvements. It has become evident that the funding situation will likely delay the construction of needed highway improvements. Other actions should be taken in the more imme- diate future to help reduce the demand on, and increase the capacity of, the roadway system. RECOMMENDED PLAN Based on the considerations discussed above and on the results of the screening process, the following corridor plan is recommended: Short -Range Actions Related to the I -494 Mainline: o Implement the established travel demand management policies for the corri- dor, which may include instituting policies on a regional basis. o Continue the process to install ramp metering and preferential access where appropriate. o Begin operation planning and implementation of an improved route structure to serve the corridor. Provide fixed transit facilities on -site as deve- lopments occur. o. Define and promote improvements for an effective system of support road- ways. o Reduce access to I -494 between I -35W and TH 77 to improve mobility on I -494. a Continue study of specific interchanges in the corridor such as Baker Road /CSAH 62, CSAH 18, TH 100, Penn Avenue, I -35W, etc. Long -Range Strategies for the I -494 Mainline: o Add one lane in each direction, but design the facility to accomodate an additional pair of lanes in the median. This would allow flexibility should the municipal forecasts occur. It also fosters a 30 to 50 year perspective which is being promoted by Mn /DOT for highway planning when major interchanges and facilities are involved. o Operate this additional lane as an HOV lane demonstration project. This would help to promote the travel demand management strategies implemented in the short -term. 1 -494 Mainive Roadway and Operational Alt,...native4. qj Very Good + -}- `J°�, .c° JCI 6 J4 �, Good -�- �� `J° A � � °Q y�� y yQ� y p� Neutral Q �°� c� Q Q �� , Q �� ° cq' Q �� Q ,qjq Q Poor — .J�`a �i`D� �c �c � a�� Very Poor — — °� c° °° oa cg' a` ° °a �° �g, ��Z,a C �• °c, J �, °° as °° ¢, °° as J �, °o as oc "� °° �, �� - Q T � Goals/ Objectives Provide a level of mobility consistent with its functional classification. O + + + + + Develop a system of support roadways which provides direct and O O O O O continuous routes. Provide sufficient capacity in the corridor to serve the demand "' + + + + Provide transit and TDM to make efficient use of capital investments. O + + To achieve the goals in the most cost - effective manner. — + + + + — O Ranking Summary 2= 6+ 6+ 1+ 2+ Alternative Screening ASSUMES: Regional Forecast Very Good Good Neutral Poor Very Poor O Goals /Objectives 1 -494 Maine Roadway and Operational Al native: P> ocC,Q,p� Q yp� Q� �Q� O Q oa�� Q o J � c � P � �� y Q� Oft y o Q c Q� c � ro$04� C-3 �o �� `o yoqj -0 qj Q QJ 4o Provide a level of mobility consistent with its functional classification. O + + + + + + Develop a system of , support roadways which provides direct and O O O O O continuous routes. Provide sufficient capacity in the corridor to serve the demand — — + O + + + Provide transit and TDM to make efficient use of capital investments. + O + + To achieve the goals in the most cost - effective manner. — - O + + -�- Ranking Summary 3- 2_ 4+ 3+ 5+ Alternative Screening ASSUMES: Cities' Land Use Forecast VIII.D 1' M E M O R A N D U M TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager FROM: Francis Hoffman, City Engineer -,� SUBJECT: Regional Highway Jurisdiction Report Hearing Metropolitan Council - May 26, 1987 DATE: May 14, 1987 Attached is a notice for a Public Hearing by Metropolitan Council on a recently completed study. The study dealt with the issue of highway and roadway jurisdiction. Repeated editorials in the Minneapolis Star and Tribune and an early Citizen's League report suggested that MNDOT could solve some financial problems by returning lesser roads to cities and counties. These reports. suggest - removing 12,000 miles from the highway system. Legislation was passed in 1985 to deal with the above suggestions and the Met Council public hearing will conduct a hearing on the recommendations of the jurisdiction study. Attached are the basic conclusions and recommendations of the report. The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Transportation Committee will meet on Wednesday, May 20th to discuss AMM policy and testimony at the public hearing. The staff would recommend that we discuss the recommendations briefly, Monday evening. If the Council has some specific concerns I will forward those to the AMM Transportation Committee and attend the public hearing on the 26th of May. FJH:lmb i REGIONAL HIGHWAY JURISDICTION STUDY REPORT BACKGROUND The Regional Highway Jurisdiction Studv a 1985 state law re uirin Report has been prepared in response to q g jurisdiction studies to be conducted for each region of the state. The Metropolitan to is responsible for conducting the study in this region. The Council requested its Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) to undertake the study for them because of the board's experience with the topic and the study's potential impact on local v put together a Highway Jurisdiction Task Force in 1980tonexamineTissues ofdhighway Jurisdiction. In early 1986 it reactivated the Task Force to produce the report. Representation on the task force was drawn mainly from local elected Officials and transportation professionals. CONCERNS Highway jurisdiction not only involves questions of who should own roadways, and thus bear the financial impact for their maintenance, but also what functions the roadways should serve. Unless the issue of fiscal impact can be addressed in a manner that participating units of government feel is equitable, it will be difficult to accomplish significant changes in roadway jurisdiction. Another issue involves equity throughout the state. enthusiasm to recommend significant roadway transfers TinrthesMetropolitan Area when it is possible that other regions throughout the state are not going so. The concern is that the region could be a financial loser in thetransfero of jurisdiction from the state to local government. RECOMMENDATIONS The report identifies processes that, if established, icOuld facilitate an orderly rearrangement of street and highway jurisdictions. Its recommendations focus on improving the process for facilitating highway jurisdiction changes. No specific roadways are identified for transfer in the study. The report calls for the creation of a highway jurisdiction board by the state legislature. The board would have a number of responsibilities including facilitating and resolving the transfer of roadway ownership as well as reviewing other directly related jurisdictional matters. DPF361 Ll* v NOTICE OF METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ..PUBLIC HEARING REGIONAL HIGHWAY JURISDICTION STUDY REPORT The Metropolitan Council will hold a public hearing to receive comment on the Regional Highway Jurisdiction Study Report. The report was prepared in response to a 1985 state law requiring highway jurisdiction studies to be conducted for each region in the state. After the public comment period concludes on June 8, 1987, a response to the comments .will be prepared along vuith any revisions to the report generated from the public's comments. The report will then be considered by the Metropolitan Systems Committee of the Council prior to final action by the Council. The report must be submitted to the Minnesota Department of Transportation by July 1, 1987. PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATION When: Tuesday, May 26, 1987 - 11:00 a.m. Where: Metropolitan Council Chambers 3rd Floor Metro Square Building 7th and Robert Streets St. Paul,,Minnesota Who will be notified: Officials of all local governments and counties in the region, the Minnesota Association of Urban Counties, the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities, the Metropolitan Inter - County Association, Regional Development Commissions throughout the state, The Minnesota State Highway Patrol, The Citizen's League, the Council's Transportation Advisory Board and its Technical 9dvisony Co.- ittee. How to participatef 1. You may attend the hearing and offer comments. To register to speak in advance, call please Jane Larson at 291 -6500. 2. You may send a letter with comments to: Ann Braden Metropolitan Council 300 Metro Square Building 7th and Robert Streets St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Any Questions: Call the Council's Transportation Division and talk to Ann Braden (291- 6525). To receive copies of the document, call 291 -6464. -over- JM2013 CHAPTER IV. RECOMMENDED CHANGES IN JURISDICTION There is no state, regional or county body which can be effectively used to arbitrate and rule on the following jurisdictional matters; 1) the appropriateness of individual road transfers, 2) the conditions under which individual transfers (identified as appropriate) should occur, and 3) guidelines for identifying appropriate changes that also provide a statewide uniformity. Legislative adjustments used in the past have met with limited success and have proven to be cumbersome. Efforts to identify and implement an improved arrangement of road jurisdiction have been and will continue to be hampered by the current distribution of state collected user funds which focuses on "jurisdictions" and "aid systems" rather than on a hierarchy of the purposes served by individual roads in Minnesota. The task force recommends a process be established for making jurisdictional transfers, rather than specific changes in size of state, county, and local road systems. Jurisdiction changes are needed but they do not entail a large change in the number of miles under the jurisdiction of any level of government. No specific changes or exchanges of roads among levels of government are recommended in this report. Key findings and conclusions adopted by the task force in the Phase I Study (1980) included the following: " 7. The financial impact of jurisdictional realignment could be substantial." "13. Acceptance of a jurisdictional change implies maintenance obligations and responsibilities for future improvements." 1115. Jurisdictional changes between units of government have been occurring for some time without any formal plan or program and will continue to do so and probably at an increasing rate; as higher levels of government attempt to pass down facilities of lower priority as financial resources become more scarce." 1119. The prospects for implementing a new jurisdictional arrangement will to a large extent depend on whether adequate financial resources are provided '-for roadways to be transferred from one jurisdiction to another without placing a financial burden on the recipient governmental unit. Some roadways may need to be brought up to acceptable condition. And, all roadways will require continued maintenance." An unwritten but often spoken conclusion by task force and TAB members during _the period from 1980 to 1985 was... If changes are going to occur it should be looked at to ensure the changes are equitable or even among counties, or cities, or Mn/DOT districts. The task force came to the following additional conclusions. Conclusions A. Discussing possible regional plans for road transfers among all levels of government in a region or in the state raises anxieties (stemming from potential financial impacts) in each level of government. These anxieties reach a point where each party views itself as a financial loser in every alternate plan or scenario. A protectionist mentality is generated and begins to dominate in each governmental unit. B. Each governmental unit has identified (some internally, some publicly) roads currently under its jurisdiction which it considers to be candidates for passing to another level of government. C. In addition to Mn/DOT, county and local units of government will.continue attempts to transfer major roads (existing and proposed) which are clearly of greater than local or county significance to the state or county. D. There are currently state laws addressing transfers from the state to counties and local units of government and from counties to local units of government. In addition, the state and counties are vested by state law with authority to manage their highway programs. This authority permits the state and counties to in effect create incentives for lower units of government to receive transfers of roads. This "process" has had limited success in the past but needs to be improved to adequately serve future needs. E. Although laws and authorities to program are similar for the state and the counties, the state's programming process is more insulated from the political process than those of the counties. This allows the state to use its programming authority more effectively and more often to induce Jurisdiction changes. F. There are no state laws which address counties and local units passing roads to state or county government. This is a problem for portions of the metropolitan area which are experiencing or,will experience,increases in development density which cannot be adequately supported by the existing spacing of roads under state and /or county jurisdiction. As the density of population and jobs in an area increases so does the density of vehicle trips. A closer spacing of arterial routes is needed to adequately support these new developments. G. The County State Aid Highway System does not lend itself to addressing the need for a closer spacing of routes in developing areas. H. The issue of appropriate road jurisdiction is complicated and almost masked by the current revenue sources, collection points, and distribution mechanisms for collected revenues which are used to support roads in Minnesota.. I. Whether or not maintenance and construction on a particular road is currently supported by highway user fees collected by the state or- by property taxes collected by counties /local units of government has little or nothing to do with the primary purpose served by the road. Funding source is determined on the basis of whether or not a road is on a state or state aid system and which specific local unit has jurisdiction of the route. J. Roads which serve similar purposes should be funded at similar levels (proportions of need). and from similar funding sources (property taxes or user fees) throughout Minnesota regardless of the unit of government charged with their jurisdiction. 12 K. The identified hierarchy of roads in Minnesota (functional classification system) is fundamentally flawed because the identification of specific arterials connecting important places inside and outside the state was and is based on jurisdiction (state ownership) and not the best routes available. L. State route descriptions should be removed from the constitution and legislation. M. Existing state and federal funding is inadequate to support all needs for bridge repair and construction in Minnesota. Current state Handing for bridges needs to be continued but there is a need to also provide bridge funding which specifically targets the requirements of major bridges. Highways often carry a higher functional classification because they lead to a major bridge. Special Handing for.major bridges would allow local units of government to fund bridges and facilitate a more appropriate designation.of functional classification and jurisdiction. Recommendations 1. The Legislature should improve the process which deals with jurisdiction changes. The Legislature should create an ad hoc highway jurisdiction board which would have representation from local government and agencies including Mn/DOT. The board should be vested with the following charges and authorities: a. Identify guidelines for evaluating the appropriateness of roads which are significant to the state, counties and local governments in Minnesota. b. Identify conditions under which transfers to or from state, county and local highway systems will occur. C. Moderate discussions between concerned units of government to facilitate transfers brought to the board. d. If agreement between units of government is reached, oversee implementation of changes. If agreement cannot be reached, make a binding decision and oversee implementation of changes. 2. The Legislature should consider charging the state highway jurisdiction board with performing and maintaining a functional classification of streets and highways in Minnesota in conformance with established rules and procedures. The functional classification should be conducted without regard to current jurisdiction or aid system. When completed, this classification system should be used as a basis for distributing highway user funds in Minnesota. 3. The Legislature should also charge.the highway jurisdiction board to study and make recommendations to the Legislature with respect to possible changes in the state constitution and statutes related to recommendations 1 and 2 above. 13 4. In order to facilitate a better functional classi-ation and jurisdiction of roads in Minnesota, the Legislature should establish a new pool specifically to fund major bridges. The purpose of this recommendation is to separate the issue of functional classification from major bridge funding. We recommend no .broad jurisdictional change program should be considered or implemented unless an equitable and adequate.financial program is concurrently implemented. All jurisdictional changes must address the financial impacts to the transferring bodies. 6. To facilitate and encourage jurisdictional transfer, the Legislature should provide additional funding to cover the costs of life cycle and routine maintenance of an identified roadway system. This funding should be made available to the jurisdictional agency accepting responsiblity for a given roadway.segment in proportion and amount to cover the cost of maintenance of that segment. 14 VIII.E M E 0 R A N D U M TO: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager FROM: Francis Hoffman, City Engineer ; SUBJECT: Feasibility Report - Set Hearing Dates (6/1/87) DATE: May 14, 1987 The following improvements ahve been investigated and it has been determined that they are feasible and their construction would be in the best interest of the overall development of the City of Edina: IMPROVEMENT & LOCATION ESTIMATED COST P -S -38 Sidewalk $28,242.25 Olinger Boulevard from Tracy to Bredeson Park Path (South side) P -S -39 Sidewalk $18,134.34 W. 70th St. from Valley View Road to France Avenue (North side) The recommended hearing date is June 1, 1987. Funding for the projects sould be from State Aid and Capitol funds. FJH:lmb 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 1 CHECK._NO._.- DATE._ _._.._ -.___ AMOUNT- __ _- ___.__.._ VENDOR. _ ___ __. .__.- .- ___- _ITEM_.DESCRIPT.ION- -_ ACCOUNT. -NO. INV. M P.O. A MESSAGE _. 121702 05/12/87 902.00 BISHOP TRAVEL AIR TRAVEL 10- 2149- 000 -00 MANUAL 902.00 + + ++ ++ + ++ -CKS 125430 05/12/87 21,169.69 PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CONT 10- 4145 - 510 -51 MANUAL 21,169.69 + + + + + +* * ** -CKS 125506 05/12/87 11,988.41 SW FIDELITY _ CONT _ _._ 10- 4149 - 510 -51 MANUAL 125506 05/12/87 184.81 S W FIDELTIY MEDICARE 10 -4162- 510 -51 MANUAL 12,173.22 + + * * ** * ** -CKS 125727 _. __ 05/12/87 _ ?0.00 _ .... MN CRAFT . COUNCIL__.____ _ ____ADVERT.ISING __._.._ _________23- 4214 - 61.1 -61 MANUAL - 70.00 + * ** -CKS 127055 05/12/87 175.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 3230 - 000 -00 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 11.84 BRAEMAR GOLF _- __._. -..-PETTY-CASH- . ____ 27 -3720- 000 -00 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 81.90 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4120 - 663 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 43.05 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27 -4120- 665 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/ 12/87 333.07 .. _ BRAEMAR GOLF __.- __.___ PETTY CASH 27 -4120- 666 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 16.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4202 - 661 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 80.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4204 - 661 -66 MANUAL 127055 _ 05/12/87 __ 70.00 _. _ - _. BRAEMAR GOLF. _ _ PETTY CASH_ ____ _ 27- 4248 - 662 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 57.54 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4504 - 664 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 37.96 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27 -4516- 661 -66 MANUAL 127055.- ._ .. 05/12/87 147.78 BRAEMAR ..GOLF..- _.- ._.___._..__. PETTY .CASH ._- ..___._____.___27 -4560- 664 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 13.30 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27 -4600- 661 -66 MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 51.09 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4624- 663 -66 MANUAL 127055 .- _...___ 05/12/87 . -._ _.. _ 4.56 ___.- ._��BRAEMAR -GOLF -- _.-- __._-- _PETTY_CASH_ _ _27- 4624 - 664 -66 . _._ MANUAL 127055 05/12/87 38.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4630- 663 -66 MANUAL 1,161.09 * * + * ** ** »-CKS 127368-- _._- __05/12/87_ .. _. _ .___ - ___ 2,S51-85 MUTUAL _9ENEF I T_. ?REMIUM__ 1.0= 4158 - X1.0 -51 -_. _ .. MANUAL 2,551.85 * * ** -CKS ' 128354 05/12/87 936.91 MINNEGASCO HEATING 10- 1130- 000 -00 I MANUAL 128354___ __._05/12/87 314.91 MINNEGASCO__-___.__- HEATING_ -A_-_ _ 10 -4254- 446 -44 - MANUAL 1 128354 OS/12/87 382.55 MINNEGASCO HEATING 10- 4254 - 520 -52 _... MANUAL 128354 05/12/87 1,262.15 MINNEGASCO HEATING 10- 4254 - 540 -54 MANUAL 128354 ___.._ . 05/12/87 .. _ ._- _ _ 575.00.__.__ .__ MINNEGASCO. - -.. ____ ___ HEATING---_-_--_-_--. 10- 4254 - 646 -64 MANUAL 128354 05/12/87 124.59 MINNEGASCO HEATING 23- 4254 - 611 -61 MANUAL 1 128354 05/12/87 11.94 MINNEGASCO HEATING 26- 4254 - 682 -68 MANUAL 128354 !' 128354 05/12/87_ 05/12/87 _.75.98 1,935.21 .- MINNEGASCO MINNEGASCO HEATING _27- 4254 - 664,- 66.__._....__ __- _- 28- 4254 - 702 -70 MANUAL__t' MANUAL HEATING 128354 05/12/87 113.49 MINNEAGASCO HEATTING 40 -4254- 801 -80 MANUAL 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 2 CHECK_NO.,_ -DATE _ _AMOUNT _ _ _. VENDOR _ -. -- -ITEM- DESCRIPTION._ACCOUNT NO. INV. _# P.O. # MESSAGE 128354 05/12/87 1,717.06 MINNEGASCO HEATING 40 -4254- 803 -80 MANUAL 128354 05/12/87 20.69 MINNEGASCO _ HEATING __. __ 50- 4254 - 821 -82 MANUAL _ 128354 05/12/87 39.51 MINNEGASCO HEATING 50 -4254- 841 -84 MANUAL - 128354 05/12/87 92.88 MINNEGASCO HEATING 50 -4254- 861 -86 MANUAL 7,602.87 »_ » » » » »» » »» -CKS 128391 05/12/87 527.76 N STATES ELECTRIC 10 -1130- 000 -00 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 297.82 N STATES ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 301 -30 MANUAL 1228391 05/12/87 12,191.06 N STATES ELECTRIC _ 10- 4252 - 321 -30 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 10,072.29 N STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 322 -30 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 21180.09 N STATES ELECTRIC 10-4252- 330 -30 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 266.93 N STATES ELECTRIC. _— _ 10- 4252 - 345 -30 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 91.42 N STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 358 -30 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 1,834.62 N STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252- 375 -30 MANUAL 128391 - 05/12/87 567.85 N STATES ELECTRIC _ __. 10 -4252- 440 -44 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 41.31 N STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 460 -46 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 1,063.65 N STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 520 -52 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 956.15 N STATES ,- ___ ELECTRIC _—.___ ----- _- 10 -4252- 540 -54 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 2,495.17 N STATES ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 646 -64 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 402.01 N STATES ELECTRIC 23- 4252 - 612 -61 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 120.65 N STATES ELECTRIC _ _ _ 26 -4252- 682 -68 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 1,282.18 N STATES ELECTRIC 27 -4252- 662 -66 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 154.03 N STATES ELECTRIC 27- 4252 - 664 -66 MANUAL 128391 .. 05/12/87 2,849.41 N STATES ELECTRIC- ___-_.____.. 28- 4252 - 702 -70 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 23.60 N STATES ELECTRIC 29- 4252 - 722 -72 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 11992.15 N STATES ELECTRIC 40- 4252 - 801 -80 MANUAL 128391 _.. 05/12/87 _ 16,547.20 _. N STATES - - - -- _ ELECTRIC, _._ ____ 40 -4252- 803 -80 MANUAL _ 128391 05/12/87 269.03 N STATES ELECTRIC 40- •4252- 804 -80 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 440.73 N STATES ELECTRIC 50 -4252- 821 -82 MANUAL .128391 05/12/87 - _ 849.27 _ .__ N STATES _ __.__. -_ __- ELECTRIC _. 50- 4252- 841 -84 MANUAL 128391 05/12/87 335.66 N STATES- ELECTRIC 50 -4252- 861 -86 MANUAL r 57,852.04 • » » » » «» » »» -CKS r 128746 _ 05/12/87 _ 9,995.00 _. VERSATILE _._.... —_._ -_ MACH d EOUIP_- _ ____ 27 -1340- 000 -00 MANUAL i 128746 05/12/87 99.95 VERSATILE MECH 6 EQUIP 27- 1340 - 000 -00 MANUAL r 128746 05/12/87 99.95- VERSATILE CORRECTION 27- 1340 - 000 -00 MANUAL - 9,995.00 r 128747 05/12/87 45.42 MISSION SERVICE TAPES 10- 4504 - 100 -10 MANUAL .45.42 ► --- - » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138002 05/11/87 14.25 AT 6 T TELEPHONE 10- 4256 - 510 -51 14.25 • I. 138003 05/11/87 47.50 ALSINSON GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 260 -26 389144 138003 05/11/87 16.35 ALBINSON GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 260 -26 389205 -- - -- - -. _.. -- .. - -- - -._ 63.85 » - -- - -- -- "'� 138004 05/06/87 151.67 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 10 -4262- 440 -44 9 t � 1987 CITY OF EOINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 3 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION _ __.- _ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. b MESSAGE 138004 05/06/87 7.53 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 10- 4262- 482 -48 138004 05/06/87 22.92 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 10- 4262- 520 -52 138004 05/06/87 17.10 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 10- 4262 - 628 -62 - 138004 05/06/87 99.05 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 50- 4262- 520 -52 138004 05/06/87 27.60 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 50- 4262 - 821 -82 138004 05/06/87 77.74 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 50 -4262- 841 -84 - 138004 05/06/87 41.18 AMERICAN LINEN LAUNDRY 50- 4262 - 861 -86 444.79 » 138005 05/13/87 37.25 AUDIO GROUP ADVERTISING 50- 4214 - 822 -82 138005 05/13/87 37.25 AUDIO GROUP ADVERTISING 50- 4214 - 862 -86 74.50 • » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138008 05/08/87 37.53 KAMAN BEARING 3 SPLY REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 617930 37.53 • _." » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138013 05/13/87 131.04 ALTERNATOR REBUILD GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 440 -44 1309 138013 05/13/87 116.10 ALTERNATOR REBUILD G£N SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 440 -44 1310 138013 05/06/87 79.12 ALTERNATOR REBUILD G£N SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 560 -56 138013 05/13/87 61.90 ALTERNATOR REBUILD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 1350 138013 05/13/87 138.90 ALTERNATOR REBUILD REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 59362 138013 05/13/87 49.50 ALTERNATOR REBUILD REPAIR PARTS _. 10 -4540- 560 -56 9640 138013 05/06/87 44.70 ALTERNATOR REBUILD REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 138013 05/13/87 158.54 ALTERNATOR REBUILD TOOLS 10- 4580 - 560 -56 1311 779.80 « » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138015 05/11/87 89.29 AT R T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 10 -4256- 510 -51 138015 05/11/87 51.44 AT & T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 23- 4256 - 612 -61 140.73 • - __ _ _ _ » »» -CKS 138017 05/06/87 185.60 ALLIED PLASTICS REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 520 -52 3999 138017 05/05/87 36.00 ALLIED PLASTICS REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 646 -64 15213 221.60 s - - ' 138018 05/11/87 13.20 AT 3 T INFO SYSTEM TELEPHONE 10 -4256- 628 -62 13.20 » s »ss »s * »» -CKS 138025 05/12/87 28.00 ALFONS ANDERSSON SERVICES 27- 4201 - 663 -66 28.00 » 138026 05/13/87 1,172.84 BADGER METER INC WATER METER 40- 1220 - 000 -00 487160 ' 138026 05/05/87 1,268.70 SAOGER METER INC WATER METERS 40 -1220- 000 -00 485104 _ 2,441.54 t » » » « «» » »• -CKS 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 4 CHECK NO.,..DATE - AMOUNT. VENDOR _ ITEM.DESCRIPTION._ _ -__ _.ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE _ 138028 05/12/87 688.00 BEER WHOLESALERS INVENTORY _....__ _ 27- 4630 - 663 -66 138028 05/12/87 688.00 BEER WHOLESALERS INVENTORY 27 -4630- 993 -99 - 138028 05/12/87 688.00- BEER WHOLESALERS CORRECTION 27 -4630- 993 -99 138028 05/12/87 1 , 568.50 BEER WHOLESALERS, ,. -.._ _INVENTORY _ _ _,,__,__• 50- 4630 - 822 -82 138028 05/08/87 2,323.85 BEER WHOLESALERS INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 - 138028 05/12/87 1,645.08 BEER WHOLESALERS INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 862 -86 6,225.43 t atataa ttt -CKS 138031 05/13/87 11.52 SERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 420 -42 293767 - 138031 05/13/87 23.20 BERTELSON BROS INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 440 -44 291760 138031 05/13/87 189.35 SERTELSON BROS INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 540 -54 291771 138031 05/06/87 103.00 SERTELSON BROS INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 600 -60 290967 - 138031 05/06/87 7.60 BERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10- 4516 - 133 -12 138031 05/13/87 117.25 SERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10- 4516 - 160 -16 293767 138031 05/06/87 3.16 SERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10- 4516 - 160 -16 290888 138031 05/06/87 3.03 BERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10- 4516 - 160 -16 138031 05/06/87 12.00 SERTELSON BROS INC - OFFICE SUPPLIES ___. 10 -4516- 490 -49 138031 05/13/87 97.38 BERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10- 4516 - 510 -51 293767 - 138031 05/06/87 197.69 BERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10- 4516 - 510 -51 290886 138031 05/06/87 1.35 BERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10 -4516- 510 -51 138031 05/06/87 4.64 SERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 10 -4516- 600 -60 290886 - 138031 05/06/87 12.00 BERTELSON BROS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 27- 4516 - 661 -66 783.17 » ataaat »tt -CKS 138033 05/13/87 331.20 BERGFORD TRUCKING INVENTORY 50 -4626- 822 -82 138033 05/13/87 493.60 BERGFORD TRUCKING INVENTORY 50 -4626- 842 -84 138033 05/13/87 674.50 BERGFORD TRUCKING _.._ _.__INVENTORY__ -__.__ _.._.__ _50- 4626 - 862 -86 1,499.30 r so*-CKS , - 138035 05/11/87 50.40 BOUSTEAD ELEC 6 MFG CONT REPAIRS 40 -4248- 801 -80 204521 50.40 *00-CKS 138037 05/13/87 60.00 BRAUN ENS TESTING IN SERVICES 10- 4201 - 520 -52 - 138037 05/06/87 239.10 BRAUN ENS TESTING IN CONSTRUCTION 60- 1300 - 001 -20 05673 299.10 • . 138038 05/11/87 100.00 GEORGE BUTLER POLICE SERVICE 10- 4100- 430 -42 100.00 » tstttt ttt -CKS 138041 05/06/87 2,852.60 BURY d CARLSON INC BLACKTOP 10 -4524- 301 -30 26296 138041 05/06/87 6,795.90 BURY 6 CARLSON INC BLACKTOP 10- 4524 - 314 -30 26296 - - -... - - - - - - -- - -9., 648.50 » _ t»» —CKS �t r t 1987 L_.. OF EDINA CHECK h_wfSTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 5 CHECK NO. DATE__- - ___ __ AMOUNT. VENDOR ___.._ ...--ITEM -DESCRIPTION __. -- .___.ACCOUNT NO. INV. 8 P.O. N MESSAGE 138046 05/13/87 477.94 BLUMBERG PHOTO CABLE. TV ._.__._._ -_ .. __ 10- 2149- 000 -00 860082 138046 05/13/87 153.62 BLUMBERG PHOTO CABLE TV 10- 2149- 000 -00 860053 631.56 + 138047 05/13/87 305.00 BROWN PHOTO PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508- 420 -42 27508 138047 05/13/87 14.10 BROWN PHOTO PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508 - 440 -44 453453 319.10 • __ » » » » »» » +» -CKS 138053 05/08/87 77.30 BROWNING FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 10- 4250 - 646 -64 77.30 + 138054 05/13/87 290.22 BATTERY WAREHOUSE REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 95247 290.22 + + + » » »s » +» -CKS 138058 05/11/87 _. 100.00 WAYNE- BENNETT ___._ POLICE._SERVICE. __10- 4100 - 430 -42 100.00 + r ++ -CKS 138060 05/12/87 500.99 AMBASSADOR SAUSAGE CONCESSIONS 27- 4624- 663 -66 500.99 138061 OS/08/87 20.10 "A" PLUS PRESORT POSTAGE 10- 4290- SIO -S1 117 138061 05/06/87 30.32 "A" PLUS PRESORT _- .. _ POSTAGE--. __ f._ 1 0- 4290 - 510 -SI 138061 05/13/87 27.54 "A" PLUS PRESORT POSTAGE 10- 4290 - 510 -51 138061 05/06/87 82.81 "A" PLUS PRESORT POSTAGE 10- 4290 - 510 -51 138061 05/06/87 197.87 "A" PLUS PRESORT____. -. ..- POSTAGE- ..____,__ ._._ .— 10- 4290 - 510 -51 138061 05/13/87 44.90 "A" PLUS PRESORT POSTAGE 10 -4290- 510 -51 403.54 + »+»»»» ' + +» -CKS 138065 05/13/87 1 0.50 CULLIGAN _ _ __... -_. __. ....._._ _____CONT_SERV.. ___.. —.. __ ._____ 10-4200-482-48 10.50 « 138066 05/13/87 255.06 _. COP __..__ _.___ ___ _. GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 510 -51 73SOS9 138066 05/05/87 61.50 COP GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 540 -54 732938 316.56 + » »s » »» »» +-CKS 138072 05/13/87 _.161.46 DAILY_CONST. RE PORT S— __.__._. ADVERT ISING___10 - 4210 - 140 -14 n 161.46 + 138073 OS/12/87 _. -173.76 __ CITY BEER ___ -___. INVENTORY _. _______ .. -_ 50 -4630- 822 -82 138073 " 05/08/87 140.15 CITY BEER INVENTORY SO- 4630 - 842 -84 138073 05/12/87 224.50 CITY BEER- INVENTORY SO -4630- 862 -86 _•----- .._.._..T-- ----------- � - - - -__ .--------- - - - - -- 538...41 - � - ---- ..- ------ - - - - -- ----- _-- ------- --..._ ____.___ _ _._ ._.. _ _ - - -- — .— �._.._ w r » + » »+ I + ++ -CKS 'R. 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK N0._ DATE .- _AMOUNT. 138075 05/08/87 60.63 138075 05/08/87 5.40 66.03 a « *«a* 10- 4508 - 200 -20 138078 05/13/87 355.60 138078 05/12/87 987.63 138078 05/12/87 690.35 2,033.58 + INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 138080 05/12/87 49.06 138080 05/12/87 299.23 138080 05/12/87 1,736.32 » »« -CKS 2,084.61 » GEN SUPPLIES 27- 4504 - 663 -66 138082 05/13/87 33.75 138082 05/13/87 20.00 138082 05/13/87 28.00 138082 05/13/87 19.00 - _ 100.75 a » » » » »» CONWAY FIRE 6 SAFETY EQUIP MAINT 138084 05/11/87 61.07 CONWAY FIRE 6 SAFETY EQUIP MAINT 61.07 a » » » » »» CONWAY FIRE 6 SAFETY 138091 05/13/87 366.00 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY 366.00 a 138092 05/08/87 24.40 138092 05/08/87 100.00 138092 05/08/87 288.69 138092 05/08/87 27.91 138092 05/08/87 183.40 624.40 + CITY OF EDINA RUBBISH. REMOVAL__ - -_ -_._ 50- 4250 - 821 -82 138095 05/13/87 524.62 SUPPLY 23-4588- 611 -Gt 524.62 » C d S DIST INC CRAFT SUPPLIES 138097 05/06/87 47.15 - -- - -- -- 47.15 + . as *aaa C d S DIST INC CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 6 VENDOR ITEM -DESCRIPTION.--.. - .__ACCOUNT - NO..__INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE CLANCY DRUG INC GEN SUPPLIES _ _ _ 10- 4504 - 133 -12 CLANCY DRUG INC PHOTO SUPPLIES 10- 4508 - 200 -20 *a« -CKS COCA COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY - __. 50- 4632- 822 -82 COCA COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 COCA COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 » »« -CKS CONT -MINN GEN SUPPLIES 27- 4504 - 663 -66 CONT -MINN CLEAN SUPPLIES 27- 4512 - 663 -66 CONT -MINN - -CONCESSIONS _ 27- 4624 - 663 -66 - - _ * ** -CKS CONWAY FIRE 6 SAFETY EQUIP MAINT 10 -4274- 440 -44 91746 CONWAY FIRE 6 SAFETY EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 440 -44 91989 CONWAY FIRE 6 SAFETY EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 440 -44 91561 CONWAY FIRE & SAFETY REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 440 -44 11028 a »» -CKS COPY EQUIPMENT INC EQUIP REPLACEMENT 10- 4901 - 260 -26 » »» -CKS CITY OF EDINA RUBBISH. REMOVAL__ - -_ -_._ 50- 4250 - 821 -82 C d S DIST INC ._ __CRAFT SUPPLY 23-4588- 611 -Gt 048921 C d S DIST INC CRAFT SUPPLIES 23- 4588 - 611 -61 048875 C d S DIST INC COST OF COMMODITIES 23- 4624 - 613 -61 048875 C d S DIST INC COMMODITIES . 23- 4642 - 613 -61 049136 C d S DIST INC COMMODITIES 23 -4642- 613 -61 049061 a ** -CKS - COMMISSIONER REVENUE. _ ^_GASOLINE- __1.0 -4612- 560 -56 COURTNEY C WAYNE MILEAGE 10- 4208 - 100 -10 «a* -CKS *» *-CKS j• 1987 OF EDINA CHECK 3TER 05- 18 -8'. AGE 7 CHECK. NO._ DATE___ _.___.. ___. AMOUNT.- _..__ _. VENDOR.. __.._.____- ITEM. DESCRIPTION .____._ACCOUNT NO... INV. M P.O. M MESSAGE 138100 05/08/87 177.61 CURTIS 1000 PRINTING _ _..__ 23- 4600 - 611 -61 9208 138100 05/08/87 188.57 CURTIS 1000 PRINTING 23- 4600 - 611 -61 9736 366.18 + aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138106 - _05/11/87 .100.00 DAHL- MR HILDING POLICE.SERVICE__. ____10 -4100- 430 -42 100.00 » saaaaa __ aaa -CKS 138110 05/08/87 285.85 OAVIOSEN DIST INC INVENTORY 50 -4630- 842 -64 aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138125 05/06/87 365.91 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 133 -12 16615 138125 05/13/87 138.72 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 335 -30 16670 138125 05/13/87 50.10 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES _ __. _.10 -4504- 520 -52 16605 138125 05/08/87 24.50 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 625 -62 16658 138125 05/06/87 471.50 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 645 -64 16626 138125 _ 05/06/87 408.00 MERIT SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 645 -64 16633 138125 05/13/87 49.00 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING SUPPLIES 10- 4512 - 540 -54 16690 138125 05/13/87 78.00 MERIT SUPPLY PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 16690 138125 05/06/87 495.00 MERIT SUPPLY PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 16583 138125 05/08/87 414.00 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING SUPPLIES 28- 4512 - 702 -70 16646 138125 05/06/87 400.30 MERIT SUPPLY CLEANING SUPPLIES 28- 4512 - 702 -70 16625 138125 05/12/87 _. 247.50 MERIT- SUPPLY _ _____- CLEANING SPLY__...__ -..-28-4512-702-70 16691 3,142.53 + » »» -CKS v 138134 05/13/87 36.75 CITY WIDE SERVICES CONT REPAIRS 50- 4248 - 841 -84 36.75 + » » » » »» + ++ -CKS 138136 05/08/87 2,804.89 EARL F ANDERSEN CONST 10 -1445- 000 -00 70237 138136 05/06/87 73.80 EARL F ANDERSEN GEN SUPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 69934 138136 _.05/06/87 _ 170.00 .. EARL F- ANDERSEN _- ___REPAIR PARTS..___- __10-4540-330-30 69993 3,048.69 + 138137 05/08/87 386.43 E KRAEMER d SONS INC_ ._._ SAND GRAVEL ROCK -.__. __...10- 4522- 314 -30 81549 138137 05/08/87 134.26 E KRAEMER d SONS INC CLASS V MAT 10- 4532 - 301 -30 81549 520.69 + aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138143 05/.12/87 413.05 .. EMRICH...BAKING CO _ .__._ ... CONCESSIONS,_..._.__. 27- 4624- 663 -66 413.05 + i aaa -CKS_ 138t50 05/05/87 23.11 ELECTRONIC CENTER GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 330 -30 99110 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 8 CHECK NO-DATE _ AMOUNT _ VENDOR _ .. _ITEM DESCRIPTION - ___,_- _ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE_ -. 138150 05/05/87 100.70 ELECTRONIC CENTER REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 102650 138150 05/05/87 28.34 ELECTRONIC CENTER REPAIR PARTS __- 10- 4540 - 520 -52 99140 138150 05/11/87 75.85 ELECTRONIC CENTER REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 110780 228.00 » » » » »+» » »» -CKS 138153 05/13/87 196.00 ENGINE PARTS SUPPLY REPAIR PARTS.___ - -.- _._ 10 -4540- 560 -56 92224 ' 138153 05/13/87 55.77 ENGINE PARTS SUPPLY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -S6 92022 251.77 » »» » » »» » »» -CKS ' 138157 05/13/87 51289.00 50TH FRANCE BUS ASSN RUBBISH.._ _._ _ 10-4200- 395 -30 5,289.00 • 138158 05/08/87 45.00 FEED RITE CONTROL CONT REPAIRS 26 -4248- 682 -68 138158 05/13/87 3,065.91 FEED RITE CONTROL WATER SUPPLIES 40- 4622 - 805 -80 85069 3,110.91 + •v » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138183 05/OS/87 191.00 BEST LOCKING SYSTEMS REPAIR_PARTS 10- 4540- S20 -52 72301 191.00 • »»» -CKS > 138188 05/05/87 56.25- GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO CREDIT 10- 4540- S20 -52 333849 138188 05/11/87 202.59 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO REPAIR PARTS._ 10 -4540- 520 -S2 336294 138188 05/05/87 393.00 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO REPAIR PARTS 27 -4540- 646 -64 333604 539.34 » »»»»»» » »» -CKS 138194 05/06/87 19.00 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS EOSUIP RENTAL 25636 138194 05/13/87 56.40 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 440 -44 76520 > 138194 OS/13/87 52.09 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 440 -44 76519 138194_ 05/06/87 266.25 .. GENERAL COMMUNICATNS _ RADIO. SERVICE ._..___ 10- 4294 - 560 -S6 25635 138194 OS/13/87 952.50 GENERAL COMMUNICATNS EQUIP NEW 10- 4902 - 440 -44 75967 y 1,346.24 • : 138195 05/11/87 13.23 GOLF CAR MIDWEST REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 665 -66 13.23 • » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138199 05/13/87 _ 49.86 . G T PARTS _ REPAIR PARTS. 10-4540-560-56 88854 138199 05/13/87 31.65 G T PARTS REPAIR PARTS 10 -4S40- 560 -S6 88855 v 138199 05/13/87 S3.61 G T PARTS REPAIR PARTS 10-4540- 560 -56 88853 - - -. 135.12 » » » » »» »»» -CKS 138206 OS/06/87 483.35 G 6 K SERVICES LAUNDRY 10 -4262- 301 -30 138206 OS/06/87 260.40 G 3 K SERVICES LAUNDRY 10- 4262 - 560 -56 A 1 1987 C :., OF EDINA 038143 CHECK N0 --- DATE. _ AMOUNT 138206 05/06/87 171.00 138206- 05/06/87 113.60 138206 05/06/87 318.80 CORRECTION 10- 4610 - 560 -56 1,347.15 k WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610 - 560 -56 302464 138209 05/13/87 17.69 138209 05/13/87 128.70 138209 05/06/87 108.90 138209 05/13/87 54.85 WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610 - 560 -56 310.14 » Rkkkkk 10- 4610 - 560 -56 300021 138214 05/05/87 29.37 138214 05/06/87 47.68 138214 05/05/87 89.31 138214 05/05/87 81.20 138214 05/05/87 87.31 13,3214 05/05/87 87.31 138214 05/05/87 37.92 138214 05/05/87 87.31- 138214 05/05/87 15.84 138214 05/05/87 294.00 138214 05/05/87 118.39 138214 05/05/87 61.19 138214 05/05/87 87.31- 138214 05/11/87 59.72 834.62 » s kkkkkk 138228 138228 138228 138228 138228 05/06/87 05/06/87 05/06/87 05/06/87 05/08/87 138230 05/13/87 138231 05/12/87 kkktkk 138238 05/13/87 138238 05/06/87 i kkkkkk CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 9 VENDOR _ -_._ __- .____.ITEM..DESCRIPT_ION____ -.___ACCOUNT NO. .INV. M P.O. M MESSAGE G b K SERVICES LAUNDRY 10- 4262 - 646 -64 G K SERVICES - _. LAUNDRY _ ..__ __.. 10- 4512- 540 -54 G 6 K SERVICES LAUNDRY 40- 4262- 801 -80 kkk -CKS GENUINE PARTS PARTS _ __ 10- 4620- 560 -56 642579 GENUINE PARTS PARS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 643281 GENUINE PARTS PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 642966 GENUINE PARTS GEN SUPPLIES 40- 4504 - 801 -80 644175 TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY TOLL COMPANY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 325 -30 038143 __.WELDING SUPPLY _ 10 -4610- 560 -S6 485248 WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610 - 560 -S6 300021 WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610 - 560 -S6 _ - 10- 4540 - 560 -56 WELDING SUPPLIES 10 -4610- 560 -56 300021 CORRECTION 10- 4610 - 560 -56 300021 WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610 - 560 -56 302464 CORRECTION 10- 4610 - 560 -56 300021 WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610- 560 -56 300816 WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610- 560 -56 705904 WELDING SUPPLIES .._. 10- 4610 - 560 -56 WELDING SUPPLIES 10- 4610 - 560 -56 704771 CORRECTION 10- 4610 - 560 -56 300021 _. SERVICES_.. _ __.... 27 -4201- 664 -66 039888 12.00 MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 671.86 MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY -__ PARTS __._. _.. _ - 10- 4540 - 560 -56 34.07 MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY TOOLS 10- 4580- 560 -56 540.47 MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY PARTS 10- 4620- 560 -56 28.88 _ MCGUIRE AUTO SUPPLY_ ..REPAIR.PARTS _. ...________.27- 4540 - 664 -66 1,287.28 + 57.95 HOFF WILLIAMSON GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 440 -44 231156 57.95 k 185.23 HOFFERS INC OFFICE FURN 27 -1330- 000 -00 104217 _.185.23 » _ 27.00 WM H MCCOY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 51351 31.05 WM H MCCOY GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 49452 kkk -CKS kkk -CKS » »» -CKS kkk -CKS kkk -CKS ,I 1987 CITY v OF EOINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 10 CHECK-NO-DATE _ ..AMOUNT _.VENDOR -. -. -- -ITEM DESCRIPTION ..__.ACCOUNT - -NO. INV. M P.O. N MESSAGE 138242 05/06/87 144.78 HYDRAULIC SERV CONT REPAIRS.___ __.. 27- 4248-664 -66 24537 144.78 * ** * *s* so*-CKS a 138244 05/06/87 250.00 HAYDEN MURPHY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- S60 -56 250.00 * 138245 05/06/87 58.80 ROBERT 8 HILL GEN SUPPLIES 27- 4504 - 662 -66 58.80 * w * * * * ** * ** -CKS 138249 05/11/87 100.00 NM HOFFMAN POLICE SERVICE 10 -4100- 430 -42 100.00 » y * ** -CKS 138258 05/13/87 26.25 INDUSTRIAL GASKET CO REPAIR.P_ARTS ._.40- 4540 - 807 -80 126067 � 26.25 * ** * ** *** -CKS 138277 05/06/87 280.65 CARLSON PRINTING GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 702 -70 38106 t 138277 - 05/12/87 239.70 CARLSON PRINTING PRINTING.... 38163 520.35 * ** -CKS 138286 05/13/87 81.85 JUSTUS LUMBER REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 1041 138286 .05/13/87 10.28 JUSTUS LUMBER REPAIR PARTS _ -. ..- __..10 -4540- 520 -52 2158 92.13 w • * * * ** * ** -CKS 138289 05/11/87 100.00 WALTER JOHNSON POLICE SERVICE 10 -4100- 430 -42 r 100.00 r * * * * ** * ** -CKS C 138294 05/11/87 21.31 CRESCENT ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 345 -30 a 138294 05/11/87 40.99 CRESCENT ELECTRIC REPAIR PARATS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 C 138294 05/11/87 _. 239.20 CRESCENT ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS- -_.._— _ ..____10- 4540 - 520 -52 . 138294 05/11/87 111.21 CRESCENT ELECTRIC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 646 -64 y 412.71 • C * * * * ** * ** -CKS 138302 _ 05/12/87 _ .. 5,801.00 . _ KUETHER DI ST CO .. - _ __ _ ._ _ __INVENTORY__. -_� .. _..._ . _ 50- 4630 - 822 -82 138302 05/08/87 7,455.20 KUETHER DIST CO INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 842 -84 13,256.20 * ** -CKS I 138304 _ . _.. 05/13/87 ___._. .._........ __ _.25.18 .._.__ .,._,.KNOX_IUMBER CO. _...- _REPAI.R_ PAR.T.S. " _.10-4540- 520 -52 504711_ N � 1987 l,_ -, OF EDINA CHECK h_.lSTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 11 CHECK NO .. DATE AMOUNT. VENDOR _. ITEM DESCR IPT.ION- ._.-- __ -. -- ACCOUNT NO. INV . 4 P.O. A MESSAGE 138304 05/06/87 60.97 KNOX LUMBER CO REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 520 -52 501895 138304 .05/13/87 10.77 KNOX LUMBER CO REPAIR PARTS..____ .. -_.. ___10- 4540 - 520 -52 504735 138304 05/11/87 16.19 KNOX LUMBER CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 504601 138304 05/06/87 5.94 KNOX LUMBER CO REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 502048 .138304 _.05/06/87 114.64 KNOX LUMBER CO __ REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 504227 138304 05/11/87 52.51 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 27- 4504 - 662 -66 504720 138304 05/11/87 85.99 KNOX LUMBER CO GENERAL SUPPLY 27- 4504 - 662 -66 504734 138304 05/11/87 124.40 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLY _._ 27- 4504 - 664 -66 504774 138304 05/08/87 17.97 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 702 -70 504706 138304 05/06/87 121.89 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 702 -70 504351 138304 05/12/87 11.46 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 702 -70 504464 138304 05/12/87 53.96 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 702 -70 504761 138304 05/12/87 16.01 KNOX LUMBER CO GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 702 -70 504613 717.88-0 a » »aa» • aaa -CKS 138311 05/12/87 3,332.15 EASTSIDE BEVERAGE INVENTORY 50 -4630- 822 -82 138311 05/08/87 4,198.05 EASTSIDE BEVERAGE INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 138311 05/06/87 5,233.45 EASTSIDE BEVERAGE INVENTORY....... _ 50- 4630- 862 -86 12,763.65 • aa» -CKS 138317 05/06/87 382.49 LAWSON PRODUCTS GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 322 -30 138317 05/06/87 143.13 LAWSON PRODUCTS GEN SUPPLIES __ 10 -4504- 325 -30 138317 05/06/87 473.98 LAWSON PRODUCTS GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 138317 05/13/87 233.02 LAWSON PRODUCTS GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 138317 05/13/87 26.21.. _ LAWSON PRODUCTS GEN SUPPLIES _...._ .__ -. .. 10- 4504- 646 -64 138317 05/06/87 192.30 LAWSON PRODUCTS PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 138317 05/13/87 62.37 LAWSON PRODUCTS PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 138317 05/13/87 298.25 _ LAWSON PRODUCTS- -.__.. GEN SUPPLIES._.__ ____ 40 -4504- 801 -80 138317 05/13/87 144.04 LAWSON PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 40- 4540 - 801 -80 1,955.79 138318 05/11/87 119.09 LEEF BROS INC LAUNDRY 10 -4262- 440 -44 138318 05 /it /87 20.00 LEEF BROS INC LAUNDRY 27- 4262- 664 -66 _. 139.09 ' 138319 05/11/87 504.00 LEITNER COMPANY SOD & BLACK DIRT 27- 4562- 664 -66 _504.00. F- - - - - - - -- - - -- - - -- - -- - » » » » »• »» »-CKS 1383225 05/06/87 19.52 LONG LAKE FORD TRACT GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 646 -64 050587 ' 19.52 f • » » » »» » »» -CKS 138329 05/06/87 - ,_.._. 312.67 _ LAYNE. MINNESOTA CO _ . REPAIR__PARTS._..___. .___._ . - -_40 -4540- 803 -80 9852 312.67 138332 05/13/87 498.75 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES CONFERENCE 10- 4206 - 140 -14 :� 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 12 .. CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR tTEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. # MESSAGE 498.75 • » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138344 05/13/87 52.60 MED OXYGEN 6 EQUIP EQUIP MAINT___ 10 -4274- 440 -44 138344 OS/13/87 22.50 MED OXYGEN 6 EQUIP EQUIP MAINT 10 -4274- 440 -44 138344 05/13/87 59.10 MED OXYGEN 6 EQUIP EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274- 440 -44 134.20 • » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138346 OS/08/87 46,257.75 MET N WASTE C L COMM BLDG PERMITS 10- 3095 - 000 -00 r 46,257.75 + r » » » »» »»» -CKS r 138358 05/13/87 207.95 NATL GUARDIAN SYST ALARM_.SERV....__ _- 50 -4304- 841 -84 207.95 138359 05/13/87 26.88 MINN TORO INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 560 -56 654158 138359 05/08/87 282.00 MINN TORO INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 652639 W 138359 05/13/87 21.57 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 652055 138359 05/13/87 296.94 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 646 -64 650853 138359 05/08/87 201.60- MINN TORO INC DISCOUNT 27 -4540- 664 -66 C78998 w 138359 05/08/87 248.56 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 654020 i 138359 05/08/87 214.04 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS _ 27 -4540- 664 -66 652464 138359 05/13/87 286.32 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540- 664 -66 655661 s 138359 05/08/87 133.18 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 651963 138359 05/08/87 128.39 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS - 27- 4540 - 664 -66 652671 138359 OS/08/87 29.61 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 653712 :r 138359 05/13/87 50.88 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 654994 138359 05/08/87 90.66 MINN TORO INC REPAIR PARATS_._...__..__. 27- 4540 - 664 -66 653781 1,577.43 + 138360 05/05/87 12.60 MINNESOTA WANNER GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 325 -30 065901 138360 05/05/87 94.20 MINNESOTA WANNER GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 065905 s 138360 05/OS/87 152.98 MINNESOTA WANNER GEN SUPPLIES 10-4504 - 646 -64 065904 138360 OS/ 13/87 54. SO MINNESOTA WANNER ,- TOOLS_ _ . _.-_._..40- 4580 - 801 -80 066054 314.28 + r � »»» -CKS 138363 05/13/87 15.25 MONARCH MARKING OFFICE SUPPLIES SO- 4516 - 860 -86 890112 1 - - 15.25 » »» -CKS { 138365 05/11/87 100.00 BURT MERFELO POLICE SERVICE 10 -4100- 430 -42 d 100.00 » { 138366 05/12/87 13.19 MINNESOTA BAR INVENTORY SO- 4632 - 822 -82 138366 05/08/87 397.45 MINNESOTA BAR INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 _ -138366-----05112/87 ... __._.._ 429.39 _ -- MINNESOTA.BAR -` ____- __INVENTORY _ 50 -4632- 862 -8b 840.03 s » »r -CKS 1987 L..r OF EOINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 13 _CHECK NO D._TE _ .__. -. AMOUNT. - .. . -_ _ ... ___VENDOR.___ _.. .-__. ._- ._ITEM_. DESCRIPTION _- - -__ -. .ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. N MESSAGE 138370 - - ..- 5/12/87 132.75 MIDLAND-PRODUCTS CO _ CONCESSIONS 28 -4624- 703 -70 19392 132.75 * ** -CKS 138378 5/12/87 4,951.30 MARK VII SALES INVENTORY 50 -4630- 822 -82 138378 - 5/08/87 9,337.75 MARK VII SALES INVENTORY _._.__. 50- 4630- 842 -84 138378 15/08/87 81091.80 MARK VII SALES INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 22,380.85 138379 #5/06/87 31.50 METRO FONE COMM GEN SUPPLIES 40- 4504 - 601 -80 241431 31.50 138380 15/13/87 14,038.82 THOMSEN NYBECK SERVICES 10- 4201 - 220 -22 14,038.82 + 138381 5/06/87 198.10 STAR & TRIBUNE ADVERTISING 10- 4212 - 510 -51 138381 15/11/87 198.10 STAR d TRIBUNE ADVERTISING 10- 4212 - 510 -51 396.20-A * * * « ** * ** -CKS 138388 15/06/87 6.87 NTL ATOMIK MOTOR REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 321070 - 138388 15/13/87 234.69 NTL ATOMIK MOTOR REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 321977 241.56 r * « « * ** ** *-CKS 138400 )5/13/87 807.10 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO TIRES 10- 4616 - 560 -56 807.10 * * « * ** ' * ** -CKS 138403 )5/08/87 473.00 N W_SOUND GEN- SUPPLIES. 28- 4504 - 702 -70 59965 473.00 a - - - -- -_._- _ -_y_.. - -- * ** -CKS 138406 )5/05/87 77.90 NTCC INC REPAIR PARTS 50- 4540 - 841 -84 -.77-.90. * _ - *a * * «a *** -CKS 138412 )5/08/87 159.90 NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY COMMODITIES 23- 4624 - 613 -61 134955 138412 )5/08/87 24.06 NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY COMMODITIES 23- 4642 - 613 -61 135262 138412 )5/08/87 92.88 _ - NW GRAPHIC SUPPLY__ -COMMODITIES __. _ 23- 4642 - 613 -61 135270 276.84 138413 )5/12/87 _ __ 254.43 ___ NATIONWIDE PAPERS __ __. GEN__SUPPLIES .,.___— _- ___.._ 27- .4504- 664 -66 254.43 __ _ * * * * * * - - - - -- - - .... -- - - - -- - - -- - - - - -- - - - - -- -- - - - -- —A... -- ... _ * ** -CKS - 138420 )5/12/87 274.30 OLD DUTCH FOODS CONCESSIONS 27 -4624- 663 -66 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 14 ` --CHECK NO,_ DATE _ __. _AMOUNT _ VENDOR - ITEM _DESCRIPTION . -,_. -_ _ACCOUNT_ NO._INV. 0 P.O. N MESSAGE 274.30 • » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138429 OS/12/87 1,329.20 .- PEPSI COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 27- 4624- 663 -66 138429 05/08/87 361.75 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50 -4632- 822 -82 138429 05/08/87 414.40 PEPSI COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 138429 05/08/87 201.15 PEPSI..COLA BOTTLING INVENTORY- _. 50- 4632 - 862 -86 2,306.50 + y » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138434 OS/08/87 51.20 PRINTERS SERVICE INC EQUIP MAINT 28 -4274- 704 -70 13271 51.20 t » »» -CKS 138439 05/08/87 217.28 PRIOR LAKE AG GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 - 217.28 t » » » » »» » »» -CKS 138445 OS/06/87 270.00 PAPER CALMENSON 6 CO PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 371171 270.00 t 138446 05/13/87 16.66 PIONEER RIM A WHEEL GEN SUPPLIES .- ...- ---- - -. 10- 4504 - 646 -64 16.66 • � t aatata taa -CKS a 138448 05/06/87 239.10 THE PRINT SHOP PRINTING 10- 4600- 628 -62 3500 _ 239.10 » .. 111111 ttt -CKS 138450 05/13/87 135.02 PBE PARTS 10 -4620- 560 -56 .i 135.02 » ttttaa art -CKS ` 138452 05/13/87 24.12 QUICK SERV BATTERY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 15859 138452 05/13/87 24.60 QUICK SERV BATTERY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 14276 d 138452 05/13/87 11.56 QUICK SERV BATTERY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 16134 60.28 + .. tartar ttt -CKS 138457 05/08/87 2,660.00 R.L.000LD & CO.INC. EQUIP REPLACEMENT _ 10- 4901 - 650 -64 81987 d 138457 OS/08/87 4SS.58 R.L.GOULD 6 CO.INC. REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 08168 -- 3. 115.58 - tttatt ttt -CKS : 138460 05/12/87 65.20 ROYAL CROWN BEV INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 822 -82 -� 138460 05/12/87 302.10 ROYAL CROWN BEV INVENTORY 50 -4632- 842 -84 a 1 1987 L... OF EOINA CHECK kr_n1STER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 15 CHECK NO.--DATE AMOUNT VENDOR _ ._ .._ ___ -ITEM DESCRIPTION _. _ - -_ ACCOUNT NO. INV . N P.O. N MESSAGE 138460 05/12/87 328.90 ROYAL CROWN BEV INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 862 -86 696.20 • 138461 05/08/87 74.95 REEDS SALES 6 SERV GEN SUPPLIES 27 -4504- 664 -66 169654 138461 05/08/87 273.20 _ REEDS SALES 6 SERV REPAIR PARTS _... 27- 4540- 664 -66 170585 348.15 • aaaaaa _ -. aaa -CKS 138463 OS/13/87 3,621.10 REX DIST INVENTORY 50 -4630- 842 -84 3,621.10 + _ aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138479 05/08/87 231.65 R & R SPECIALTIES CONT REPAIRS 28 -4248- 704 -70 8433 231.65 a 138480 OS/13/87 306.00 RTW INC INSUANCE 10- 4260 - 510 -51 138480 05/06/87 365.19 RTW INC INSURANCE 10- 4260 - 510 -51 671.19 a - aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138482 05/08/87 66.07 SATELLITE INDUSTRIES CONT REPAIRS 27- 4248 - 664 -66 - 66.07 + aaaaaa aaa -CKS J 138485 05/08/87 _ 3,687.31 STATE BLDG INSP._ BLDG PERMITS-_ _...._ 10- 3095- 000 -00 138485 05/03/87 91.00 STATE BLDG INSP SURTAX 10- 3113 - 000 -00 3,778.31 a aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138490 05/06/87 207.66 SHERWIN WILLIAMS _.- GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 325 -30 138490 05/06/87 111.54 SHERWIN WILLIAMS PAINT 10- 4544 - 335 -30 319.20 + aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138492 05/06/87 207.66 SOUTHDALE FORD ._. _ CONT REPAIRS---- 10- 4248 - 560 -56 138492 05/06/87 362.17 SOUTHDALE FORD CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 5967 138492 05/05/87 28.70 SOUTHDALE FORD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 144681 138492 05/13/87 3.84 SOUTHDALE FORD ____.... REPAIR PARTS._.____ ___ 10- 4540 - 560 -56 145392 138492 05/13/87 41.37 SOUTHDALE FORD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 145404 138492 05/13/87 31.45 SOUTHDALE FORD PARTS 10 -4620- 560 -56 675.19 + __ 138493 05/12/87 5,681.10 SOUTHSIDE DIST COINC INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 822 -82 138493 05/08/87 11,073.65 SOUTHSIDE DIST COINC INVENTORY- __._...- .. -.._ ___ 50- 4630 - 842 -84 138493 OS/08/87 161.50 SOUTHSIDE DIST COINC INVENTORY 50- 4630- 862 -86 16,916.25 a jaaaaaa ` aaa -CKS 'I 138500 05/11/87 100.00 HAROLD SWANSON POLICE SERVICE. 10 -4100- 430 -42 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 16 v CHECK NO—DATE AMOUNT _. VENDOR_ ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO..INV. A P.O. N MESSAGE 138500 05/11/87 10.00- HAROLD SWANSON CORRECTION 10 -4100- 430 -42 138500 05/11/87 10.00 HAROLD SWANSON .POLICE SERVICE ._ __ .. 10 -4100- 430 -42 100.00 a + +» -CKS - 138502 05/13/87 28.68 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 72726 28.68 + - 138503 05/13/87 134.94- SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP CREDIT 10- 4504- 646 -64 138503 05/13/87 57.33 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 138503 05/13/87 23.06 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 646 -64 -- 138503 05/11/87 41.40 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP REPAIR PARATS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 1385C2 05/05/87 15.19 SUBURBAN - CCC�HEVROLET REPAIR PARTS _ 10- 4540 - 560 -56 72279 1385C� 05/05/87 8.48 SUBURBAN REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 72433 - 138503 05/06/87 27.46 SUBURBAN PLIWLFS�1P REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 138503 05/06/87 37.28 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP TOOLS 10- 4580 - 301 -30 1385'2 05/05/87 .74 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 72417 138503 05/13/87 51.98 SUBURBAN PLUMS -SUP GEN SUPPLIES 40- 4504 - 801 -80 ° 138503 05/13/87 _ _ 93.80 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP REPAIR_PARTS _ ___ 40- 4540 - 803 -80 138503 05/06/87 67.04 SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP CONST 60- 1300 - 182 -03 4.4 (SUBURBAN PLUMB) aaaaaa 24.41 (SUBURBAN CHEV.) aaa -CKS 138505 05/05/87 9.50 SUN ADVERTISING -_.. _..._ _ 10- 4210 - 140 -14 9.50 + aaaaaa aaa -CKS .. 138508 05/13/87 25.25 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 420 -42 18189 138508 05/13/87 6.14 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES ._ 10 -4504- 440 -44 18180 138508 05/13/87 7.10 ST PAUL BOOK GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 440 -44 31922 .� 138508 05/08/87 63.19 ST PAUL BOOK OFFICE SUPPLIES 23- 4516 - 611 -61 31381 101.68.+ _ aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138516 05/08/87 133.83 SEARS ROEBUCK GEN SUPPLIES _ 28- 4504 - 703 -70 .. 138516 05/06/87 55.65 SEARS ROEBUCK GEN SUPPLIES 29- 4504 - 722 -72 c ., aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138531 05/06/87 79.20 AMMONIA HOUSE CONT REPAIRS 28- 4248- 704 -70 013902 79.20 + aaaaaa aaa -CKS d - 178537 _ _05/13/87 _._.__ 204.00 _ _- TRI STATE DRILLING -. REPAIR..PARTS.__ _ __ _ 40- 4540- S05 -80 72184 204.00 + .r C aaa -CKS - 138542 05/08/87 13,237.15 THORPE DIST INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 862 -86 r 1987 L__. OF EDINA CHECK hr-aiSTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 17 _CHECK NO. DATE.. _ AMOUNT _. VENDOR _ ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. A P.O. M MESSAGE 13,237.15 a ' aaaaaa aaa -CKS . 138545 _ 05/06/87 129.50 TWIN CTY GARAGE DOOR .. REPAIR_ PARTS - .._.__.____.._... 10- 4540 - 520 -52 20222 129.50 • aaaaaa -- aaa -CKS 138550 05/06/87 170.85 TISDEL STANDARD REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 170.85 a aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138553 05/05/87 153.80 UNITED ELECTRIC CORP REPAIR PARTS 40- 4540 - 801 -80 153.80 + ' aaaaaa aaa -CKS , 138569. - -. 05/12/87 227.69 VALLEY INDUSTRIAL GASOLINE _ 28 -4612- 704 -70 227.69 • aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138573 05/05/87 81.50 VOSS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 646 -64 16246 138573 05/05/87 145.32 VOSS GEN SUPPLIES _ 27 -4504- 646 -64 15442 226.82 a aaa -CKS 138575 05/13/87 162.00 WATER PRODUCTS REPAIR PARTS 40- 4540 - 803 -80 035927 138575 05/13/87 239.50 WATER- PRODUCTS ..- _ REPAIR PARTS..._ __40- 4540 - 803 -80 036211 401.50 aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138579 05/05/87 76.76 WILLIAMS STEEL -HOWE GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 76107 138579 - 05/13/87 126.74 WILLIAMS STEEL -HDWE ._.... _ TOOLS 10- 4580 - 801 -80 77660 138579 05/13/87 126.74- WILLIAMS STEEL -HOWE CORRECTION 10- 4580 - 801 -80 138579 05/13/87 126.74 WILLIAMS STEEL -HOWE TOOLS 40- 4580 - 801 -80 77660 203.50 +.. aaaaaa *t*-CKS 13S5S2 05/11/87 409.00 GORDON SMITH CO GASOLINE 27 -4612- 664 -66 1045 409.00 a aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138586 05/08/87 70.20 W W GRAINGER REPAIR PARTS -_._ __. 10- 4540 - 646 -64 70.20 + _._138587_ _______05/08/87_ -: ___ __.____ —_ 145.32 _ ______ _WEIGLE_SUE..____.__ ___— .MILEAGE_. _ ---10-4208-600-60 _. 145.32 a aaaaaa _ aaa -CKS 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 18 CHECK NO-DATE - AMOUNT VENDOR _ ITEM DESCRIPTION _. ACCOUNT NO... INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE 138590 05/11/87 100.00 HENRY WROBLESKI POLICE_SERVICE_ _._- _.__._10 -4100- 430 -42 100.00 » aaa -CKS -- 138612 05/08/87 2,418.36 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP BLACKTOP 10- 4524 - 314 -30 2,418.36 a _, aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138618 05/08/87 23.71 MIDWEST BADGE DONATIONS 23 -3265- 000 -00 91259 23.71 » aaaaaa aaa -CKS 138703 05/06/87 490.00 CYLINDER CITY IC CONT REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 4495 138703 05/13/87 420.00 CYLINDER CITY IC REPAIR PARTS 10- •4540- 560 -56 04073 910.00 » 138704 05/06/87 11.90 PIP PRINTING GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 133 -12 138704 05/05/87 36.70 PIP PRINTING GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 133 -12 48.60 a 138705 05/06/87 526.16 VANS INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 133 -12 526.16 a 138706 05/06/87 261.68 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 540 -54 9350 138706 05/06/87 83.00 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT REPAIR.PARTS 10- 4540 - 540 -54 9918 344.68 a J 138707 05/06/87 216.00 BLOOMINGTON LINOLEUM REPAIR PARTS -_ 10- 4540 - 520 -52 7474 138707 05/06/87 58.30 BLOOMINGTON LINOLEUM REPAIR PARS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 7478 274.30 » 138708 05/06/87 376.00 ARCH SALES OF MN REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 NS311 376.00 a 138709 05/06/87 196.40 STEWART LUMBER REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 78975 196.40 » 138710 05/06/87 42.00 FLIP SIDE GRAPHICS PARTS 10- 4620 - 560 -56 7979 42.00 a • 138711 05/05/87 499.20 THE PRINT SHOP PRINTING 23-4600 - 611 -61 499.20 a 138712 05/05/87 6.98 RADIO SHACK REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 520 -52 375109 138712 05/05/87 7.87 RADIO SHACK REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 520 -52 375109 ;. 14.85 • ... - - _ 138713 05/05/87 8.00 NAOMI JOHNSON TYPE REPLACEMENT 10- 4288 - 510 -51 138713 ___- . 05/05/87. . -_ _ 5.07. NAOMI JOHNSON _ .__.- .____ADVERTISING 138713 05/05/87 17.23 NAOMI JOHNSON GEN SUPPLIE 23- 4504 - 612 -61 i 138713 05/05/87 19.04 NAOMI JOHNSON OFFICE SUPPLIES 23- 4516 - 611 -61 J 1987 L_ . OF EDINA CHECK h-.1STER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 19 CHECK NO.- DATE . _-.AMOUNT .. _. VENDOR __..___. _ITEM DESCRIPTION _.._____ ..... ACCOUNT NO. INV. M P.O. M MESSAGE ' 138713 05/05/87 15.42 NAOMI JOHNSON CLASS SUPPLIES 23- 4588 - 611 -61 64.76 » - - - -- ' ! 138714 05/06/87 472.83 CONST FASTENING REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 520 -52 8980 -- __ 472.83 * 138715 05/06/87 83,993.00 MARQUETTE BANK MPLS INVEST EDINBOROUGH 10 -1090- 000 -00 83,993.00 •. _ - -_ 138716 05/06/87 70.00 EDINA ATHLETIC ASSN CONFERENCE 26 -4202- 681 -68 70.00 * 138717 05/06/87 25.00 HERB DECKER RECYCLING 10- 4504 - 507 -50 - 25.00 » 138718 OS/06/87 S24.SO DOWELL SCHLUMBERGER CRRECTION 26- 4248 - 682 -68 138718 05/06/87 5,211.50 DOWELL SCHLUMBERGER CONT REPAIRS 26- 4248 - 682 -68 138718 05/06/87 S24.SO- OOWELL SCHLUMBERGER CORRETION 26 -4248- 682 -68 138718 05/06/87 524.50- OOWELL SCHLUMBERGER CORRECTION 26- 4248 - 682 -68 138718 05/06/87 524.50 OOWELL SCHLUMBERGER -., CONT REPAIRS 26- 4248 - 682 -68 138718 05/08/87 51211.50- DOWELL SCHLUMBERGER CORRECTION 26- 4248 - 682 -68 .00 • 138719 05/06/87 944.43 EDINA EMPLOYEES REIMBURSEMENT 10- 4500 - 500 -50 - 944.43 » 138720 05/06/87 101.20 TWIN CITYPRODUCE GEN SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 500 -SO 69620 - 138720 05/06/87 113.60 TWIN CITYPRODUCE GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- 500 -50 69477 214.80 * _ 138721 05/06/87 164.05 ISIA PRINTNG 28- 4600- 701 -70 164.05 » 138722 05/06/87 55.00 AM PUBLIC WORKS ASSN DUES 10- 4204 - 260 -26 15414 55.00 *. 138723 05/06/87 145.81 BARR ENGINEERINGS CO SERVICES 10- 4201 - 260 -26 145.81 » .. 138724 05/06/87 9.60 NATIONAL SAFETY MAUUAL 10 -4502- 420 -42 - 9.60 * - - 138725 05/06/87 75.00 LOLA EDMAN SERVICES 27 -4201- 662 -66 9169 75.00 » 138726 OS/06/87 75.00 DARLYNE EDMAN SERVICES 27- 4201 - 662 -66 9108 138726 05/12/87 75.00 DARLYNE EDMAN _ ..- SERVICES...___. ._.__...__ .__ __27- 4201 - 662 -66 9171 f 150.00 » » » -CKS 138728 05/12/87 188.50 MAYO DIST INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 822 -82 ! ..138728--- .--.OS/08/87 .______._. ___.___ 135.00. _ _MAYO_ DIST __. _. ._.- __- INVENTORY_ _- _____50- 4630- 842 -84 323.50 I 138729 05/08/87 88.00 NORTH STAR ICE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 822 -82 •I 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 20 CHECK NO. DATE ..AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION. - __.._.ACCOUNT NO. INV.. 0 P.O. N MESSAGE - 138729 05/08/87 157.50 NORTH STAR ICE INVENTORY 50 -4632- 842 -84 . 138729 05/08/87 169.00 NORTH STAR ICE INVENTORY..____ __ ___50-4632-862-86 414.50 • 138730 .05/08/87 99.92 TC HOME JUICE INVENTORY _- _ . 50 -4632- 842 -64 138730 05/08/87 687.40- TC HOME JUICE CORRECTION 50- 4632 - 862 -86 138730 05/08/87 687.40 TC HOME JUICE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 138730 05/08/87 68.40 TC HOME JUICE INVENTORY__ _._._ -. 50- 4632- 862 -86 168.32 + 138731 .05/08/87 490.00 EGAN FIELD NOUAK CONST 60- 1300 - 005 -20 490.00 • 138732 05/08/87 70.00 ST LOUIS..PARK REC GEN SUPPLIES ._ 28- 4504 - 702 -70 . 70.00 + 138733 OS/08/87 _ 276.50 A SHORT STORY _.GEN SUPPLIES _ -. 27 -4504- 664 -66 39919 276.50 • 138734 05/08/87 500.00 ROBERT MATSON GEN SUPPLIES-__ _ .__. 10- 4504 - 642 -64 1255 . 500.00 • 138735 05/08/87 25.00 PLUNKETTS INC GEN SUPPLIES 28- 4504 - 702 -70 346277 ' 25.00 • 138736 05/08/87 10.79 ..STEBGO METALS INC GEN SUPPLIES _._... ...__ 23- 4504 - 612 -61 43030 . 10.79 + 138737 05/08/87 _ 28.00 CLEAN FLO LAB INDIANHEAD LAKE__ 10 -2242- 000 -00 3946 ' 138737 05/08/87 1,904.33 CLEAN FLO LAB INDIANHEAD LAKE 10 -2242- 000 -00 3913 - 1,932.33 0 138738 05/08/87 22.40 HENN CTY DEPT OF POSTAGE 10- 4290 - 140 -14 22.40 + 138739 05/08/87 15.00- MN GOLF COURSE SUP T CORRECTION 27 -4204- 661 -66 138739 05/08/87 150.00 MN GOLF COURSE SUP DUES 27 -4204- 661 -66 �. 138739 05/08/87 15.00 MN-GOLF COURSE SUP - DUES __....__._ _ _ 27 -4204- 661 -66 150.00 r 138740 05/08/87 74.00 BOB NERRE _ _ _LAUNDRY______- __,___ ______27 -4262- 663 -66 • 74.00 + 138741 05/08/87 175.00 _ LINDENFELSER _ RUBBISH. REMOVAL-... .___._._10- 4250 - 646 -64 012180 • 175.00 • 138742 05/08/87 114.00 _ EDINA LIQUOR 02 _ COMMODITES- _ _. 10- 4500 - 500 -50 138742 05/12/87 114.00 EDINA LIQUOR 112 CORRECTION 10- 4500 - 500 -50 138742 05/12/87 114.00- EDINA LIQUOR 02 CORRECTION 10- 4500 - 500 -50 138742 05/12/87 ___ 114.00- EDINA LIQUOR 02 _ CORRECTION _ _ ..__..10- 4500 - 500 -50 .00 + 138743 __ _____05/08/87 . _. _ - . 10. 00 _ IMPRINTERS _ , -- _ __ _ -_ . __ GEN_ SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 510 -51 8752 _ • 10.00 • f "' 138744 05/08/87 _ . 64.35.__..... _TARGET. TARGET. STORES ..._. _ _ . CONT_.REPAIRS__._._._ . __ 23- 4248 - 612 -61 • 1987 L_ . OF EDINA CHECK h- ESTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 21 CHECK NO. -DATE AMOUNT _...VENDOR _.._.ITEM_DESCRIPTION. -____- .ACCOUNT NO. INV. M P.O. M MESSAGE 64.35 t 138745 05/08/87 61.20 MPLS WELDERS SUPPLY GEN SUPPLIES - 23- 4504 - 612 -61 61.20 * •ssss� •s « -CKS 138748 05/11/87 182.27 CELLULAR ONE DUES.__ .- _ 10- 4204 - 140 -14 182.27 + 138749 05/11/87 6.50 LIEN SERVICES 27- 4201 - 664 -66 6.50 • 138750 .05/11/87 194.62 SERVICE SALES CORP ADVERTISING .._.,__ SO- 4516 - 820 -82 1387SO OS/11/87 194.63 SERVICE SALES CORP ADVERTISING 50 -45t6- 840 -84 t387SO OS/11/87 194.63 SERVICE SALES CORP ADVERTISING SO- 4516 - 860 -86 583.88 138751 05/11/87 11,370.00 E H RENNER 6 SONS CONT REPAIRS 40 -4248- 801 -80 11,370.00 +_ - 138752 05/11/87 44.50 THE PRINT SHOP PROGRAMS 10-4500- 500 -50 ' 44.50 138753 05/11/87 33.90 SYSTEM SUPPLY INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504- SIO -SI 050183 138753 OS/12/87 46.40 SYSTEM SUPPLY INC GEN SUPPLIES .. ..- ___...... 10- 4504 - 510 -51 OS0297 80.30 e 138754 05/11/87 6.09 COLLEEN PAULUS MILEAGE 10- 4208 - 480 -48 6.09 138755 OS/11/87 63.00 AMRE .. REFUND---. _._ ..__..______ _ _ . 10-3095-000-00 63.00 • 138756 05/11/87 54.00 THOMAS D BERGUEN REFUND_.- _.. _._ 10- 3095- 000 -00 54.00 + 138757 OS/11/87 358.00 AKONA CORP_ .. _ - -. .. ___ CHEMICALS _ __ .._ _ . ___ 10-4564-642-64 16919 358.00 • ' 138758 05/11/87. 162.00 MAUREEN BROCKWAY .. MAINTENANCE ...___. 23 -4120- 612 -61 138758 05/11/87 60.00 MAUREEN BROCKWAY MAINTENANCE 23- 4201 - 611 -61 - 222.00 + 138759 05/11/87 172.00 SUSIE HIBBS SERVICES 23 -4201- 611 -61 172.00 • 138760 05/11/87 120.00 J THOMAS NELSON LUNCHEON _ 23- 4201 - 611 -61 120.00 y 138761 05/11/87 80.00 HEATHER HENKEL LUNCHEON 23 -4120- 612 -61 '. 80.00 • ' 138762 05/11/87 160.00 LYLE HOOFNAGLE LUNCHEON 23- 4120 - 612 -61 % 160.00 y i' 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 22 CHECK NO_DATE AMOUNT . -, VENDOR. ITEM DESCRIPTION - _ -__ -- _ACCOUNT N0._ INV. • P.O. # MESSAGE 138763 _ 05/11/87 41.25 PAT GREER _ LUNCHEON _. _..._ _-.__23- 4540 - 613 -61 41.25 • 138764 05/11/87 50.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY - .,..RUBBISH REMOVAL,_._ _.___,__10 -4250- 353 -30 50.00 + 138765 .05/11/87 196.00 VICTORIA LENANDER.- _ AMBULANCE REFUND._ 10- 3180 - 000 -00 196.00 • 138766 05/11/87 500.00 LAKELAND FLORIST CONT SERV 10- 4200 - 180 -18 500.00 • _ 138767 05/11/87 104.63 NEWARK ELECTRONICS REPAIR..PARTS - _.10- 4540 - 520 -52 829205 104.63 138768 -. 05/11/87 126.11 JOSEPH RYAN AMBULANCE REFUND- ._... 10- 3160- 000 -00 126.11 + _ 138769 .. 05/11/87 568.25 WINFIELD DEVELOP. MONTHLY..LEAS _._ 10- 4201 - 627 -62 568.25 • .. 138770 05/12/87 85.06 CEDERGREN DESIGN GEN,SUPPLIES _ 28- 4504 - 702 -70 6271 85.06 138771 05/12/87 114.00 EDINA LIQUOR #3 _._. COMMODITIES ..... -_,._ 10 -4500- 500 -50 138771 05/12/87 57.00- EDINA LIQUOR M3 CREDIT 10- 4500 - 500 -50 57.00 • 138772 05/12/87 21200.00 SOUTHERN THUNDER REG FEES 28- 3500 - 000 -00 2,200.00 « 138773 05/12/87 133.63 MOLLIE PAULSON SERVICES 23 -4120- 613 -61 133.63 • 138774 05/12/87 24.50 BARBARA LUNDGREN ART WORK SOLD 23- 3625- 000 -00 24.50 138775 05/12/87 44.80 SUSAN FRAME ART WORK SOLD - 23 -3625- 000 -00 44.80 « 138776 05/12/87 175.00 MARGARET MCDOWELL ART WORK SOLD 23 -3625- 000 -00 175.00 138777 05/12/87 315.00 SANDRA CLARK ART WORK SOLD 23- 3625- 000 -00 315.00 • 138778 05/12/87 23.80 NANCY HAMMER ART WORK SOLD - 23 -3625- 000 -00 23.80 0 138779 05/12/87 41.30 BETTY THOMPSON ART WORK SOLD 23- 3625- 000 -00 41.30 • 138780 05/12/87 44.80 BETTY PEDDIE ART WORK SOLD 23- 3625- 000 -00 44.80 0 1987 C. . OF EOINA CHECK k..A STER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 23 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ ._ VENDOR .- _I.TEM.DESCRIPTION _ - - -- _.ACCOUNT NO. INV. M P.Q. N MESSAGE 138781 ___OS/12/87 115.50 AUDRY BUCKLEY ART WORK SOLD_._.______- .._23- 3625- 000 -00 138791 05/13/87 115.50 • LODGING 10- 4206 - 140 -14 138782 ._05/12/87 385.00 KAY SHARKEY _ ART WORK SOLD_. 138792 OS/13/87 385.00 » CONT REPAIRS 40 -4248- 801 -80 20330 138783 05/12/87 126.26 MOLLIE PAULSON _ART WORK SOLD_.- .23- 3625- 000 -00 138793 05/13/87 126.26 » REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 138784 05/12/87 134.97 AQI RONDACK DIRECT GEN SUPPLIES 27-4504- 662 -66 138794 05/13/87 134.97 » ADVERTISING 50 -4214- 822 -82 138785 OS/12/87 2,575.00 SPALDING RANGE BALLS 27- 4636 - 666 -66 526953 138794 05/13/87 2,575.00 » ADVERTISING 50 -4214- 862 -86 138786 ._05/12/87 269.98 OAVES FOOD WAGON CONCESSIONS _ _ 27- 4624- 663 -66 138795 05/13/87 269.98 » ADVERTISING 50- 4214- 822 -82 138787 OS/12/87 249.00 THE OLD OAK TREE. OFFICE FURN ._ 27 -1330- 000 -00 09963 138795 05/13/87 249.00 • ADVERTISING ___._.. _.__ 50- 4214 - 862 -86 » » » -CKS 138790 05/13/87 47,295.00 NORWEST BANK MPLS DUE HRA 10- 1145 - 000 -00 47,295.00 » 138791 05/13/87 165.00 LMC HOUSING LODGING 10- 4206 - 140 -14 165.00 » 138792 OS/13/87 440.00 MPLS 6 SUB SEWER CONT REPAIRS 40 -4248- 801 -80 20330 440.00 •. - - - - 138793 05/13/87 124.05 SCHARBER d SONS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 124.05 s . 138794 05/13/87 108.33 TWIN CITY READER ADVERTISING 50 -4214- 822 -82 138794 - 05/13/87 108.34 .__ TWIN CITY READER_.... ADVERTISING __. 50 -4214- 842 -84 138794 05/13/87 108.33 TWIN CITY READER ADVERTISING 50 -4214- 862 -86 325.00 « 138795 05/13/87 12.50 AMERICAN LEGION POST ADVERTISING 50- 4214- 822 -82 138795 05/13/87 12.50 AMERICAN LEGION POST ADVERTISING 50 -4214- 842 -84 138795 05/13/87 12.50 AMERICAN LEGION POST ADVERTISING ___._.. _.__ 50- 4214 - 862 -86 37.50 » 138796 05/13/87 38.73 FME CORP GEN SUPPLIES_ - . -_ -__ 10- 4504 - 510 -51 38.73 t 138797 05/13/87 200.00. N CRAIG JOHNSON _.__ CONT SERVICE _._ ._____ 50- 4200 - 820 -82 138797 05/13/87 200.00 N CRAIG JOHNSON CONT SERV 50- 4200 - 840 -84 138797 05/13/87 200.00 N CRAIG JOHNSON CONT SERV 50- 4200 - 860 -86 - - -- - - - - - -600. 0 0 - • - -- - _ .. - - -- ._ _- - - - - - -- -- -- - - -- -- 138798 OS/13/87 80.00 STATE OF MINNESOTA BLDG CODE 10- 4502 - 490 -49 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 05 -18 -87 PAGE 24 CHECK NO-DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION. `_ _ACCOUNT NO.. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE _- 80.00 « 138799 05/13/87 513.00 ERIC ANDERSON SERVICES 10- 4201- 500 -50 138799 05/13/87 39.90 ERIC ANDERSON MILEAGE 10- 4208- 500 -50 552.90 + .. 138800 05/13/87 3,559.42 VICTOR CARLSON PAYMENT 60 -2040- 000 -00 3,559.42 • — 138801 05/13/87 44,407.15 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS PAYMENT 60 -2040- 000 -00 44,407.15 t 138802 05/13/87 4,916.25 DAVID H VOLKMAN PAYMENT 60 -2040- 000 -00 _ 4,916.25 s 138803 05/13/87 53,793.40 BURY CARLSON & SONS PAYMENT 60 -2040- 000 -00 53,793.40 « 138804 05/13/87 43.95 PUBLIC SECTOR CONST CONF 10- 4202 - 420 -42 43.95 • 138805 05/13/67 49.18 SHERIFFS DEPT EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 420 -42 138805 05/13/87 487.72 SHERIFFS.DEPT ROOM & BOARD _._ 10- 4286- 220 -22 536.90 s 138806 05/13/87 7,458.25 HENNEPIN CTY TREAS ROOM & BOARD ....... 10- 4286 - 220 -22 13558 138806 05/13/87 51102.00 HENNEPIN CTY TREAS ROOM & BOARO 10- 4286- 220 -22 13460 138806 05/13/87 125.62 HENNEPIN CTY TREAS ROOM & BOARD 10- 4286- 220 -22 12,685.87 « 138807 05/13/87 70.00 ERIC FELTON CONFERENCE 10 -2149- 000 -00 70.00 • _- 138808 05/13/87 107.72 SCHAFER EQUIP CO TOOLS 10- 4580 - 301 -30 131829 107.72 + 138809 05/13/87 29.00 BENFER EQUIP & SUPP GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 301 -30 5795 29.00 • 138810 05/13/87 991.00 ARPS TREE SERVICE STUMP GRINDING 10- 4248- 644 -64 991.00.* 138811 05/13/87 193.00 FRANK B HALL & CO INSURANCE 10- 4260 - 510 -51 193.00 + . 138812 05/13/87 900.90 LABOR RELATIONS ASSO SERVICES 10- 4201 - 140 -14 900.90 + _ 138813 05/13/87 250.00 REM CN INC SERVICES 10- 4201 - 520 -52 001164 _ 250.00 138814 05/13/87 19.00 US WEST PAGING GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 133 -12 - -- - -- 19.00 y -- 138815 05/13/87 40.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY SERVICES 10- 4201 - 500 -50 1987 OF EDINA CHECK STER 05 -18 -8. AGE 25 CHECK NO.- DATE ._ ._ AMOUNT _ VENDOR - - . I.TEM _DESCRIPTION_ _.___ _ ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O. N MESSAGE - 40.00 + 138816 05/13/87 171.04 LUNDS SERVICES 50 -4201- 821 -82 07082 171.04 + 138817 05/13/87 86.26 KUSTOM ELECTRONICS LEASE PAYMENT 10- 4901 - 420 -42 86.26 + I 138818 05/13/87 82.66 ARTISTIC FLOORS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 520 -52 3123 82.66 + I 138819 OS/13/87 97.66 ARMSTRONG MED 1ND 1ST AID SUPPLY 10- 4510 - 440 -44 138819 05/13/87 11200.00 ARMSTRONG MED IND EQUIP MAINT 10- 4901 - 440 -44 1,297.66 138820 05/13/87 390.00 MID CENTRAL INC GEN SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 440 -44 001161 138820 ..._._05/13/87 324.00 MID CENTRAL INC PROT CLOTHING -__.. _ 10- 4574 - 440 -44 001161 714.00 • r 138821 _ 05/13/87 132.00 ALL FIRE TEST INC EQUIP.MAINT _.___ _.10- 4274 - 440 -44 09210 132.00 + 138822 05/13/87 267.00 PPC INC CONFERENCE. _ 10- 4202- 440 -44 267.00 + 138823 OS/13/87 287.48 HENN CTY MED CTR 1ST AID SUPPLIES __ .10- 4510 - 440 -44 5313 r 287.48 + 138824 ..05/13/87 47.10 CUTOM FIRE APPARATUS GEN SUPPLIES---- _... 10- 4504- 5b0 -56 001625 47.10 + x i tt + + ++ tea. -CKS 0 188126 05/13/87 215.00 OAVIS EUGENE SERVICES 10- 4201- 600 -60 188126 05/13/87 29.82 _ DAVIS EUGENE MILEAGE _ 10- 4208 - 600 -60 244.82 + w ttte +e _ e ++-CKS 344,314.00 FUND 10 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 4,919.50 FUND 23 TOTAL ART CENTER 247.59 ._ FUND 26 TOTAL -_ SHIMMING POOL FUND_ _ 26,326.04 FUND 27 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND 10,461.49 FUND 28 TOTAL RECREATION CENTER FUND Computer checks #'s 77835 thru 79.25 _ FUND 29 TOTAL GUN RANGE FUND 78112, hand typed checks 76979 40,279.46 FUND 40 TOTAL UTILITY FUND 76998 j° 100,009.70 FUND 50 TOTAL LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND _ 107,472.36 FUND 60 TOTAL __ _ CONSTRUCTION FUND _ _ _ /.r. „�V�D 7:77, FAYR'EN7 634, 109.39 TOTAL '� �!NANCL JIHcCT� .ATE � 1987 C,.. OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 1 CHECK NO_.- DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. A P.O. M MESSAGE 090129 05/08/87 4,571.53- BELLBOY 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 4,571.53 -a asssra saa -CKS 096415 04/23/87 8,856.00 MED CENTER - HOSP " �- _ i0- 4156 - 510 -51 MANUAL 8,856.00 a a•a -CKS 096701 04/23/87 300.00 POSTMASTER POSTAGE DUE 10 -4290- 510 -51 MANUAL 300.00 a -- - - -_.. -- aaaaaa sta -CKS 097067 05/08/87 273.75 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 097067 05/08/87 5.00 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 097067 05/08/87 6.00 CAPITAL CITY _ _ DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 097067 05/08/87 221.84 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 506.59 a aasras aa• -CKS 097129 05/08/87 4,571.53 BELLBOY -- — 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 4,571.53 a •ssr.a« _. aaa -CKS 097135 04/23/87 3.13- EAGLE WINE DISCOUNT--- 50- 3710 - 003 -00 MANUAL 097135 05/08/87 4.10- EAGLE WINE _ __ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097135 05/08/87 8.49- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 097135 05/08/87 205.09 EAGLE WINE .. 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 097135 05/08/87 424.36 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 097135 04/23/87 24.94 EAGLE WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 822 -82 MANUAL 097135 04/23/87 156.63 EAGLE WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 MANUAL 795.30 a — __ -- -- - - asr•a «« - aar -CKS 097138 05/08/87 46.88- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 15.73- ED PHILLIPS_ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 .67- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 7.73- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 2.06- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 40.17- ED PHILLIPS -- 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 12.90- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 3.45- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 14.79- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 2,343.75 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 2,008.39 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 739.60 ED PHILLIPS - 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 67.36 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 _ 1,572.85 -_ ED PHILLIPS _ 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 205.85 ED PHILLIPS _ 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 773.40 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 2 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR 32.48- ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. 8 MESSAGE 097138 OS/08/87 344.80 ED PHILLIPS .39- JOHNSON 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 097138 05/08/87 11290.10 ED PHILLIPS 40.32- JOHNSON 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL MANUAL , 9,201 .72 05/08/87 .39 JOHNSON WINE SO -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 .39- - - -- - -- »» »-CKS 097190 OS/08/87 74.11- GRIGGS COOPER AND C SO -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 097190 05/08/87 3.67- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097190 05/08/87 40.04- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 097190 05/08/87 3,705.38 GRIGGS COOPER AND C SO- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 097190 05/08/87 183.52 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 097190 05/08/87 21002.19 GRIGGS COOPER AND C - 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL MANUAL 5,773.27 » 05/08/87 9.46- JOHNSON WINE SO- 3710 - 842 -84 r f i f r 1 » » » -CKS 097285 05/08/87 32.48- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3700 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 .39- JOHNSON WINE - 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 40.32- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL , 097285 05/08/87 .39 JOHNSON WINE SO -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 .39- JOHNSON WINE - 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 1.52- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 1.84- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 4.65- JOHNSON WINE - - - - - 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 17.02- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL y 097285 05/08/87 9.14- JOHNSON WINE SO- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 09728S 05/08/87 13.04- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 9.46- JOHNSON WINE SO- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 82.06- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 3.40- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 .31- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 1.04- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 1.71- JOHNSON _ WINE - '- - 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 1.36- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 6.58- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL w 097285 05/08/87 1.62- JOHNSON WINE __. _ - ___.__.___ 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 5.46- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL w 097285 05/08/87 2,016.41 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 4,103.50 JOHNSON _ WINE - - - _ 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 1,700.87 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL b 097285 05/08/87 152.17 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 .90 JOHNSON WINE - - — - 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 182.63 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL fj 097285 05/08/87 .00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 40.11 JOHNSON WINE - + -'-" �' 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 464.32 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL k 097285 05/08/87 40.11- JOHNSON WINE SO -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 05/08/87 39.21 JOHNSON WINE - -- _ - -- - 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 16.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 1,304.44 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL w 097285 05/08/87 339.50 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 946.54 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 66.45- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL w 097285 05/08/87 3.27- JOHNSON WINE -" - _.� - "' -- 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 097285 05/08/87 913.30 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL iv 1987 C_ OF EDINA 2.68- CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT NjO97285 05/08/87 545.05 097285 05/08/87 171.21 097285 05/08/87 658.92 _.097285 05/08/87 30.96 '097285 05/08/87 135.80 097285 05/08/87 103.90 097285 05/08/87 161.11 sss -CKS 50- 3710- 822 -82 13,683.82 s 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 50 -3710- 862 -86 097433 05/08/87 1.50 - 097433 05/08/87 1,598.14 097433 05/08/87 .00 097433 05/08/87 21.60 097433 04/23/87 48.00 WINE 097451 1,666.24 s »» » »»» CHECK RC_LSTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION JOHNSON WINE JOHNSON WINE JOHNSON WINE JOHNSON WINE JOHNSON WINE JOHNSON WINE JOHNSON WINE PAUSTIS 6 SONS PAUSTIS 6 SONS PAUSTIS d SONS PAUSTIS & SONS PAUSTIS d SONS 097435 05/08/87 2.68- PRIOR WINE CO 097435 05/08/87 10.01- PRIOR WINE CO 097435 05/08/87 6.16- PRIOR WINE CO 097435 05/08/87 133.95 PRIOR WINE CO 097435 05/08/87 500.28 PRIOR WINE CO 097435 05/08/87 308.10 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL 923.48 • sss -CKS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL ' 097451 05/08/87 15.04- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 .29- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 .29 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 .29- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 15.04- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 15.04 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 16.69- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 4.57- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 .26 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 15.22- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 11.08- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 18.14- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 833.99 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 12.76- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 761.00 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 554.16 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 1,501.45 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 1,501.45- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 28.75- QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 28.95 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 28.75 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 1,501.45 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 456.65 QUALITY WINE 097451 05/08/87 11809.20 QUALITY WINE 5,851.87 s INVENTORY 04 -30 -87 PAGE 3 ACCOUNT NO. INV. * P.O. R MESSAGE 50-4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 842 -84 ss» -CKS 50- 3700 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL 50 -4626- 842 -84 sss -CKS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 822 -82 sss -CKS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710- 822 -62 MANUAL 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL J 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 4 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O. N MESSAGE tsssss tts -CKS 097747 05/08/87 .95- BRW, ENTERPRISES 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 097747 05/08/87 63.58 BRW, ENTERPRISES 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 62.63 tsssss 1st -CKS 0 103055 04/23/87 100.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 3230 - 000 -00 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 11.29 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 3720 - 000 -00 MANUAL 103055 04/23/97 38.50 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4120- 663 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 365.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4201 - 662 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 12.00 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4202 - 661 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 13.75 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27 -4204- 661 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 23.92 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4290 - 661 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 18.54 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4504 - 662 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 8.59 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4516 - 661 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 15.20 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4600 - 661 -66 MANUAL 103055 04/23/87 188.89 BRAEMAR GOLF PETTY CASH 27- 4624 - 663 -66 MANUAL 795.68 ssssss sts -CKS 103251 04/23/87 60,000.00 HRA DUE HRA 10 -1145- 000 -00 MANUAL 103251 04/23/87 60.00- HRA CORRECTION_ 10 -1145- 000 -00 MANUAL 103251 04/23/87 60.00 HRA DUE HRA 10 -1145- 000 -00 MANUAL 60,000.00 s ttttst - - sst -CKS 103354 04/23/87 2,977.34 MINNEGASCO HEAT 10- 1130 - 000 -00 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 739.78 MINNEGASCO HEAT 10- 4254 - 446 -44 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 689.58 MINNEGASCO HEAT 10- 4254 - 520 -52 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 3,108.20 MINNEGASCO HEAT 10 -4254- 540 -54 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 935.17 MINNEGASCO HEAT 10- 4254 - 646 -64 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 112.05 MINNEGASCO HEAT 23- 4254 - 612 -61 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 1,511.66 MINNEGASCO HEAT 27- 4254 - 662 -66 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 151.93 MINNEGASCO HEAT 27- 4254 - 664 -66 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 2,855.49 MINNEGASCO HEAT 28- 4254 - 702 -70 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 247.36 MINNEGASCO HEAT 40- 4254- 801 -80 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 2,479.21 MINNEGASCO _ _ HEAT - - - 40-4254- 803-80 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 61.78 MINNEGASCO HEAT 50- 4254 - 821 -82 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 82.13 MINNEGASCO HEAT 50 -4254- 841 -84 MANUAL 103354 04/23/87 173.95 MINNEGASCO _ _ HEAT -� 50- 4254 - 861 -86 MANUAL 16,125.63 t ttssss 1st -CKS 103391 04/23/87 633.89 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10 -1130- 000 -00 MANUAL 103391 04/23/87 296.08 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 301 -30 MANUAL 103391 04/23/87 12,132.84 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 321 -30 MANUAL 103391 04/23/87 10,086.65 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC__________ 10- 4252- 322 -30 MANUAL 103391 04/23/87 2,097.75 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC �— 10 -4252- 330 -30 MANUAL a 103391 04/23/87 434.98 NORTHERN STATES ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 345 -30 MANUAL • f 1 1987 C. OF EDINA CHECK NO. DATE 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 103391 04/23/87 ELECTRIC 04/23/87 1103391 ELECTRIC » » » » »» 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 103396 04/23/87 1103396 04/23/87 AMOUNT 48.23 1,788.72 542.29 41.31 989.19 971.15 2,071.40 530.75 86.48 861.10 137.55 5,659.05 23.60 2,167.34 10,488.59 23.60 411.99 570.62 296.20 53,391.35 » 194.60 60.25 7.85 3,843.18 215.68 73.02 59.77 156.02 49.94 323.86 344.72 37.72 109.71 976.55 154.53 184.41 129.94 6,921.75 » CHECK Rr- -&STER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 5 VENDOR NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NORTHERN STATES NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL NW BELL ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. A P.O. N MESSAGE ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 358 -30 MANUAL ELECTRIC _ 10- 4252 - 375 -30 MANUAL ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 440 -44 MANUAL ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 460 -46 MANUAL ELECTRIC_ 10- 4252- 520 -52 MANUAL ELECTRIC 10- 4252 - 540 -54 MANUAL ELECTRIC 10 -4252- 646 -64 MANUAL ELECTRIC 23- 4252 - 612 -61 MANUAL ELECTRIC 26- 4252 - 682 -68 MANUAL ELECTRIC 27- 4252 - 662 -66 MANUAL ELECTRIC 27- 4252 - 664 -66 MANUAL ELECTRIC 28- 4252 - 702 -70 MANUAL ELECTRIC 29- 4252 - 722 -72 MANUAL ELECTRIC 40- 4252 - 801 -80 MANUAL ELECTRIC 40- 4252 - 803 -80 MANUAL ELECTRIC 40- 4252- 804 -80 MANUAL ELECTRIC 50- 4252 - 821 -82 MANUAL ELECTRIC 50- 4252 - 841 -84 MANUAL ELECTRIC 50- 4252 - 861 -86 MANUAL » »» -CKS TELEPHONE 10- 4201 - 622 -62 MANUAL FINANCE DEPT 10- 4226 - 160 -16 MANUAL FINANCE DEPT _ - -._ 10- 4256 - 460 -46 MANUAL FINANCE DEPT 10- 4256 - 510 -S1 MANUAL TELEPHONE 10- 4256 - 628 -62 MANUAL TELEPHONE 10- 4256 - 646 -64 MANUAL TELEPHONE 10- 4504 - 133 -12 MANUAL TELEPHONE 23- 4256 - 612 -61 MANUAL TELEPHONE 26- 4256- 682 -68 MANUAL TELEPHONE 27- 4256 - 662 -66 MANUAL TELEPHONE 28- 4256 - 702 -70 MANUAL TELEPHONE _ 29- 4256 - 722 -72 MANUAL TELEPHONE 40 -4256- 801 -80 MANUAL TELEPHONE 40 -4256- 803 -80 MANUAL TELEPHONE _ _ 50- 4256 - 821 -82 MANUAL TELEPHONE 50- 4256 - 841 -84 MANUAL TELEPHONE 50- 4256- 861 -86 MANUAL 104067 05/08/87 134.75 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628 - 842 -84 104067 05/08/87 4.90 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 842 -84 139.65 • » » » » »» 104135 05/08/87 8.41- EAGLE WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 104135 05/08/87 .48 EAGLE WINE SO- 3710 - 822 -82 104135 05/08/87 29.94- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 104135 05/08/87 57 _ _ EAGLE WINE - - 50- 3710 - 862 -86 104135 05/08/87 25.33- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 » »» -CKS MANUAL MANUAL » »» -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 6 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE 104135 05/08/87 48.05- EAGLE WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 104135 05/08/87 420.50 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 104135 05/08/87 1,497.05 EAGLE WINE _ — - —' SO- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104135 05/08/87 3.83- EAGLE WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 104135 05/08/87 3.38- EAGLE WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 104135 05/08/87 3.83 EAGLE WINE - -` - -- ' "'- 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 104135 05/08/87 3.83- EAGLE WINE SO -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL i 104135 05/08/87 1,266.28 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 104135 05/08/87 28.70- EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 104135 04/23/87 77.97 EAGLE WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL 3,115.21 a, as » » »» aaa -CKS e 104138 05/08/87 40.75- ED PHILLIPS _ ....�- 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 2.18- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 OS/08/87 11.06- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 54.40- ED PHILLIPS _ _ - - -'- 80- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 10.27- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 1.94- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 18.18- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 22.79- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 7.08- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 7.02- ED PHILLIPS - - - -" 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 2,037.35 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 2,719.78 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 1,139.65 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 11105.85 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 214.60 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 1,517.61 ED PHILLIPS - -- 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 194.40 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 1,027.16 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 708.35 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 104138 05/08/87 702.15 ED PHILLIPS SO- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL i 104138 04/23/87 45.66 ED PHILLIPS INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 MANUAL 104138 04/23/87 33.32 ED PHILLIPS - INVENTORY ________'___'_'50-4630-842-84 MANUAL 104138 04/23/87 24.75 ED PHILLIPS INVENTORY 50 -4632- 822 -82 MANUAL 4 ,104138 04/23/87 42.57 ED PHILLIPS - -- INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 MANUAL 11,340.56 • aaaaaa � aaa -CKS 104190 05/08/87 23.65- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 104190 05/08/87 38.49 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 104190 05/08/87 38.49- GRIGGS COOPER AND C ....50-3710-842 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL ' i 104190 05/08/87 38.49- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ck�104190 05/08/87 52.18- GRIGGS COOPER AND C__ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 104190 104190 05/08/87 05/08/87 11182.28 1,818.72 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL l GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50-4626-842-84 MANUAL _ 104140 OS /OS /87 1,924.30 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 104190 05/08/87 1,924.30- GRIGGS COOPER _ AND C 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104190 05/08/87 2,608.97 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 104190 04/23/87 41.99 GRIGGS COOPER INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 MANUAL 5,537.64 - _ — - — aaaaaa •�� aaa -CK i 1987 Ca., OF EDINA CHECK N0. DATE AMOUNT CHECK REGISTER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 104285 05/08/87 13.42- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 56.51- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 143.45- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 1.39- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 3.51- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 92.22- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 4.45- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 2.01- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 19.61- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 79.68- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 2.56- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 230.55- JOHNSON WINE t04285 05/08/87 79.68- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 79.68 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 8.30- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 2.90- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 230.55- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 36.37- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 1.62- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 .00 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 100.58 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 963.33 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 4,611.00 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 4.90 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 .35 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 24.50- JOHNSON WINE ' 104285 05/08/87 3,984.14 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 3,984.14 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 11,527.50 JOHNSON _ WINE 104285 05/08/87 24.50 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 24.50 _ JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 3,984.14- JOHNSON _ WINE 104285 05/08/87 1,818.60 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 8.75 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 11,527.50 JOHNSON WINE -�- 104285 05/08/87 3.15 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 444.56 JOHNSON WINE _ 104285 OS/08/87 28.20- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 .00 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 140.54 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 4.55 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 6.30 JOHNSON WINE 104285 ., 05/08/87 351.26 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 832.64 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 5.60 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 9.45 JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 256.45 - . JOHNSON - WINE 104285 05/08/87 .00 JOHNSON WINE 104285 _ 05/08/87 289.98 JOHNSON WINE _ 104285 05/08/87 3.85 __- JOHNSON WINE 104285 05/08/87 161.71 JOHNSON WINE e 104285_ 05/08/87 4.20 JOHNSON WINE - -'36, 128.09 -� -- --- - -- - - -- - - - - - -- .srsrer 04 -30 -87 PAGE 7 ACCOUNT NO.._INV. 9 P.O. *MESSAGE 50- 3700- 822 -82 - - -- -- 50- 3700 - 822 -82 50- 3700 - 842 -84 50- 3710- 822 -82 -� -- -- - SO- 3710 - 822 -82 50- 3710 - 822 -82 50- 3710 - 822 -82 SO-3710-822-82 50 -3710- 822 -82 50 -3710- 842 -84 - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 50- 3710 - 842 -84 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- 3710- 862 -86 - - - SO- 4626- 822 -82 50- 4626- 822 -82 50- 4626- 822 -82 50- 4626- 822 -82 50- 4626- 822 -82 50 -4626- 822 -82 50 -4626- 842 -84 50- 4626- 842 -84 _ 50- 4626- 842 -84 50- 4626- 842 -84 50- 4626 - 842 -84 50- 4626- 842 -84 50 -4626- 842-84 50- 4626- 862 -86 50- 4626- 862 -86 - - _ 50 -4626- 862 -86 50 -4628- 822 -82 50- 4628- 822 -82 50 -4628- 822 -82 50- 4628 - 822 -82 50 -4628- 822 -82 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- 842 -84 .50-46e8-862-86 50- 4628- 862 -86 50- 4628 - 862 -86 _ 50-46e8-86e-86 MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL rrr -CKS �I -I �I 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 8 I CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. M MESSAGE 104435 05/08/87 11.51- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 104435 05/08/87 4.71- PRIOR WINE CO _ -� 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 104435 05/08/87 575.55 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ,104435 05/08/87 235.40 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 794.73 • -- - - - - -- _ •sss «� ss• -CKS 104451 05/08/87 24.15- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 6.47- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 2.34- QUALITY WINE - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 13.06- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 13.06- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 8.53- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 13.06 QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL - 104451 05/08/87 1,207.45 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 117.04 QUALITY WINE - _ - 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 647.30 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL e 104451 05/08/87 1,305.10- QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 104451 05/08/87 1,305.10 QUALITY WINE _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL r 104451 05/08/87 426.42 QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL r 104451 05/08/87 1,305.10 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 3,648.76 • - - — - -- . + e syssss s• »-CKS r 104747 05/08/87 1.69- BRW, ENTERPRISES 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL < 104747 05/08/87 113.14 BRW, ENTERPRISES 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111.45 • - — -- » »s »se •t» -CKS s %104784 04/23/87 22.00 POSTMASTER POSTAGE 10- 4290 - 184 -18 MANUAL 22.00 s •tas »s • +* -CKS 106095 04/23/87 18.65 COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX — — 10- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL y 106095 04/23/87 18.65- COMM OF REV CORRECTION 10- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL ; 106095 04/23/87 187.65 COMM OF REV SALES TAX 10- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL 106095 04/23/87 166.57 COMM OF REV - -SALES 'TAX— - - -- 23- 3357- 000 -00 MANUAL 106095 04/23/87 1,233.35 COMM OF REV SALES TAX 27- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL 106095 04/23/87 115.96 COMM OF REV SALES TAX 28- 3357 - 000 -00 MANUAL 106095 04/23/87 59.30 COMM OF REV SALES TAX ~ • _ 29- 3357- 000 -00 MANUAL v 106095 04/23/87 863.39 COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX 40 -3357- 000 -00 MANUAL 106095 04/23/87 6,231.78 COMM OF REVENUE_ SALES TAX 50- 3357 - 001 -00 MANUAL 106095 04/23/87 11,858.28 _ COMM OF REVENUE SALES TAX ! 50 -3357- 002 -00 MANUAL y 106095 04/23/87 10,382.62 COMM OF REV SALES TAX 50 -3357- 003 -00 MANUAL 31,098.90 y es «ss� *** -CKS 107174 04/23/87 125,000.00 1ST SD BANK ' -- TRANSFER —50= 1010 - 000 -00 MANUAL 107174 04/23/87 125,000.00- 1ST SO BANK TRANSFER 50 -1010- 000 -00 MANUAL �� 1987 C,.. OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 9 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. • MESSAGE .00 t » » »» »» - --- -- - -- a »» -CKS • + 107430 04/23/87 21,190.34 PERA PERA CONT 10- 4145 - 510 -51 MANUAL 21,190.34 • • » »aaa» t »» -CKS 107506 04/23/87 10,704.84 SW FIDELTIY ICA CONT 10- 4149-510 -51 MANUAL 107506 04/23/87 138.92 SW FIDELTIY MED CONT 10 -4162- 510 -51 MANUAL 10,843.76 t a »aa »» aa» -CKS 107700 04/23/87 21000.00 POSTMASTER POSTAGE DUE 10- 4290 - 510 -51 MANUAL 2,000.00 t a »a » »» a »» -CKS 110396 04/23/87 15.02 NW BELL TELEPHONE 23- 4256 - 612 -61 MANUAL 15.02 t ata -CKS 110463 04/23/87 2,116.40 REX DIST INVENTORY__ - _ 50- 4630- 822 -82 MANUAL 110463 04/23/87 3,095.25 REX DIST INVENTORY 50- 4630- 862 -86 MANUAL 5,211.65 t sttttt t »t -CKS 111067 05/08/87 386.75 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111067 05/08/87 6.00 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111067 05/08/87 201.92 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 111067 05/08/87 6.50 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111067 05/08/87 713.65 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI _ - ' — _ 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111067 05/08/87 21.50 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111067 05/08/87 11.50 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI _ - �' 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111067 05/08/87 395.85 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI — -- 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 1,743.67 » a » » » »» ta» -CKS 111129 05/08/87 1,400.4S BELLBOY _ .. _ . _�.._. _. 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 111129 05/08/87 1,436.52 BELLBOY 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111129 05/08/87 1,787.88 BELLBOY 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 4,624.85 111135 05/08/87 7.98- EAGLE WINE SO- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL i 111135 05/08/87 14.39- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL ' 111135 05/08/87 38.45 -_ EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111135 05/08/87 _ 398.95 _ _ EAGLE WINE — — 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111135 05/08/87 719.29 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL I' r 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 10 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. A MESSAGE _ 111135 05/08/87 1,922.71 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111135 05/04/87 41.99 EAGLE WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111135 05/04/87 17.59 EAGLE WINE _ INVENTORY - 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL 111135 05/04/87 56.99 EAGLE WINE INVENTORY 50 -4632- 862 -86 MANUAL 3,096.70 * * * * ** * ** -CKS , 111138 05/08/87 9.99- ED PHILLIPS __..._.. __.. -- 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 23.50- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL , 111138 05/08/87 2.16- ED PHILLIPS SO- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 39.59- ED PHILLIPS - 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL _ 111138 05/08/87 7.10- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 16.83- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 .86- ED PHILLIPS - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 44.58- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 .43- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 24.50- ED PHILLIPS - " 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 7.10- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 1,175.19 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 1,979.37 ED PHILLIPS _ _ _ SO -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 2,229.20 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 999.15 ED PHILLIPS SO- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 215.71 ED PHILLIPS SO- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 1,682.75 ED PHILLIPS SO- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 86.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 710.21 ED PHILLIPS - 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 43.00 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL r 111138 05/08/87 710.35 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111138 05/08/87 2,450.29 ED PHILLIPS - 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111138 05/04/87 145.00 ED PHILLIPS INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 862 -86 MANUAL r 12,249.58 r * * * * ** ** *-CKS r 111190 05/08/87 19.66- GRIGGS COOPER AND C _- - "- - -' - 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111190 05/08/87 55.59- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL f 111190 05/08/87 38.98- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111190 05/08/87 983.11 GRIGGS COOPER _ _ AND C 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 111190 05/08/87 2,779.63 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL ! 111190 05/08/87 1,949.11 GRIGGS COOPER AND C SO- 4626- 862-86 MANUAL 5,597.62 * - -- "Y f * * * * ** ** *-CKS 1.111198 04/23/87 6,902.40 GROUP HEALTH HOSP 10- 4156 - 510 -S1 MANUAL f 6,902.40 * * * *** * ** -CKS ! 111251 04/23/87 620,000.00 HRA DUE FROM HRAy� 10 -1145- 000 -00 MANUAL 620,000.00 + ! -- -- . �- - -- - - -- - - - - - -- -- - - -- - -- -- - -- __ ** *-CKS 111285. 05/08/87 30.03- JOHNSON WINE _ - ` 50- 3700 - 842 -84 MANUAL � 1 1987 OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 11 _CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. A MESSAGE 111285 05/08/87 371.93- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3700 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 20.69- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 2.40- JOHNSON _ _ _ WINE SO- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 6.61- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 1.02- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 8.12- JOHNSON WINE _�__ -_ - - -- 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 51.36- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 4.76- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 7.24- JOHNSON WINE - - 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 4.76- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 4.76 JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL it1285 05/08/87 2.57- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .17 JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 13.56- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 5.94- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .17 JOHNSON WINE SO- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .17 JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862 -66 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 65.87- JOHNSON WINE - _ 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .17- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .17- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 1,034.54 JOHNSON _ _ WINE 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 4.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 2,567.23 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 11.90 JOHNSON _ _ WINE T. - 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 3,293.71 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 16.10 JOHNSON WINE SO- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 6.30 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 102.21 JOHNSON WINE _ 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 5.25 JOHNSON WINE ___ __._ ---- .-- - - - - -- -- SO- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 2.45 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 240.15 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 661.94 JOHNSON _ _ WINE _ 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 476.32- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 18.90 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 7.35 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 OS/08/87 812.37 _ -JOHNSON WINE _ - -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 7.35 JOHNSON - _ _- _ WINE -_ -50 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 725.19 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 7.35 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 476.32 JOHNSON WINE -- l - -- - 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 7.35- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 476.32 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 594.80 JOHNSON _ WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 17.28- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .35 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 17.28 JOHNSON _ _ WINE -- - - 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 15.40 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111285. 05/08/87 .35- JOHNSON WINE - - 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 17.28- JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 5.60 JOHNSON WINE SO -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 _ _ _17.28 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .35 JOHNSON _ WINE _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 17.63- JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL I 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 12 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE a° 111285 05/08/87 257.60 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL >' 111285 05/08/87 11.90 JOHNSON WINE �u 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 1 111285 05/08/87 1,358.21 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111285 05/08/87 .35- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 11,627.41 » » » » » »» » »» -CKS 111435 05/08/87 .OS PRIOR WINE CO 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 3.38- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 17.91- PRIOR WINE CO 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 .22 PRIOR WINE CO - 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 13.21- PRIOR WINE CO 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 1.70- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 4.46- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111435 OS/04/87 35.16 PRIOR WINE INVENTORY 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 133.85 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 895.60 PRIOR WINE CO - -- -- -- `- SO- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 11.40- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 660.73 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 111435 05/08/87 84.95. PRIOR WINE CO _ _ 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 1,758.50 a aaa -CKS 111442 04/23/87 12,572.24 PHP HOSP 10- 4156 - 510 -51 MANUAL 12, 572.24 a as » » »» *00-CKS 111451 05/08/87 5.65- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 8.82- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 11 1451 05/08/87 22.05- QUALITY WINE -- __..__ .......___... - - - - - -- 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 28.30- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 1.49- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 27.15- QUALITY WINE - " " —` "- —' -- 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 56.31- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 21.25- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 440.92 QUALITY WINE - -- -� - -- -�- 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 1,102.38 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL . 111451 05/08/87 1,414.79 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 2,815.64 QUALITY WINE _ _ __ - 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 564.60 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 2,713.70 QUALITY WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 111451 05/08/87 149.10 QUALITY WINE - - —' SO- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ,111451 05/08/87 21122.05 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 11,152.16 a a » » » »» »aa -CKS 111702 04/23/87 3,097.50 NERMFLEX SERVICES 10-4201- 160 -16 MANUAL 3,097.50 a 111703 04/23/87 154.60 MET HEALTH HOSP "-_ --' 10= 4156 - 510 -51 MANUAL :i 154.60 a 1987 OF EDINA CHECK NO. DATE 111704 04/23/87 » * » »t* EAGLE 113700 05/04/87 1113700 05/04/87 » » » » »» POSTMASTER 113739 05/04/87 113740 05/04/87 ktkkRk LILY JOHNSON 114741 05/04/87 kRtt ** * ** -CKS 1117135 05/08/87 tk *tkt 117190 05/08/87 `117190 05/08/87 ktkktt 118067 118067 118067 118067 118067 *tt *tt 118135 118135 118135 118135 118135 118135 ' 118135 ttkkkk 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/04/87 CHECK REGISTER AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION 191.70 COMM LIFE INS LIFE INS 191.70 * EAGLE WINE 95.00 POSTMASTER POSTAGE 1,161.36 POSTMASTER PERMIT LOGIS 1,256.36 * EAGLE WINE 153.00 LILY JOHNSON REIMBURSEMENT 153.00 * * ** -CKS 200.00 STARDUST HOTEL CABLT TV 200.00 * 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 63.56 STACEY KNESS COFFEE MAKER 63.56 * 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 482.50- EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 482.50 -* 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 99.80- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 4,989.92 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 4,890.12 118.37 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 3.60 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 4.50- CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 4.20 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 255.55 CAPITAL CITY DISTRI 377.22 s 8.96- EAGLE WINE 11.30- EAGLE WINE 30.24- EAGLE WINE 448.18 EAGLE WINE 564.90 EAGLE WINE 1,512.01 EAGLE WINE 74.54 EAGLE WINE 2,549.13 * ** -CKS 50- 3710- 822 -82 04 -30 -87 PAGE 13 ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE 10- 4157 - 510 -51 MANUAL 50- 4628- 822 -82 * ** -CKS 10- 4290 - 510 -51 MANUAL 10- 4290 - 510 -51 MANUAL INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 * ** -CKS 10- 4206 - 500 -50 MANUAL 10- 2149- 000 -00 MANUAL * ** -CKS 10- 4504 - 627 -62 MANUAL * ** -CKS 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL * ** -CKS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL * ** -CKS 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL *** -CKS 50- 3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL * ** -CKS 1987 CITY OF EDINA 29.38- GRIGGS COOPER CHECK REGISTER 50- 3710 - 822 -82 04 -30 -87 PAGE 14 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT GRIGGS COOPER VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE 118138 05/08/87 2.06- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 2.28- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 34.20- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 6.85- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 1.81- ED _ PHILLIPS — —` 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 40.42- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 12.69- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 1.86- ED _ _ PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 128.48- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 1,709.81 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL t18138 05/08/87 2,020.97 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 6,423.92 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 206.00 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 228.08 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 181.26 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 685.20 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 118138 05/08/87 186.20 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL „ 118138 05/08/87 1,269.00 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 118138 05/04/87 72.50 ED PHILLIPS INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 842 -84 MANUAL 118138 05/04/87 11.88 ED _ PHILLIPS INVENTORY 50- 4632- 842 -84 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 12,764.17 a JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL aaaaaa ' - - aaa -CKS 118190 05/08/87 29.38- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 118190 05/08/87 43.97- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 118190 05/08/87 68.07- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 118190 05/08/87 1,468.90 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 822 -82 MANUAL 118190 05/08/87 2,198.67 GRIGGS COOPER AND C _ 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 118190 05/08/87 3,403.38 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 1118190 05/04/87 76.10 GRIGGS COOPER INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 MANUAL 7,005.63 �- — — :r aaaaaa aaa -CKS 118285 05/08/87 109.22- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3700 - 862 -86 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 70.32- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 .70- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL s 118285 05/08/87 1.54- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 .32- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 67.37- JOHNSON WINE _ _ — - 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL s 118285 05/08/87 6.70- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL , 118285 05/08/87 9.16- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 9.16 _ JOHNSON WINE _ _ _ 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 9.16- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 9.39- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 7.17- JOHNSON WINE _ _ 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 5.60- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 85.43- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 3,516.56 JOHNSON WINE - _ _ 50- 4626 - 822 -82 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 16.80 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL , 118285 05/08/87 3,368.28 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 - 21.00 JOHNSON WINE _._._�__ 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 118285 05/08/87 4,271.04 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 111111 118435 118435 118435 118435 118435 118435 118435 11843S 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 -- 118451 118451 15.99- 1987 C... OF EDINA CHECK N0. DATE . 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/08/87 118285 05/04/87 118285 05/04/87 111111 118435 118435 118435 118435 118435 118435 118435 11843S 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 118451 -- 118451 118451 05/08/87 15.99- CHECK REGISTER WINE 04 -30 -87 PAGE 15 AMOUNT VENDOR .ITEM DESCRIPTION_______ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. N MESSAGE 21.35 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL - 153.60 JOHNSON WINE _ 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 1.40 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 32.02 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 2.80 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 69.80 JOHNSON _ _ _ WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL .70 JOHNSON WINE 50-4628- 822 -82 MANUAL ' 12.25 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 854.14 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 12.25 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 854.14 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 12.25- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 670.28 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL - 854.14- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 12.25 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 939.29 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL - 12.95 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 716.56 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 98.40- JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL - .00 JOHNSON WINE _ 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 8.40 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 561.67 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 14.70 JOHNSON WINE _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 210.46 JOHNSON WINE INVENTORY 50- 4630- 822 -82 MANUAL 62.20 JOHNSON WINE INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 MANUAL ' 15,079.18 t_ 05/08/87 15.99- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 842 -84 05/08/87 1.47- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 862 -86 05/08/87 15.90- PRIOR WINE CO 50 -3710- 862 -86 05/08/87 729.40 PRIOR WINE CO 50 -4628- 842 -84 05/08/87 759.98 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 862 -86 05/08/87 73.35 PRIOR WINE CO _- _ _. _ _ 50- 4628- 862 -86 05/04/87 69.90 PRIOR WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 05/04/87 34.95 PRIOR WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632- 862 -86 1,634.22 + _, 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 OS/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 - 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 05/08/87 4.08- QUALITY WINE 7.40- QUALITY WINE 10.79- QUALITY WINE . -. 39.95- QUALITY WINE 3.12- QUALITY WINE 55.30- QUALITY WINE 11.86- QUALITY WINE 369.78 QUALITY WINE 1,997.23 _QUALITY WINE 2,765.93 QUALITY WINE 407.65 QUALITY WINE QUALITY WINE _1,077.00 1,182.80 QUALITY WINE 312.42 QUALITY WINE 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- 3710 - 862 -86 50 -4626- 822 -82 50- 4626- 842 -84 50- 4626- 862 -86 50 -4628- 822 -82 50- 4628- 842 -84 - -_- - - 50- 4628- 862 -86 50- 4628 - 862 -86 ttt -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL t »» -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL I. MANUAL MANUAL - MANUAL ,I 9 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 16 CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. A P.O. N MESSAGE _ 118451 05/04/87 13.12 QUALITY WINE INVENTORY 50- 4632 - 842 -84 MANUAL 7,993.43 • r »rrr» rrr -CKS 121174 05/04/87 101,000.00 1ST SOUTHDALE PAYROLL TRANSFER 50 -1010- 000 -00 MANUAL 121174 05/04/87 101,000.00- 1ST SOUTHDALE PAYROLL TRANSFER 50- 1010 - 000 -00 MANUAL .00 r _ rrrr »r rrr -CKS 121251 05/04/87 80,000.00 HRA DUE HRA 10 -1145- 000 -00 MANUAL 801000.00 r rrr -CKS 121700 05/04/87 154.60 MET HEALTH PLAN HOSPITALIZATION 10 -4156- 510 -51 MANUAL 154.60 r _ 121701 05/04/87 320.00 POSTMASTER POSTAGE BROCHURES 10- 4290 - 510 -51 MANUAL 320.00 r - - - - --- -. _ . . ~ » »r » »» »r» -CKS _ 124129 05/08/87 1,543.35 BELLBOY 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 124129 05/08/87 2,586.23 BELLBOY 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 124129 05/08/87 3,517.66 BELLBOY - 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL ' 7,647.24 » » » » »rr -•. -- - -- - - - -- - ° -- rr» -CKS - 125129 05/08/87 1,062.20 BELLBOY 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 125129 05/08/87 2,607.10 BELLBOY 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 125129 05/08/87 3,750.02 BELLBOY 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL v 7,419.32 r » » »r »» rrr -CKS 125135 05/08/87 9.23- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL _ 125135 05/08/87 55.87- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL , 125135 05/08/87 19.06- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125135 05/08/87 24.27- EAGLE WINE _ _ - - -- 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125135 05/08/87 45.05- EAGLE WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125135 05/08/87 2,793.37 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 125135 05/08/87 461.50 EAGLE WINE - _ _ _ 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL A 125135 05/08/87 953.06 EAGLE WINE 50 -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 125135 05/08/87 1,213.25 EAGLE WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 125135 05/08/87 2,252.27 EAGLE WINE ____ �" 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL - 7,519.97 r 125138 05/08/87 76.88- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 2.97- ED PHILLIPS - -�- �� 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 21.76- ED PHILLIPS 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 187 Y OF EDINA CHECK ncGISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 17 _. -CHECK N0. DATE. AMOUNT VENDOR _ I_TEM DESCRIPTION _ _ _ ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. M MESSAGE = 125138 05/08/87 21.42- ED PHILLIPS _ 125138 05/08/87 19.26- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 85.09- ED PHILLIPS _ __,_. ___ ,— _.___._ _ 50-3710-842-84 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 5.60- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 21.74- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 2.30- ED PHILLIPS - ` - -- -" -� 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL a 125138 05/08/87 53.57- ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 1,071.00 ED PHILLIPS 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 3,843.76 ED PHILLIPS _ " -_,_ 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 4,254.38 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 2,678.63 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 115.02 ED PHILLIPS - - -. -- - -- 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL - 125138 05/08/87 297.35 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 2,175.55 ED PHILLIPS 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 125138 05/08/87 - 1,926.35 ED PHILLIPS - - '- - 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL - 125138 05/08/87 559.79 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125138 ' 05/08/87 2,173.95 ED PHILLIPS 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 18,785.19 a-- - -- - - -- - -- -- SO- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL .a aiaaaa - - - aaa-CKS 125190 125190 05/08/87 05/08/87 32.47- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 6.49- 36.25- GRIGGS COOPER GRIGGS COOPER AND C _ _ AND C - " - --` 50 -3710- 822 -82 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 1.38- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 23.83- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 2.16- GRIGGS COOPER AND C `" --- - - 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 1.38- GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 1,623.68 COOPER AND C 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 68.87 _GRIGGS GRIGGS COOPER AND C — - - 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 11812.65 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 1,191.67 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 68.87 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 108.20 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125190 05/08/87 324.60 GRIGGS COOPER AND C 50 -4626- 862 -86 MANUAL S,094.58 a .._ -.. _ --- --- _T___.- 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL aaaaaa - - -- - - _ -" aaa -CKS 125285 05/08/87 3.59- JOHNSON WINE 125285 05/08/87 6.11- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 .48- JOHNSON WINE — -` - - ' 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 41.72- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 3.61- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL ' 125285 05/08/87 3.61- JOHNSON WINE - '- - _._,__ ....___ ._ 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 12.72- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 4.48- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 8.31- JOHNSON WINE - -- - --- - -- -- -- - _- 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 38.48- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 27.58- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 842 -84 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 _ 18.88- JOHNSON WINE - -" - i '_________ 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 5.96 JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86. MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 4.45- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 3.61- JOHNSON WINE -- --- 50- 3710 - 862 -86 '50- MANUAL 125285 05/08/87 18.88 JOHNSON WINE 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL I� t 1987 CITY OF EDINA CHECK NO. DATE 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 125285 05/08/87 st�sts 125435 05/08/87 CHECK REGISTER PRIOR 04 -30 -87 PAGE 18 AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. N MESSAGE 5.96- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 5.96- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 18.88- JOHNSON WINE 50 -3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 70.15- JOHNSON WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 7.3S JOHNSON WINE 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 2,085.80 JOHNSON _ _ _ WINE 50 -4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 3.50 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 1,379.20 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 1,923.47 JOHNSON _ WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 7.3S JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626 - 842 -84 MANUAL 3,508.20 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4626 - 862 -86 MANUAL 16.45 JOHNSON WINE - 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 610.76 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 1.05 JOHNSON WINE SO- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 48.03 JOHNSON _ WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 7.35 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 361.00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 8.75 JOHNSON WINE - 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 7.70 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 357.95 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 822 -82 MANUAL 8.75 JOHNSON _ WINE - SO -4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 448.28 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 1,272.42 JOHNSON WINE SO- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 9.80 JOHNSON WINE - 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 829.59 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 20.30 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 361.00 JOHNSON WINE - -- - 50- 4628 - 842 -84 MANUAL 14.00 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 10.15 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 12.25- JOHNSON WINE - 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 43.12 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 361.00 JOHNSON WINE 50 -4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 12.25 JOHNSON _ _ WINE - - 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 8.75 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 1,868.15- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 445.64 JOHNSON WINE - 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 597.25 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 21.70 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 597.31 JOHNSON _ WINE �_ -- 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 1,868.15 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 12.25 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 43.12- JOHNSON WINE - - - "- 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 597.25- JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 1,889.57 JOHNSON WINE 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 16, 390.68 • - - - - -- -- - - -- - - -- - - - 125435 05/08/87 17.00- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 822 -82 125435 05/08/87 7.71- PRIOR WINE CO -3710- 822 -82 125435 05/08/87 7.34- PRIOR WINE CO _ _50 - 50 -3710- 842 -84 125435 05/08/87 9.44- PRIOR WINE CO 50- 3710 - 862 -86 125435 05/08/87 385.29 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628 - 822 -82 125435 05/08/87 850.14 PRIOR WINE CO i �- '- - - '- 50 -4628- 822 -82 125435 05/08/87 366.95 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 842 -84 •*• -CKS MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL MANUAL 1987' OF EDINA CHECK ISTER 04 -30 -87 PAGE 19 CHECK NO_. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION_ — ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O. M MESSAGE 125435 05/08/87 472.19 PRIOR WINE CO 50- 4628- 862 -86 MANUAL 2,033.08 + » » » » »» » »» -CKS 125451 05/08/87 40.35- QUALITY WINE - - 50- 3710-822 -82 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 19.98- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 822 -82 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 3.12- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 2.22- QUALITY WINE _ 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 44.79- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 24.57- QUALITY WINE 50 -3710- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 1.14- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 40.62- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710- 862 -86 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 .04 QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 2.08- QUALITY WINE 50- 3710 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 2,017.28 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 822 -82 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 110.92 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 2,238.38 QUALITY WINE _ _ _ 50 -4626- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 2,031.22 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 56.92 QUALITY WINE 50- 4626- 862 -86 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 1,996.45 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 822 -82 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 2,457.10 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 312.42 QUALITY WINE 50- 4628- 842 -84 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 208.28 QUALITY WINE _ - 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 125451 05/08/87 3.70- QUALITY WINE 50- 4628 - 862 -86 MANUAL 11,246.44 »e » » »» » »» -CKS 873,504.61 FUND 10 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 980.41 FUND 23 TOTAL _ ART CENTER 136.42 FUND 26 TOTAL SWIMMING POOL FUND 5, 015.13 FUND 27 TOTAL GOLF COURSE FUND Hand typed checks #76877 thru 8,975.22 FUND 28 TOTAL RECREATION CENTER FUND 76988 120.62 FUND 29 TOTAL GUN RANGE FUND 17,355.75 FUND 40 TOTAL UTILITY FUND 314,828.48 FUND 50 TOTAL LIQUOR DISPENSARY FUND 1,220,916.64 TOTAL - -- -- - - ' APPFPV, ,Ee PAYMENT, „ t p CHECK RECIS1E� / / PF,GES f