HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-10-03_COUNCIL PACKETAGENDA
EDINA HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EDINA CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 3, 1988
ROLLCALL
I. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
FOR GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C -146 (CENTENNIAL LAKES)
II.- -SET- -DATE TO CONSIDER BIDS - CENTENNIAL LAKES GRADING
III. ADJOURNMENT
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
CENTENNIAL UPDATE
I. ADOPTION OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. All agenda items listed with an asterisk ( *)
and in bold print 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. 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 Council to pass. Waiver of Second Readine: 4/5 favorable
rollcall vote of all members of Council required to pass. Final Development
Plan Approval of Property Zoned Planned District: 3/5 favorable rollcall vote
required to pass.
A. Preliminary Plat Approval
1. Berenberg First Addition - Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale.
Generally located north of Interlachen Blvd and west of Oxford Av
(Contd from 9/12/88)
* 2. Edina Highlands 2nd Addition - Lot 6, Block 1, Edina Highlands - 5257
Lochloy Drive (Contd from 9/19/88)
* B. Set Hearing Date (10/17/88)
1. Final Development Plan for Americana State Bank - Building Expansion
5050 France Avenue South
* 2. Amendment to Subdivision Ordinance No. 801
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Affidavits of Notice by Clerk.
Analysis of Assessment by City Manager or Engineer. Public comment heard.
Action of Council by Resolution. 3/5 favorable rollcall vote of all members of
the Council required to pass.
A. Maintenance Improvement No. M -88 - 50th Street and France Avenue Business
District (Contd from 9/19/88)
B. Alley Improvement No. A -178 - West 48th Street between 3913 West 48th
Street and 4001 West 48th Street
C. Street Lighting Improvement No. L -29 - York Avenue from West 74th Street
to West 78th Street
D. Street Lighting Improvement No. L -30 - West 76th Street from Xerxes Avenue
to Edinborough Way
E. Street Lighting Improvement No. L -31 - Edinborough Way from York Avenue to
West 76th Street
F. Public Works Garage Improvement No. PW -88 - City Public Works Garage
Agenda
Edina City Council
October 3, 1988
Page 2
IV. PUBLIC HEARING ON STREET 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
required to pass.
A. Vacation of Part of West 76th Street
V. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS.
VI. AWARD OF BIDS
* A.
Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 379, Watermain Improvement No.
365, and
Storm Sewer Improvement No. 186 (Minnesota Drive)
1. $10,175,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series
* B.
Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 377, Watermain Improvement No.
363, Storm
2. $5,100,000 G.O. Taxable Tax Increment Bonds,
Sewer Improvement No. 185 and Street Improvement No. BA -281
(Malibu Dr.)
* C.
Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. 378 and Watermain Improvement
No. 364
(Ryan Avenue)
4. $2,470,000 G.O. Recreational Facility Bonds,
* D.
(2) Motor Starters for Wells
B.
* E.
Fire Department Pagers
-
VII._ RECOMMENDATIONS AND REPORTS
Resolution Cancelling Levy for 1987 on $5,400,000
A.
Report on France Avenue /Mavelle Drive Right of Way
B.
I -494 Corridor Commission Appointments
C.
Community Health Services Advisory Committee Recommendation on
Radon
Obligation
Testing
Redevelopment Bonds
D.
Park Board Minutes of September 13, 1988
E.
Edinamite Silent Auction
F.
AMM Request for Funding - Computer Analysis Capability
G.
Set Date - Council /Legislators' Breakfast
* H.
1988 Solid Waste Management Agreement - Hennepin County
VIII. SPECIAL CONCERNS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL
IX. POST AGENDA AND MANAGER'S MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS
A. Response to Armstrong Letter
X. FINANCE
A.
Award of Bond Bids
1. $10,175,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series
1988
2. $5,100,000 G.O. Taxable Tax Increment Bonds,
Series
1988
3. $3,160,000 Utility Revenue Bonds, Series 1988
4. $2,470,000 G.O. Recreational Facility Bonds,
Series
1988
B.
Adoption of 1989 Budget
-
* C.
Resolution Cancelling Levy for 1987 on $5,400,000
General
Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1984
* D.
Resolution Cancelling Levy for 1989 on $2,200,000
General
Obligation
Redevelopment Bonds
Agenda
Edina City Council
October 3, 1988
Page 3
X,.. FINANCE (Contd)
* E. Payment of Claims as per pre -list dated 10/1/88: General Fund $135,250.67,
- Art Center $4,760.11, Capital Fund $2,317.07, Swimming Poll Fund
$1,316.29, Golf Course Fund $9,214.75, Recreation Center Fund $53,266.15,
Gun Range Fund $352.05, Edinborough Park $6,233.90, Utility Fund
$243,178.54, Liquor Dispensary Fund $15,765.28, Total $471,654.81
SCHEDULE OF UPCOMING MEETINGS /EVENTS
Sat Oct 15 EDINAMITE
7:00 p.m. Edinborough Park
Mon
Oct
17
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 p.m.
Council Room
Tues
Oct
18
Met Council Regional Breakfast
Meeting 7:30 a.m.
Hopkins House
Mon-
Nov
7
Regular Council Meeting
7:00 p.m.
Council Room
Tues
Nov
8
GENERAL /CITY ELECTION
Polls Open 7:00 a.m.
- 8:00 p.m.
Mon Nov 21 Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m. Council Room
e
U)
0
�eee
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To:
Housing & Redevelopment
From:
Authority of Edina
Gordon Hughes, Executive
Director, by Francis
Hoffman, City Engineer
Date:
30 September, 1988
Subject: Mass Grading of Phase I -
Centennial Lakes Project
Project C -146 (HRA)
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # L.--& II.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
❑ To Council
Action ❑ Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Approve grading project for Phase I of Centennial Lakes. Authorize bids for
above project.
Info /Background:
This project would be to'conduct grading of all Phase I land in the Centennial
Lakes Project. The estimated project cost is $620,350.74 to be assessed over
2,449,814 square feet. This results in an estimated per square cost of 25.32
cents per square foot.
GRADING
CENTENNIAL LAKES
MASS GRADING OF PHASE I
GRADING COVERS:
e
RETAIL SITE
THEATER SITE
MEDICAL OFFICE SITE
NORTH PARK AREA
CENTRAL PARK AREA
PORTION OF SOUTH
PARK AREA
ESTIMATED COST: $6209350.74
AREA TO BE ASSESSED: 21449,814 SQ. FT.
COST PER SQUARE FOOT: 25.32 CENTS
ASSESSED OVER 10 YEARS
AUTHORIZE: PROJECT
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
BIDS
4 A.
o e
Cn
•'NR)APOMS�O •
ieBB
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Kenneth Rosland
From: Craig Larsen
Date: October 3, 1988
Subject: S -88 -7, Berenberg
First Addition, Lot 1,
Block 1, Hilldale
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # 11.A.1
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
0 To Council
Action ❑ Motion
Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Continue hearing to October 20, 1988, and order staff to prepare Findings
of Fact to support denial of the Preliminary Plat as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
Info /Background:
The subject proposal was twice heard by the Planning Commission, on July 6,
and July 27, 1988. The Commission recommended denial based on reasons set
forth in the July 6, 1988 staff report. Those reasons were:
1. Lot size. The existing lot is not unusually large compared to other
lots in the Hilldale Addition.
2. Character and Symmetry. The proposed subdivision would adversly impact
the existing character and symmetry of the neighborhood.
3. Site Development. The property exhibits very steep slopes. The
Comprehensive Plan requires larger lots if this condition exists.
Members in attendance: G. Johnson, V. Shaw, G. Workinger, J. Bailey,
J. Paulus, H. McClelland
understanding that the City has looked at a number of scenario's re
issue. Until a firm proposal is submitted to City Staff, the C Sion cannot
speculate. Mr. Jenson expressed frustration that somethlagagMe concrete cannot
be established regarding this area. He added man , including his, will not
be able to be developed due to different fac Commissioner G. Johnson
agreed with this observation. He po' ut as an example the Dinwiddie
property which lies directly s the proposal. He added that as a body the
Commission can act only at is submitted.
Commisspot7paulus moved to recommend approval of S -88 -6, subject to staff
conditio nd the further recommendation that the house placement on Lot 4
sho a the avera a back of the house along Fox Meadow Lane.
an seconded t e mo carried.
S -88 -7 Preliminary Plat Approval for Berenberg First Addition.
Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale. Danny Berenberg.
Mr. Larsen reminded the Commission at the last meeting it was recommended
that Mr. Berenberg approach his neighbors with an option of opening up Orchard
Lane to his property and to give Commission Members time to view and walk the
site.
Mr. Gary Gandrud, 8400 Normandale Boulevard, attorney representing Danny
Berenberg was present, Mike Black, Planner, J. R. Hill and Associates, Mr. James
Van Valkenberg, representing neighbors, and Danny Berenberg, proponent was
present.
Mr. Gandrud told the Commission Mr. Berenberg was unable to find any
neighbors willing to give up or sell a piece of their property, therefore, the
Commissions recommendation of access off Orchard Lane appears impossible.
Mr. Van Valkenberg told the Commission this neighborhood is an established
neighborhood, with the majority of the lots comparable in size. If this
proposal were to be approved it would jeopardize the character and symmetry of
the area. -
Mr. Richard Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road agreed with Mr. Van Valkenberg's
observations and presented to the Commission a detailed topography map of the
area. He pointed out if approved the proposed driveway would be roughly 300
feet long, creating a "neck or flag lot ". Mr. Franz Jevney, 6 Spur Road
pointed out aspects which should be considered before a decision is reached. 1)
uniqueness of the neighborhood, the area is surrounded by a ridge, majority of
lots were platted according to this terrain 2) adverse impact to the pond if
the proposal is approved, any ground alteration could damaged the ponds
capabilities 3) the character and symmetry of the neighborhood would be
violated and a precedent would be set which would subject other lots to the
possibility of subdivision. Mr. Tom Martinson, 4536 Oxford Avenue South told
the Commission he is opposed to this proposal. He pointed out if approved the
City would be allowing development of a "neck lot ". Mr. Martinson pointed out
the general neighborhood was developed with respect for topography, view,
vegetation and wildlife. A subdivision would result in a violation of those
standards. Mr. Martinson added if this proposal is approved at least 19 more
subdivided lots would be possible in this small neighborhood under an identical
rationale and the character and symmetry would forever be lost. Mrs. Lucy Hahn
presented to the Commission a signed petition opposing the proposed subdivision.
Mr. Van Valkenberg echoed the concerns of the neighbors and requested that the
Commission recommend denial of this subdivision.
Mr. Gandrud told the Commission Danny Berenberg does not want to violate
the neighborhood or its standards. He said Danny Berenberg wants to remain in
Edina which is the reason for requesting this subdivision. Mr. Gandrud pointed
out the power line easement is considered part of the lot which should minimize
any concerns that the lot is being developed as a "neck lot ".
A discussion ensued with the Commission in agreement that this proposal
violates community standards. Special consideration must be given to
topography, character and symmetry. The development of a "neck lot" is not in
harmony with the Comprehensive Plan, and construction of a house in the rear
yard of another house does not make good planning sense.
Commissioner McClelland moved to recommend subdivision denial.
Commissioner Paulus seconded the motion. Commissioner G. Johnson abstained.
All voted aye; motion carried.
P -88 -2 Southdale Center Expansion
The Center Companies and The Equitable Life
Assurance Society of the United States
Mr. Larsen presented his staff report and noted the C er Companies,
representing Southdale Center have submitted plans for expansion and
renovation of the Center. The expansion is greater An 10% of the existing
floor area, thus Final Development Plan approval required. The project would
.- include the construction of a new Dayton's de ment store containing
approximately 340,000 square feet of gross or area. The existing -Dayton's
store would be converted to mall space new tenant space. This conversion
would provide approximately 117,000 s, re feet of new leasable area in the
center. In addition, all existin ' mmon areas and mall areas would be
renovated. Three new, single 1 parking decks would be added to serve the
expanded center. The J.C. P ey and Dayton's Garden Center's would be removed.
Southdale is now 32 years d. The proposed expansion is intended to preserve
Southdale's competitiv 'osition in a changing retail climate. Staff believes
it is important to Community for Southdale to remain strong and healthy.
The proposed reno ion of the Center will insure that Southdale will continue
to be an asset the Community.
Mr. sen concluded his staff report recommending approval of the Final
.Develop t Plan with'the following conditions:
Staff approval of a landsca
LOCATION MAP
SUBDIVISION
NUMBER S -88 -7
L O C A TI O N North of Interlachen Blvd, west of Oxford Avenue
REQUEST Create one additional lot
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
P.C. Members Present: G. Johnson, H. McClelland, L. Johnson, D. Runyan, V. Shaw,
D. Johnson
P•G
5 -88 -7 Preliminary Plat Approval,
Berenberg First Addition.
Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale
General - Location: North of Interlachen Boulevard and west of
Oxford Avenue -
Mr. Larsen told the Commission the subject property measures approximately
. 61,009 square feet in area and is developed with a single family dwelling. The
lot area includes an NSP easement covering the easterly 50 feet of the lot. The
easement area is approximately 20,250 square feet.
Mr. Larsen explained the preliminary plat proposes to create one, new
buildable lot. The new lot would contain 46,609 square feet including the NSP
easement. Excluding the easement, the lot would contain 26,359 square feet.
The lot would have 76 feet of frontage on Interlachen Boulevard including the 50
foot easement. The proposed driveway would encroach on the easement, but the
new building pad would not encroach. The preliminary plat proposes to retain
the existing dwelling in its present location. The plat proposes a lot 102 feet
wide with 120 feet of depth with an area of 14,400 square feet.
Mr. Larsen pointed out the property is characterized by severe topography.
Ground elevation falls from 940 feet near Interlachen Boulevard to 890 feet at
the northerly boundary of the property. The proposed building pad is
approximately 30 feet below street grade. Development of the new lot will
require extensive cut and fill activity. Soil engineering would be required to
insure protection of the house and pond from retaining wall collapse or erosion
of the steep slopes.
Mr. Larsen added currently storm water enters the northerly portions of the
property from the east and drains to the pond north of the property. 'The
preliminary plat proposes an easement for drainage and utilities. The
engineering department would like to enlarge the easement area.
Mr. Larsen concluded staff believes, for several reasons, the proposed
subdivision does not represent sound community planning. Mr. Larsen summarized
the reasons as follows:
Lot size. The subject property is part-of the Hilldale Addition. Lots
in the Hilldale Addition are quite large. A typical lot on Circle East or
Circle West is about 160 feet wide. The four lots immediately west of the
property are 125 or 130 feet in width. Lots is the proposed subdivision would
be 102 and 76 feet in width. It appears the reason this lot was made wider in
the original plat was to account for the NSP easement, and, possibly, because of
the severe topography of the lot. These physical constraints continue to exist
today.
Character and Symmetry. The Comprehensive Plan states "Allow further
subdivision of developed single family lots only if neighborhood character and
symmetry are preserved." The NSP easement forces the new house to be located in
the rear yard of the existing dwelling. Although the new lot will meet minimum
Zoning Ordinance size requirements, it will appear to be a neck lot when
developed, which will have a negative impact on the existing character and
symmetry of the neighborhood.
Site Development. The Comprehensive
minimum lot sizes for single family and tw,
slopes-."- The property contains very steep
alteration for development. The existence
reason why the lot was platted as a larger
original Hilldale Addition.
Plan states, "Require increased
D family dwelling lots on steep
slopes which require substantial
of these slopes seems a logical
lot than some adjacent lots in the
Based on the preceding reasons staff recommends denial of the preliminary
plat.
Representatives for the proponent, Mr. Mike Black, James R. Hill and
_: Associates and Gary Gandrud, Attorney, 8400 Normandale Boulevard were present.
Mr. -Black told the Commission he felt the staff's position was very
subjective. He pointed out the home is being developed by and for the owner,
Danny Berenberg. He added the result of the division would be 1 lot of 46,609
square feet, which is very much in keeping with the size of lots of the area.
Using graphics he pointed out the lot as it compares with other lots in the
area. He noted from the curb on Interlachen Boulevard the proposed house would
not be visible. Mr. Black said the construction of a house on the proposed new
lot would not violate City setbacks and would comply with the City's Zoning
Ordinance.
Commissioner Runyan pointed out the grade of the driveway as it approaches
the proposed home would be relatively steep. Mr. Black indicated it would be
graded to a 9% slope. Commissioner McClelland pointed out the proposed house
would be positioned in the rear yard of the existing house on a site that has a'
very steep grade. She also said the Planning Commission has been very reluctant
to approve "neck lots ", and cannot remember when approval for a neck lot was
granted. Mr. Gandrud said the width of the property off Interlachen is so
great that the question of "neck lot" may not apply here. Commissioner G.
Johnson asked Mr. Black if the proponent had given any thought to opening up
Orchard Lane. Mr. Black responded the proponent did give that idea some thought
but it was never pursued.
Mr. Gandrud told the Commission the proponent wishes to maintain his
residence in the City of Edina. He added Mr. Berenberg wants to remain in the
immediate area which is why he has chose to construct a home on his property.
Mr. Gandrud pointed out the lot would be subdivided according to the City's
ordinance standards. Mr. Gandrud reported at one time Mr. Berenberg considered
a 4 lot subdivision for his property but decided on the proposal presented this
evening. Commissioner McClelland indicated she would find it extremely
difficult to consider a 4 lot subdivision for this parcel of land. Mr. Gandrud
approached the Commission with a preliminary plat indicating a proposal for a 4
lot subdivision for the lot in question. Mr. Black said Mr. Berenberg
considered many options for this site, one being the possibility,of removal of
the existing house and redevelopment of the site into 4 buildable single family
lots.
Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Gandrud if Mr. Berenberg has developed a
design for the proposed house. Mr. Gandrud said Mr. Berenberg has a design in
mind but has not developed the design through to its completion. This will be
done when Mr. Berenberg is assured that the subdivision request is approved.
Commissioner McClelland told the Commission she felt more thought must be
given to this proposal. She added in her opinion the proponent has a number of
- -options --to pursue, one being the possibility of developing the proposed house
off Orchard Lane, another would be removal of the existing house and the
development of a new house in a different location. Mr. Gandrud told
Commissioner McClelland in his opinion all options have been considered and they
are two. Either approve the plan presented or consider a 4 lot subdivision
which also meets the City's Zoning Ordinance requirements.
Commissioner D. Johnson moved for denial of the proposal. Commissioner
McClelland seconded the motion.
Commissioner L. Johnson asked Mr. Larsen what is staff's position on denial
of the proposal. Mr. Larsen said findings for denial may be based on the
character and symmetry of the neighborhood being violated, the severe
topography, the NSP easement and the development of a "neck lot ".
Commissioner G. Johnson suggested continuing this item until July 27, 1988
to give the Commission Members time to walk the site, to allow the proponent
time to speak with neighbors and to allow the proponent time to consider the
option of developing the house off Orchard Lane.
Commissioner D. Johnson withdrew his motion commenting even with further
study he may be unable to support the request for subdivision.
Commissioner D. Johnson moved to continue item S -88 -7 until the July 27,
1988 Community Development and Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner
McClelland seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion carried.
7uS/ wliiiam Avenue s
Lots 15, 16 and 17
Block 2, Brookside Heights
General Location: Northeast corner of William Avw e and West 51st Street
Mr. Larsen informed the Commis 'he subject property is comprised of 3
individually platted lots measu 50 X 136.5 feet each. The proponent desires
to divide lot 16, the middl t adding 25 feet each to lot 15 and'17. The
result will be two 75 fo and 136.5 foot lots.
An existin age will be removed and a new garage will be constructed in
a conformingsloffation on the northerly parcel.
Pi.arsen pointed out the resulting lots each measure over 10, 000 square
area and meet all other ordinance requirements. A similar division
- -- COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JULY 6, 1988
S -88 -7 Preliminary Plat Approval,
Berenberg First Addition.
Part of .Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale
General Location: North of Interlachen Boulevard and west of
Oxford Avenue
The subject property measures approximately 61,009 square feet in area and
is developed with a single family dwelling. The lot area includes an NSP
easement covering the easterly 50 feet of the lot. The easement area is
approximately 20,250 square feet.
The preliminary plat proposes to create one, new buildable lot. The new
lot would contain 46,609 square feet including the NSP easement. Excluding the
easement, the lot would contain 26,359 square feet. The lot would have 76 feet
of frontage on Interlachen Boulevard including the 50 foot easement. The
proposed driveway would encroach on the easement, but the new building pad would
not encroach. The preliminary plat proposes to retain the existing dwelling in
its present location. The plat proposes a lot 118 feet wide with 120 feet of
depth with an area of 14,400 square feet.
The property is characterized by severe topography. Ground elevation falls
from 940 feet near Interlachen Boulevard to 890 feet at the northerly boundary
of the property. The proposed building pad is approximately 30 feet below
street grade. Development of the new lot will require extensive cut and fill
activity. Soil's engineering would be required to insure protection of the
house and pond from retaining wall collapse or erosion of the steep slopes.
Currently storm water enters the northerly portions of the property from
the.east and drains to the pond north of the property. The preliminary plat
proposes an easement for drainage and utilities. The engineering department
would like to enlarge the easement area as illustrated in the attached exhibit.
Recommendation:
Staff believes, for several reasons, the proposed subdivision does not
represent sound community planning.
Lot size. The subject property is part. of the Hilldale Addition. Lots
in the Hilldale Addition are quite large. A typical lot on Circle East or
Circle West is about 160 feet wide. The four lots immediately west of the
property are 125 or 130 feet in width. Lots is the proposed subdivision would
be 118 and 76 feet in width. It appears the reason this lot was made wider in
- -- -the or- iginal• plat was to account for the NSP easement, and, possibly, because of
the severe.topography of the lot. These physical constraints continue to exist
today.
Character and Symmetry. The Comprehensive Plan states "Allow further
subdivision of developed single - family lots only if neighborhood character and
symmetry are preserved." The NSP easement forces the new house to be located in
the rear yard of the existing dwelling. Although the new lot will meet minimum
Zoning Ordinance size requirements, it will appear to be a neck lot when
developed, which will have a negative impact on the existing character and
symmetry of the neighborhood.
Site Development. The Comprehensive
minimum lot sizes for single family and tw,
slopes." The property contains very steep
alteration for development. The existence
reason why the lot was platted as a larger
original Hilldale Addition.
Plan states, "Require increased
D family dwelling lots on steep
slopes which require substantial
of these slopes seems a logical
lot than some adjacent lots in the
Based on the preceding reasons staff recommends denial of the preliminary
plat.
V. :-- , 7
su
INV. - - zc
INTERLACHEN BOULEVARD
HILLDALE
ADDITION
l9vy
Property
July 21, 1988
The Honorable C. Wayne Courtney
Mayor of Edina
4313 Eton Place
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mayor Courtney:
We urge you to deny the application for the pending subdivision
request at 5400 Interlachen Boulevard.
We bought, our home in 1978, moving from another home in Edina. The
reason we were attracted to our present home at Eight Spur Road was
the solitude, serenity and beauty offered by our view of our
neighborhood's pond and the environment surrounding it. I presently
have approximately two acres, one acre of which is undeveloped but a
cared for forest which fronts approximately 200 feet of the pond.
We feel fortunate in having found truly one of the most exceptional
lots in our village.
Realizing this we have gone through two major remodeling projects
costing far more than the original price of the house. It was
prudent, we felt, in that the lot sizes can easily accommodate our
additions without encroaching on our undeveloped areas. Most of our
neighbors, feeling the same about the neighborhood as we do, have
done the same with no ill effects on our neighborhood's environment.
We have deer, fox, racoon and dozens of varieties of water fowl
coexisting.within our community which includes 5400 Interlachen
Boulevard. We bought our houses because of this; we've more than
doubled our investment through remodeling our home as have our
neighbors, and we don't want to see this ruined.
If one neighbor is allowed to sell out his principles for a monetary
gain, we all lose. We not only lose the serenity which we've
invested in, but we undoubtedly lose wildlife as well. It may be
only one deer, five geese or one egret that leaves with the coming
of the new development, but that is just the start as we see it.
If the proposed subdivision is allowed to pass it will undoubtedly
be followed by more as we all have land available to do the same,
and you certainly can't allow one without the next, and the next,
and the next. What, in essence, will happen if the proposed
subdivision is allowed to pass, is that in 10 to 20 years the serene
Y.
pond becomes asphalt and the beautiful environment surrounding it,
along with its wildlife, will be destroyed by the addition of 20 new
neighbors. The beauty of this unique area of our city will have
been sold out for dollars. Please don't allow that to happen.
-- _Please deny the application for subdivision.
Yours.truly,
LO EY AN BAKER
Ei pur Road.
Edina, Minnesota 55436
'n -FUm 1 001,111
city planning & economic development
July 19, 1988
Mr. William W. Lewis, Chairman
City of Edina
Planning Commission
5210 Villa Way
Edina, Minnesota 55436
Dear Mr. Lewis:
The pending subdivision request at 5400 Interlachen introduces fundamental issues
of precedent to both the Planning Commission and the adjacent neighborhood.
you are satisfied that the Commission and Council understand and endorse the Unless likcly
implications of approval, I urge you to support your staff recommendation to deny the
application.
Changes
My concern is not one of change, per se. We have for many years seen replatting
of large remaining parcels, such as recently at 5525 Interlachen; it's also likely that
we'll see more requests to add density - -three lots from two, for example. In either
case, these lots physically front a public street in one of a number of configurations
well - established in this community.
By approval of a "flag
anything is possible as long
lot" as proposed,
the
City sends
a signal
that virtually
as the lot is at
built within minimum setbacks. In effect,
least
the
9,000 s.f. in
City
area and
buildings are
planning standards. Probably
most damaging
really enforces
is the message "right"
no community
economic return supercedes
establishment
and
that
maintenance
a
of stable
to maximize
residential
environments.
Implications
When this has occurred in other communities, the results have been negative to
both the city and the majority of its citizens. The record of "no- controls, no
standards" is very clear in suburban areas of cities such as Houston and metropolitan
Miami, where residential neighborhoods are constantly eroded by development pressure,
and continuous conflict is the rule.
At a more subtle, though very real, level, the possibility of extraordinary
individual gain is also negative for the city. The record of San Francisco's Western
Addition (downzoned in 1972) and Powderhorn Community in Minneapolis (downzoned
in 1975) suggests what could happen if Edina shifts from a "home investment"
mentality to one of "selling out." Personal investment in home maintenance declines,
and improvements virtually cease: why put money in a property when a developer will
buy you out, and you can go elsewhere?
Obviously the civic commitment to a neighborhood, even the community itself, is
seriously eroded in such circumstances. Given that private reinvestment and community
identification are the cornerstones of Edina's success, these are precisely the
characteristics one would not wish to endanger.
4536 Oxford Avenue S. - Minneapolis. Minnesota • 55436 -1406 • (612) 920 -1972
1<.
Mr. William W. Lewis -- July 19, 1988 -- page 2
The Surrounding Neighborhood
The immediate neighborhood to 5400 Interlachen is defined by Interlachen, Cooper,
Division, Oxford and Hollywood. It contains 31 homes, which focus on a land - locked
pond. This neighborhood was established in the 1950s and has been stable for over a
generation. Among the parcels can be found a very wide range of personal income
and property value, yet the area is physically cohesive and harmonious. It is very
close to an ideal residential area.
Besides the pond, the neighborhood is distinguished by large, irregular lots, set
within an oak grove. Houses are sensitively sited according to topography and view:
literally millions of dollars in private investment following a common environmental
theme of respect for topography, view, vegetation and wildlife. Clearly development
and subsequent ownership has not been based upon maximization of potential real
estate return.
A New Equation
Should the Planning Commission and Council approve the proposed flag lot, this
will almost certainly change. .A cursory test based upon aerial photographs and plats
reveals that in addition to the new lot at 5400 Interlachen, at least 19 more
subdivided lots would be possible in this small neighborhood under an identical
rationale. It should be stressed that this is nowhere near the maximum possible under
general code minimums, and could be increased if neighbors pooled properties for
more intensive development.
While this would clearly destroy the special character and value of the
neighborhood, it would be difficult to deny others the ability to "maximize" the value
of their properties, assuming the City believes this to be of overriding importance.
Especially for those of us who are not affluent, subdivision would allow us to own our
homes free and clear just by selling open space we are not currently putting to
"productive use."
Community Values
Since moving here in the mid- 1950s, it's always been my perception that Edina is
first and foremost a superior residential community. It is gratifying to see how well
the village has turned out, based in no small part on the shared values of the
overwhelming majority of its citizens. It is difficult not to resent assertions that any
given property owner has an absolute "right" to ignore these values if they deem it
in their own immediate interest to do so. Then Edina ceases to be a community, and
becomes merely a development opportunity. -
sion to confirm our neighborhood a
And that is why. I urge the Planning Commis a
living environment. Should you feel this not to be in the City's interest, then pie s
ase
rezone the entire neighborhood to Planned Unit Development, so we can all maximize
our values, sell out, and move to a place which holds community values foremost.
tnecii unci l, Mr. PCraig Larsen
E D AUG 12
Carolyne Bisson
5340 Hollywood Road
Edina, Minnesota 55436
Mayor C. Wayne Courtney
-- -4313 Eton Place
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Dear Mayor Courtney,
Minneapolis is known as the City of Lakes and the lakes, for
the most part, are everybodies. On any given day, winter or
summer, rain or shine, one can drive by one of those
beautiful lakes and see people walking, running, skiing,
skating, or just relaxing. They are a huge part of the
natural beauty of the area, and the reason we can enjoy
these lakes today is because at some point a very long time
ago the city planners had vision and foresight and took
steps to protect these gifts from nature. Mistakes were
certainly made, and the city is certainly diminished by
them, although the majority of us today are totally unaware
of what we are missing. To the credit of city government,
however, wrongs are frequently righted, or their impact
lessened. Bassett Creek, for example, was covered over
because it was "in the way" of the industrial development of
North Minneapolis. Today, that is recognized as the tragedy
that it is, and portions of that creek have been uncovered.
The beautiful Mississippi River, long hidden behind
sawmills, flourmills, and factories, has been reclaimed as
the true treasure that it is. Good planners realize that
cities, towns, and villages are wholistic entities which
require attention to and tending of all their aspects if
they are to remain healthy and vital. Their growth, when it
is healthy, is comparable to a well tended garden. When it
is neglected, or out of control, there is trouble.
Our beautiful community of Edina has grown and blossomed
like a well tended garden under the guidance and direction
of a number of farsighted and dedicated people who sensed
these things from the cities inception. They had civic
green thumbs. Neighborhoods were planned and developed
according to certain restrictions which, although they
varied from area to area, had an internal cohesiveness and
Integrity that combined respect for the land, respect for
the landowner, and respect for the neighborhood and the
community as a whole. Parklands and wildlife preserves were
set aside for everyone to enjoy, and residential areas were
platted and planned with care. Today we have magnificient
perennial gardens such as the Country Club area, with its
regular lots and charming two story period homes. We have
the rugged Indian Hills area with its winding streets,
deciduous forests, and homes of more varied archetechural
styles - -an altogether fitting western horizon. Our "garden"
includes Parkwood Knolls, Rolling Green, and the Highlands
Area, Cornelia Park, Dewey Hill, and Morningside, among
others. All uniquely beautiful, both in themselves and in
-the gestalt which they create and which is the City of
Edina. Some are pure strains, some are hybrids, and some
are wildflowers. The Hilldale- Beverly Hills Area just east
of Rolling Green is one of these lovely wildflowers.
Developed in the late forties and early fifties with a
sensitivity for privacy and the tranquility offered by large
areas of open spaces, wildlife, and natural surroundings,
the area is characterized by large, irregular lots
contiguous, in many cases, to inaccessible, DNR protected
backlots, watersheds, and parklands. Flora and fauna
proliferate here. There are mallards and woodducks,
pheasant, geese, egrets, cardinals, orioles, goldfinch,
bluebirds, and at least one owl. My neighbor and I have
both seen, independently and on separate occassions, what we
believe to be a blue heron land on and fly from the pond
-which connects the Hilldale- Beverly Hills area. Two fox, a
doe and her two fawns make it their home as well. There are
wildflowers, cattails, and, of course, algae. The sense of
privacy, the feeling of being in contact with this tiny
piece of wilderness, is cherished by the majority of the
people who live adjacent to the area, as well as many of
those who live in the surrounding area.
As a development opportunity, the Hilldale- Beverly Hills
area is finished, as is most of Edina. All lots designated
as buildable by the zoning and building regulations (those
promises made by a community to its landowners) of the City
of Edina have been developed. There are none left.
Planning in this area must now shift from a mode of
controlling growth into one of caretaking and preserving the
,integrity of what has been done. The first step in that
process is resisting the pressure to subdivide, whether for
individual homeowners or developers.
Danny and Christina Berenberg's proposal to subdivide their
property at 5400 Interlachen Boulevard is an attempt to use
the City of Edina to rescue them from the unhappy
consequences of the decision they made to purchase the
property in 1978. Interlachen Boulevard is a very.busy
street. It was a busy street in 1978, and it is a busy
street today. For several years in between 1978 and today,
it has, in fact, been even busier, although the average
daily traffic for 1987 was actually less than the average
daily traffic for 1986. The Berenbergs have disliked this
about the location of their home since they became parents
nine years ago and, in fact, have made their feelings public
via the local news media. They like the neighborhood but
dislike the location of their home. They wish to stay in
the neighborhood. Their solution, which is to exempt them
from subdivision prohibitions which are binding upon
everyone else in the surrounding area, is unacceptable. The
addition of another home where they propose would not
eliminate the problem of having their children cross busy
streets, nor would it reduce the traffic on Interlachen.
would be the additional traffic from whomever bought
their present home. The fact of the matter is, what Danny
and Christina Berenberg want is more privacy - and they want
it at the expense of the privacy which others now have and,
which, indeed, is guaranteed by the codes and ordinances
now in effect.
I fully understand the importance of a neighborhood,
particularly when children are involved. Before marrying my
husband, Richard Miller, and moving to our present home on
Hollywood Road, I lived just two blocks away on Vandervork
Avenue with my three sons for 10 years. Where we would live
as a family was a huge consideration in our marriage plans
as leaving the extended family of our immediate neighborhood
- -was something we wished to avoid. 1 suggest Danny and
Christina wait until a suitable home goes on the market in
the area and buy one.. There have been several over the ten
years they have been in their present location. Bending the
rules by which everyone else in the neighborhood has bought
and sold their homes for the past forty years is not the
answer.
I urge you to reconfirm the dedication to quality shown by
our farsighted early leaders and support the recommendation
of your staff in denying the request to subdivide at 5400
Interlachen Boulevard.
Sincerely,
Carolyne Bisson
h
FRANZ P. JEVNE, III
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55435
612 -835 -2000
July 26, 1988
Mr. William L. Lewis
City of Edina
Planning Commission
5210 Villa Way
Edina, MN 55436
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Re: Proposed subdivision of 5400 Interlachen Boulevard
I am writing as a concerned property owner in the neighborhood
that would be directly affected by the proposed subdivision of the
lot at 5400 Interlachen Boulevard. My wife, my family, and I are
adamantly opposed to this subdivision, and greatly concerned about
the harm this would bring to the character of the neighborhood,
particularly to the pond and woodland area which is situated to the
rear of approximately 20 lots in the area of the proposed sub-
division.
This proposed subdivision runs absolutely contrary to several
important provisions of the Edina Comprehensive Plan.
1. It interferes significantly with the character and
symmetry of the neighborhood.
2. It creates.a "neck lot" where access is available only
through a narrow strip of land with a driveway running
directly under a large powerline.
3. The proposed home would have to be constructed on a very
steep slope on a lot which, when the NSP powerline is
considered, is not of sufficient size to accept such a
dwelling without destruction of the terrain and character
of the slope area. Minimum lot sizes must be increased to
accommodate homes on lots with steep slopes.
The proposed subdivision is further objectionable because,
a. It will have substantial negative impact on the unique
natural environment surrounding the pond behind the lot.
V!
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
Page Two
b. The subdivision is contrary to the intent of the original
developer who intended to provide large wooded lots around
the pond without further development which would injure
the neighborhood setting.
C. The visual aesthetic value of the pond area, and the view
from neighboring lots, would be damaged.
d. The native animals, birds, and waterfowl that inhabit the
pond and surrounding woodlands would be disturbed.
e. The drainage characteristics and flood storage capacity of
the pond would be adversely affected.
f. Approval of the subdivision would establish a precedent
encouraging the subdivision of the numerous other large
lots in the neighborhhod, drastically altering the.
character of the area.
g. The market value of single homes appropriately situated on
the large lots in the neighborhood, which were positioned,
erected, and improved in reliance on the existing plat for
the neighborhood, would be diminished if this kind of
replatting were permitted where suddenly a new house might
appear next to a quiet, wooded back yard.
I have been a resident of Edina since 1945. I have lived at my
present residence at 6 Spur Road since 1985 with my wife and four
children. I purchased this home primarily because of the superb
natural surroundings that produced one of the finest lots in Edina.
Situated behind my home is a small jewel of a wilderness area which
extends all the way up from the Minnehaha Creek flowage. The
central feature is the beautiful three acre pond, but there are two
subsidiary ponds, and the entire area behind all the homes sur-
rounding the pond is a thick and pristine woodland with water
flowage down the middle during wet periods. The pond and woodland
area is home to abundant wildlife, including deer, racoon, fox, sev-
eral varieties of turtles, fish and tremendously varied birdlife,
including many nesting places for the waterfowl that populate all
three ponds.,
The character of this neighborhood cannot be comprehended
merely by studying a plat map, which shows lots backing up to each
other.. In fact, due'to the natural terrain of the area, all the
homes'are situated on the high rim which surrounds this natural
area, and virtually all the area descending from this rim where the
dwellings are placed is in its natural and most beautiful state.
Many of the homeowners in the neighborhhod including ourselves, have
done extensive remodelling and improving of the older original homes
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
Page Three
to upgrade the property without in any way disturbing the quality of
the setting. I am sure that every homeowner in the neighborhhod
invested in their property in great part because of the value of the
natural environment that is the central feature of the neighborhood.
It is important to note that the steepness of the surrounding•
terrain leading to the ponds, and the dense woodlands, have served
as a natural limitation on additional building below the rim, and
undoubtedly were a key factor in the establishment of the original
plat and development plan. The natural area surrounding the pond is
relatively inaccessible and lovely, simply due to the God -given
topography, and, unless the present state is permitted to change,
man will not be able to deprive this area of its natural attributes.
The pond is landlocked, and we all were justified in assuming no
further development could affect it.
Not only is this special natural area an irreplaceable asset to
the property owners there, it also is an irreplaceable asset to the
city of Edina and all Edina residents. It provides flood storage
capacity off the Minnehaha Creek watershead. It is home,to the
wildlife of the area. It provides beauty to all who pass by. It is
a pocket of quiet and peace, without traffic and human interlopers.
Mr. Berenberg's proposed subdivision constitutes a direct and
irreversible assault on the character of this neighborhood. He
proposes to initiate the precedent of subdividing one of the large
lots surrounding the pond, and changing the terrain and natural
surroundings to accommodate his personal inclinations (not to
mention increasing the balance in his bank account with the sale of
one or both of the two lots to be created). If this is to be the
perquisite of Mr. Berenb.erg, then others are sure to follow. Anyone
familiar with trends in development and urban planning knows this to
be so. All of us around the pond area have large lots that can
likewise be excavated and subdivided. Indeed, my lot would be much
more buildable than Mr. Berenberg's without destroying the natural
terrain. And,.as much as I treasure the neighborhood now, I would
feel I would have no choice but to subdivide my property, sell both
lots, and then move, if the neighborhood were changed so that my
view over the pond was into Mr. Berenberg's back yard, or that of
the other residences sure to follow.
I have personally seen an alternate plan, which I understand
was prepared for Mr. Berenberg, wherein four additional residences
are proposed for his existing lot. Does not this fact alone clarify
the danger to the character and symmetry of the neighborhood that he
poses with his desire to change a superb plat plan that has produced
one of the nicest and most unique neighborhoods in Edina.
I ask that the Planning Commission do two things:
- _ 1 . I&
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
Page Four
Please personally visit the neighborhood, walk down below
the rim and experience the environment of the pond and the
neighborhood. This is essential to an understanding of
the changes the subdivision will precipitate.
2) Please deny unanimously this proposed subdivision as.an
unjustified interference with the rights of all other
property owners in Edina.
FPJ:rew
1�
n
We, the undersigned, do hereby give notice of our opposition
to the proposed sub - division of the property owned by Danny
and Christina Berenberg, located at 5400 Interlachen
Boulevard and legally described as:
-- _ -- Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing
at a point on the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1 distant
79.5 feet Northwesterly from the Northeast corner of said
Lot 1; thence South parallel with the East line of said Lot
1 a distance of 141.3 feet; thence West 76 feet to a point
in the Northwesterlyline of said Lot 1 distant 159.3 feet
Southwesterly from the most Northerly corner of said Lot l;
thence Northeasterly along the Northwesterly line of Lot 1
to the most Northerly corner thereof; thence Southeasterly
along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1, 4.5 feet to the
point of beginning, according to the plat thereof on file or
record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for
said County.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6 . � 9 ,- —
Name
a�-
Address
ZAM 6a/JW �
2 r� -hare �Q
Phone
9d °� -i47/
t -5 34 1
9. /0 C� cv�,�` 9'
10
12 (�
G�
s � /W ��� -�i� mac% ,ems 7 7
13.x' 147�7
53 5 19 -�0=� fJ
14. `� j1
15. CJ
16.
We, the undersigned, do hereby give notice of our opposition
to the proposed sub - division of the property owned by Danny
and Christina Berenberg, located at 5400 Interlachen
Boulevard and legally described as:
Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing
at a point on the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1 distant
79.5 feet Northwesterly from the Northeast corner of said
Lot 1; thence South parallel with the East line of said Lot
1 a distance of 141.3 feet; thence West 76 feet to a point
In the Northwesterlyline of said Lot 1 distant 159.3 feet
Southwesterly from the most Northerly corner of said Lot 1;
thence Northeasterly along the Northwesterly line of Lot 1
to the most Northerly corner thereof; thence Southeasterly
along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1, 4.5 feet to the
point of beginning, according to the plat thereof on file or
record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for
said County.
Name Address Phone
1 .� % p s Yo_ tr�,� 4P 0(-L2-
2. 317 7q r�Z� - -7 6&�
5.
6.
7.
4SW BMW
8.
9 '� 333
lo.� /
11. �
13.
14.
15.
16.
5112
i 5�° /C BCD
3 O rl.-\nc,, -a
a�_&.
NS
522 -47[ 7
9-Z -673
FRANZ P. JEVNE, III
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55435
612 -835 -2000
September 1, 1988
Councilmember Frederick S. Richards
7225 Fleetwood Drive
Edina, MN 55435
Dear Fred:
I regret that I will be unable to be present at the council
meeting of September 12, 1988, wherein you will be discussing the
proposed subdivision of 5400 Interlachen Boulevard, the notorious
Berenberg property.
I want to express to.you my very, very strong feelings in oppo-
sition to this project. I believe my reasons for my objections are
set forth clearly in a letter which I earlier sent to the Planning
Commission, a copy of which is attached hereto. I would urge you
and greatly hope that you will read this letter in its entirety. I
also urge you to visit the neighborhood, because, until one sees the
beautiful natural area in question, one cannot really understand the
impact on the neighborhood of Mr. Berenberg's proposal.
I also would point out that I am aware that at least one
neighbor of Mr. Berenberg's is considering plans to develop his
property down the slope and around the pond area. You can be sure
many others would follow, as the dollar value of the lots would be
-so substantial. It would, in short, be the death knell of the
neighborhood if Mr. Berenberg is granted permission to succeed.
As an attorney, I feel the law is very clear that this proposal
is injurious to the character and symmetry of the neighborhood, and
is in clear violation of the Edina Comprehensive Plan.
I thank you for your consideration of my feelings on this
matter. I hope that a strong message will be delivered to Mr.
Berenberg.
Sincerely,
vi�� n e_ =
Franz P. Jevne, III
Enclosure
FRANZ P. JEVNE, III
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55435
612 -835 -2000
July 26, 1988
Mr. William L. Lewis
City of Edina
Planning Commission
5210 Villa Way
Edina, MN 55436
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Re: Proposed subdivision of 5400 Interlachen Boulevard
I am writing as a concerned property owner in the neighborhood
that would be directly affected by the proposed subdivision of the
lot at 5400 Interlachen Boulevard. My wife, my family, and I are
adamantly opposed to this subdivision, and greatly concerned about
the harm this would bring to the character of the neighborhood,
particularly to the pond and woodland area which is situated to the
rear of approximately 20 lots in the area of the proposed sub-
division.
Th,is proposed subdivision runs absolutely contrary to several
important provisions of the Edina Comprehensive Plan.
1. It interferes significantly with the character and
symmetry of the neighborhood.
2. It creates a "neck lot" where access is available only
through a narrow strip of land with a driveway running
directly under a large poweriine.
3. The proposed home would have to be constructed on a very
steep slope on a lot which, when the NSP powerline is
considered, is not of sufficient size to accept such a
dwelling without destruction of the terrain and character
of the slope area. Minimum lot sizes must be increased to
accommodate homes on lots with steep slopes.
The proposed subdivision is further objectionable because,
a. It will have substantial negative impact on the unique
natural environment surrounding the pond behind the lot.
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
Page Two
b.- __ The subdivision is contrary to the intent of the original
developer who intended to provide large wooded lots around
the pond without further development which would injure
the neighborhood setting.
C. The visual aesthetic value of the pond area, and the view
from neighboring lots, would,be damaged.
d. The native animals, birds, and waterfowl that inhabit the
pond and surrounding woodlands would be disturbed.
e. The drainage characteristics and flood storage capacity of
the pond would be adversely affected.
f. Approval'of the subdivision would establish a precedent
encouraging the subdivision of the numerous other large
lots in the neighborhhod, drastically altering the
character of the area.
g. The market value of single homes appropriately situated on
the large lots in the neighborhood, which were positioned,
erected, and improved in reliance on the existing plat for
the neighborhood, would be diminished if this kind of
replatting were permitted where suddenly a new house might
appear next to a quiet, wooded back yard.
I have been a resident of Edina since 1945. I have lived at my
present residence at 6 Spur Road since 1985 with my wife and four
children. 'I purchased this home primarily because of the superb
natural surroundings that produced one of the finest lots in Edina.
Situated behind my home is a small jewel of a wilderness area which
extends all the way up from the Minnehaha Creek flowage. The
central feature is the beautiful three acre pond, but there are two
subsidiary ponds, and the entire area behind all the homes sur-
rounding the pond is a thick and pristine woodland with water
flowage down the middle during wet periods. The pond and woodland
area is home to abundant wildlife, including deer, racoon, fox, sev-
eral varieties of turtles, fish and tremendously varied birdlife,
including many nesting places for the.waterfowl that populate all
three ponds.
The character of this neighborhood cannot be comprehended
merely by studying a plat map, which shows lots backing up to each
other. In fact, due to the natural terrain of the area, all the
homes are situated on the high rim which surrounds this natural
area, and virtually all the area descending from this rim where the
dwellings are placed is in its natural and most beautiful state.
Many of the homeowners in the neighborhhod including ourselves, have
done extensive remodelling and improving of the older original homes
.,
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
Page Three
to upgrade the property without in any way disturbing the quality of
the setting. I am sure that every homeowner in the neighborhhod
invested in their property in great part because of the value of the
natural environment that is the central feature of'the neighborhood.
It is important to note that the steepness of the surrounding•
terrain leading to the ponds, and the dense woodlands, have served
as a natural limitation on additional building below the rim, and
undoubtedly were a key factor in the establishment of the original
plat and development plan. The natural area surrounding the pond is
relatively inaccessible and lovely, simply due to the God -given
topography, and, unless the present state is permitted to change,
man will. not.be able.to deprive this area of its natural attributes.
The pond is landlocked, and we all were justified in assuming no
further development could affect it.
Not only is this special natural area an irreplaceable asset to
the property owners there, it also is an irreplaceable asset to the
city of Edina and all Edina residents. It provides flood storage
capacity off the Minnehaha Creek watershead. It is home to the
wildlife of the area. It provides beauty to all who pass by. It is.
a pocket of quiet and peace, without traffic and human interlopers.
Mr. Berenberg is proposed subdivision constitutes a direct and
irreversible assault on the character of this neighborhood. He
proposes to initiate the precedent of subdividing one of the large
lots surrounding the pond, and changing the terrain and natural
surroundings to accommodate his personal inclinations (not to
mention increasing the balance in his bank account with the sale of
one or both of the two lots to be created). If this is to be the
perquisite of Mr. Berenberg, then others are sure to follow. Anyone
familiar with trends in development and urban planning knows this to
be so. All of us around the pond area have large lots that can
likewise be excavated and subdivided. Indeed, my log would be much
more buildable than Mr. Berenberg's without destroying the natural
terrain. And, as much as I treasure the neighborhood now, I would
feel I would have no choice but to subdivide my property, sell both
lots, and then move, if the neighborhood were changed so that my
view over the pond was into Mr. Berenberg's back yard, or that of
the other residences sure to follow.
I have personally seen an alternate plan, which I understand
was prepared for Mr. Berenberg, wherein four additional-res= deuces
are proposed for his existing lot. Does not this fact alone clarify
the danger to the character and symmetry of the neighborhood that he
poses with his desire to change a superb plat plan that has produced
one of the nicest and most unique neighborhoods in Edina.
I ask that the Planning Commission do two things:
}
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
Page Four
1) Please personally visit the neighborhood, walk down below
— -- _ the rim and experience the environment of the pond-and the
neighborhood. This is essential to an understanding of
the changes the subdivision will precipitate.'
2) Please deny unanimously this proposed subdivision as'an
unjustified interference with the rights of all other
property owners in Edina.
FPJ:rew
12
X:4
o
<�ZZ�
r J'/
el
;� X
THOMSEN
NYBECK
JOHNSON
BOUQUET
VAN VALKENBURG
OHNSTAD &
smhu, P.A.
-- jj�--,A
LAW OFFICES
SUITE 600. EDINBOROUG3H CORPORATE CENTER EAST
3300 EDINBOROUG3H WAY. MINNEAPOLIS (EDINA). MINNESOTA 55435
(612) 835 -7000 • FAX: (612) 835 -9450
GLENN G. NYBECK DONALD D. SMITH OF COUNSEL:
GORDON V. JOHNSON MARSHJ.HALBERG JACK W.CARLSON
JOHN K. BOUQUET WILLIAM E. SJOHOLM RICHARD D. WILSON, P.A.
JAMES VAN VALKENBURG HERBERT P. LEFLER, III HELGE THOMSEN, RETIRED
MARK G. OHNSTAD DENNIS M. PATRICK
PHILIP SIEFF
September 30, 1988
The Honorable C. Wayne Courtney
and Members of the Council
City of Edina
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
RE: Preliminary Plat Approval
Berenberg First Addition
Part of Lot 1, Block 1 Hilldale
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:
The above matter is before you on Monday, October 3, 1988. I
represent Mr. Miller and some of the neighbors who are objecting to this
preliminary plat which in effect is a lot division.
In connection with this Petition I am enclosing copies of various
Petitions and correspondence addressed to the City Council and Planning
Commission.
The Planning Department Staff report of July 6, 1988.
A part of the section map showing this lot and some of the other
lots in the neighborhood.
I do not have it, but the Commission in its report indicated that
they unanimously denied the request for the division.
I would urge that you view the property first hand as there
are many features there that are of importance and can be better
observed by physical inspection.
I would suggest that if you do make such inspection and wish
any information or a place to view the same, that you contact Mr.
Richard Miller at 5340 Hollywood Road (922- 5647).
Mayor C. Wayne Courtney -2- September 30, 1988
Then I am enclosing a rough drawing of the subject property and
have attempted to illustrate thereon the size of the current lot and the
proposed lots, as well as the electric easement. That easement alone uses up
some 20,000 square feet of this 61,000 square foot lot.
The Ordinance also requires a 75 -foot front width and this lot,
for all practical purposes, has a width of 26 feet at Interlachen.
To deny this request is consistent with other actions taken by
the Edina City Council in the White Oaks area, Indian Hills area, and in some
commercial areas which indicates that any lot division or new plat must be
comparable in area and size to other lots in the neighborhood.
This property also has a D.N.R protected pond.
A big part of our concern is that if this division is approved it
would create a precedent that would have a substantial domino effect on other
properties in the area, both to the east and west, and north of the subject
property. We will present more detail on that at the hearing.
Certainly if there are any questions on this I would appreciate
hearing, and would be happy to answer or obtain the answers for you on any
concerns that you have.
JVV:jd
cc: Richard Miller
i�
r
July 21, 1988
The Honorable C. Wayne Courtney
Mayor of Edina
4313 Eton Place
Edina, MN 55424
Dear Mayor Courtney:
We urge you to deny the application for the pending subdivision
request at 5400 Interlachen Boulevard.
We bought our home in 1978, moving from another home in Edina. The
reason we were attracted to our present home at Eight Spur Road was
the solitude, serenity and beauty offered by our view of our
neighborhood's pond and the environment surrounding it. I presently
have approximately two acres, one acre of which is undeveloped but a
cared for forest which fronts approximately 200 feet of the pond.
We feel fortunate in having found truly one of the most exceptional
lots in our village.
Realizing this we have gone through two major remodeling projects
costing far more than the original price of the house. It was
prudent, we felt, in that the lot sizes can easily accommodate our
additions without encroaching on our undeveloped areas. Most of our
neighbors, feeling the same about the neighborhood as we do, have
done the same with no ill effects on our neighborhood's environment.
We have deer, fox, racoon and dozens of varieties of water fowl
coexisting within our community which includes 5400 Interlachen
Boulevard. we bought our houses because of this; we've more than
doubled our investment through remodeling our home as have our
neighbors, and we don't want to see this ruined.
If one neighbor is allowed to sell out his principles for a monetary
gain, we all lose. We not only lose the serenity which we've
invested in, but we undoubtedly lose wildlife as well. It may be
only one deer, five geese or one egret that leaves with the coming
of the new development, but that is just the start as we see it.
If the proposed subdivision is allowed to pass it will undoubtedly
be followed by more as we all have land available to do the same,
and you certainly can't allow one without the next, and the next,
and the next. What, in essence, will happen if the proposed
subdivision is allowed to pass, is that in 10 to 20 years the serene
pond becomes asphalt and the beautiful environment surrounding it,
along with its wildlife, will be destroyed by the addition of 20 new
neighbors..- ---The beauty of this unique area of our city will have
been sold out for dollars. Please don't allow that to happen.
Please deny the application for subdivision.
Yours truly,
LO &Ipur%oad
AN BAKER
Ei
Edina, Minnesota 55436
city planning & economic development
- -- July 19, 1988
Mr. William W. Lewis, Chairman
City of Edina
Planning Commission
5210 Villa Way
Edina, Minnesota 55436
Dear Mr. Lewis:
The pending subdivision request at 5400 Interlachen introduces fundamental issues
of precedent to both the Planning Commission and the adjacent neighborhood. Unless
you are satisfied that the Commission and Council understand and endorse the likcly
implications of approval, I urge you to support your staff recommendation to deny the
application.
Changes
My concern is not one of change, per se. We have for many years seen replatting
of large remaining parcels, such as recently at 5525 Interlachen; it's also likely that
we'll see more requests to add density - -three lots from two, for example. In either
case, these lots physically front a public street in one of a number of configurations
well- established in this community.
By approval of a "flag
anything is possible as long
lot" as proposed, the
as the lot
City sends
a signal
that virtually
is at
built within minimum setbacks. In effect,
least
the
9,000 s.f. in
City
area and
buildings are
planning standards. Probably
most damaging
really
is the
enforces
"right"
no community
economic return supercedes
establishment
and
message that
a
to maximize
environments.
maintenance
of stable
residential
Implications
When this has occurred in other communities, the results have been negative to
both the city and the majority of its citizens. The record of "no- controls, no
standards" is very clear in suburban areas of cities such as Houston and metropolitan
Miami, where residential neighborhoods are constantly eroded by development pressure,
and continuous conflict is the rule.
At a more subtle, though very real, level, the possibility of extraordinary
individual gain is also negative for the city. The record of San Francisco's Western
Addition ( downzoned in 1972) and Powderhorn Community in Minneapolis (downzoned
in 1975) suggests what could happen if Edina shifts from a "home investment"
mentality to one of "selling out." Personal investment in home maintenance declines,
and improvements virtually cease: why put money in a property when a developer will
buy you out, and you can go elsewhere?
Obviously the civic commitment to a neighborhood, even the community itself, is
seriously eroded in such circumstances. Given that private reinvestment and community
identification are the cornerstones of Edina's success, these are precisely the
characteristics one would not wish to endanger.
4536 Oxford Avenue S.. Minneapolis. Minnesota - i5 _116_t.tn(, . (mi) oin_to-7i
f
Mr. William W. Lewis -- July 19, 1988 -- page 2 _
The Surrounding Neighborhood
The immediate neighborhood to 5400 Interlachen is defined by Interlachen, Cooper,
Division, Oxford and Hollywood. It contains 31 homes, which focus on a land- locked
pond. This neighborhood was established in the 1950s and has been stable for over a
generation. Among the parcels can be found a very wide range of personal income
and property value, yet the area is physically cohesive and harmonious. It is very
close to an ideal residential area.
Besides the pond, the neighborhood is distinguished by large, irregular lots, set
within an oak grove. Houses are sensitively sited according to topography and view:
literally millions of dollars in private investment following a common environmental
theme of respect for topography, view, vegetation and wildlife. Clearly development
and subsequent ownership has not been, based upon maximization of potential real
estate return.
A New Equation
Should the Planning Commission and Council approve the proposed flag lot, this
will almost certainly change. A cursory test based upon aerial photographs and plats
reveals that in addition to the new lot at 5400 Interlachen, at least 19 more
subdivided lots would be possible in this small neighborhood under an identical
rationale. It should be stressed that this is nowhere near the maximum possible under
general code minimums, and could be increased if neighbors pooled properties for
more intensive development.
While this would clearly destroy the special character and value of the
neighborhood, it would be difficult to deny others the ability to "maximize" the value
of their properties, assuming the City believes this to be of overriding importance.
Especially for those of us who are not affluent, subdivision would allow us to own our
homes free and clear just by selling open space we are not currently putting to
'productive use."
Community Values
Since moving here in the mid- 1950s, it's always been my perception that Edina is
first and foremost a superior residential community. It is gratifying to see how well
the village has turned out, based in no small part on the shared values of the
overwhelming majority of its citizens. It is difficult not to resent assertions that any
given property owner has an absolute "right" to ignore these values if they deem it
in their own immediate interest to do so. Then Edina ceases to be a community, and
becomes merely a development opportunity.
And that is why I urge the Planning Commission to confirm our neighborhood as a
living environment. Should you feel this not to be in the City's interest, then please
rezone the entire neighborhood to Planned Unit Development, so we can all maximize
our values, sell out, and move to a place which holds community values foremost.
tney, Ci ouncil, Mr. Craig Larsen
-11 ZED AUG 12
Carolyne Bisson
5340 Hollywood Road
Edina, Minnesota 55436
Mayor C. Wayne Courtney
4313 Eton Place
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Dear Mayor Courtney,
Minneapolis is known as the City of Lakes and the lakes, for
the most part, are everybodies. On any given day, winter or
summer, rain or shine, one can drive by one of those
beautiful lakes and see people walking, running, skiing,
skating, or just relaxing. They are a huge part of the
natural beauty of the area, and the reason we can enjoy
these lakes today is because at some point a very long time
ago the city planners had vision and foresight and took
steps to protect these gifts from nature. Mistakes were
certainly made, and the city is certainly diminished by
them, although the majority of us today are totally unaware
of what we are missing. To the credit of city government,
however, wrongs are frequently righted, or their impact
lessened. Bassett Creek, for example, was covered over
because it was "in the way" of the industrial development of
North Minneapolis. Today, that is recognized as the tragedy
that it is, and portions of that creek have been uncovered.
The beautiful Mississippi River, long hidden behind
sawmills, flourmills, and factories, has been reclaimed as
the true treasure that it is. Good planners realize that
cities, towns, and villages are wholistic entities which
require attention to and tending of all their aspects if
they are to remain healthy and vital. Their growth, when it
is healthy, is comparable to a well tended garden. When it
is neglected, or out of control, there is trouble.
Our beautiful community of Edina has grown and blossomed
like a well tended garden under the guidance and direction
of a number of farsighted and dedicated people who sensed
these things from the cities inception. They had civic
green thumbs. Neighborhoods were planned and developed
according to certain restrictions which, although they
varied from area to area, had an internal cohesiveness and
Integrity that combined respect for the land, respect for
the landowner, and respect for the neighborhood and the
community as a whole. Parklands and wildlife preserves were
set aside for everyone to enjoy, and residential areas were
platted and planned with care. Today we have magnificient
perennial gardens such as the Country Club area, with its
regular lots and charming two story period homes. We have
the rugged Indian Hills area with its winding streets,
deciduous forests, and homes of more varied archetechural
styles - -an altogether fitting western horizon. -Our "garden"
Includes Parkwood Knolls, Rolling Green, and the Highlands
Area, Cornelia Park, Dewey Hill, and Morningside, among --
others. All uniquely beautiful, both in themselves and in
the gestalt which they create and which is the City of
Edina. Some are pure strains, some are hybrids, and some
are wildflowers. The Hilldale- Beverly Hills Area just east
of Rolling Green is one of these lovely wildflowers.
Developed in the late forties and early fifties with a
sensitivity for privacy and the tranquility offered by large
areas of open spaces, wildlife, and natural surroundings,
the area is characterized by large, irregular lots
contiguous, in many cases, to inaccessible, DNR protected
backlots, watersheds, and parklands. Flora and fauna
proliferate here. There are mallards and woodducks,
pheasant, geese, egrets, cardinals, orioles, goldfinch,
bluebirds, and at least one owl. My neighbor and I have
both seen, independently and on separate occassions, what we
believe to be a blue heron land on and fly from the pond
which connects the Hilldale- Beverly Hills area. Two fox, a
doe and her two fawns make it their home as well. There are
wildflowers, cattails, and, of course, algae. The sense of
privacy, the feeling of being in contact with this tiny
piece of wilderness, is cherished by the majority of the
people who live adjacent to the area, as well as many of
those who live in the surrounding area.
As a development opportunity, the Hilldale- Beverly Hills
area is finished, as is most of Edina. All lots designated
as buildable by the zoning and building regulations (those
promises made by a community to its landowners) of the City
of Edina have been developed. There are none left.
Planning in this area must now shift from a mode of
controlling growth into one of caretaking and preserving the
integrity of what has been done. The first step in that
process is resisting the pressure to subdivide, whether for
individual homeowners or developers.
Danny and Christina Berenberg's proposal to subdivide their
property at 5400 Interlachen Boulevard is an attempt to use
the City of Edina to rescue them from the unhappy
consequences of the decision they made to purchase the
property in 1978. Interlachen Boulevard is a very busy
street. It was a busy street in 1978, and it is a busy
street today. For several years in between 1978 and today,
it has, in fact, been even busier, although the average
daily traffic for 1987 was actually less than the average
daily traffic for 1986. The Berenbergs have disliked this
about the location of their home since they became parents
nine years ago and, in fact, have made their feelings public
via the local news media. They like the neighborhood but
dislike the location of their home. They wish to stay in
the neighborhood. Their solution, which is to exempt them
from subdivision prohibitions which are binding upon
everyone else in the surrounding area, is unacceptable. The
addition of another home where they propose would not - - --
eliminate the problem of having their children cross busy
streets, nor would it reduce the traffic on Interlachen.
There would be the additional traffic from whomever bought
their present home. The fact of the matter is, what Danny
and Christina Berenberg want is more privacy - and they want
it at the expense of the privacy which others now have and,
which, indeed, is guaranteed by the codes and ordinances
now in effect.
I fully understand the importance of a neighborhood,
particularly when children are involved. Before marrying my
husband, Richard Miller, and moving to our.present home on
Hollywood Road, I lived Just two blocks away on Vandervork
Avenue with my three sons for 10 years. Where we would live
as a family was a huge consideration in our marriage plans
as leaving the extended family of our immediate neighborhood
was something we wished to avoid. I suggest Danny and
Christina wait until a suitable home goes on the market in
the area and buy one. There have been several over the ten
years they have been in their present location. Bending the
rules by which everyone else in the neighborhood has bought
and sold their homes for the past forty years is not the
answer.
I urge you to reconfirm the dedication to quality shown by
our farsighted early leaders and support the recommendation
of your staff in denying the request to subdivide at 5400
Interlachen Boulevard.
Sincerely,
Carolyne Bisson
� y •
We, the undersigned, do hereby give notice of our opposition
to the proposed sub - division of the property owned by Danny
and Christina Berenberg, located at 5400 Interlachen
Boulevard and legally described as:
Lot 11 Block 1, Hilldale, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing
at a point on the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1 distant
79.5 feet Northwesterly from the Northeast corner of said
Lot 1; thence South parallel with the East line of said Lot
1 a distance of 141.3 feet; thence West 76 feet to a point
in the Northwesterlyline of said Lot 1 distant 159.3 feet
Southwesterly from the most Northerly corner of said Lot 1;
thence Northeasterly along the Northwesterly line of Lot 1
to the most Northerly corner thereof; thence Southeasterly
along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1, 4.5 feet to the
point of beginning, according to the plat thereof on file or
record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for
said County.
Name Address Phone
�� la q
2 . `
3. l — �. tzlz
4.
5. I�-� (�r� 8' Ca co Fes. 6,9 7 d`
-:1 -7 q -7 s3
2- i;, - -3 31 1
7. VIM 53 1 ��-?_ U c)a'7 , 6L--, 61
9.
'apt vow ��Cv
-so iS
12. lC
13.
14.
15. (�
16.
We, the undersigned, do hereby give notice of our opposition
to the proposed sub - division of the property owned by Danny
and Christina Berenberg;--located at 5400 Interlachen
Boulevard and legally described as:
Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale, Hennepin County, Minnesota,
except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing
at a point on the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1 distant
79.5 feet Northwesterly from the Northeast corner of said
Lot 1; thence South parallel with the East line of said Lot
1 a distance of 141.3 feet; thence West 76 feet to a point
In the Northwesterlyline of said Lot 1 distant 159.3 feet
Southwesterly from the most Northerly corner of said Lot 1;
thence Northeasterly along the Northwesterly line of Lot 1
to the most Northerly corner thereof; thence Southeasterly
along the Northeasterly line of said Lot 1, 4.5 feet to the
point of beginning, according to the plat thereof on file or
record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for
said County.
Name j Address Phone
1.
2. 5-3/7 741( ti's CAU- 767-&0
6 . x� (XI
8.
9.
V
lo. --Ifg
11. C
12. Zr-' �.a.�`...
13.
14.
15.
16.
�✓�o D���� /91f S
� 5�P112
gas-_ yir e
52,2 —4717
9-12,0 —673
yc2o -CO 7J,5
';� ZZ -6
FRANZ P. JEVNE, III
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55435
612 -835 -2000
September 1, 1988
Councilmember Frederick S. Richards
7225 Fleetwood Drive
Edina, MN 55435
Dear Fred:
I regret that I will be unable to be present at the council
meeting of September 12, 1988, wherein you will be discussing the
proposed subdivision of 5400 Interlachen Boulevard, the notorious
Berenberg property.
I want to express to you my very, very strong feelings in oppo-
sition to this project. I believe my reasons for my objections are
set forth clearly in a letter which I earlier sent to the Planning
Commission, a copy of which is attached hereto. I would urge you
and greatly hope that you will read this letter in its entirety. I
also urge you to visit the neighborhood, because, until one sees the
beautiful natural area in question, one cannot really understand the
impact on the neighborhood of Mr. Berenberg's proposal.
I also would point out that I am aware that at least one
neighbor of Mr. Berenberg's is considering plans to develop his
property down the slope and around the pond area. You can be sure
many others would follow, as the dollar value of the lots would be
so substantial. It would, in short, be the death knell of the -
neighborhood if Mr. Berenberg is granted permission to succeed.
As an attorney, I feel the law is very clear that this proposal
is injurious to the character and symmetry of the neighborhood, and
is in clear violation of the Edina Comprehensive Plan.
I thank you for your consideration of my feelings on this
matter. I hope that a strong message will be delivered to Mr.
Berenberg.
Sincerely,
Rku ti e_ =
Franz P. Jevne, III
Enclosure
IV
FRANZ P. JEVNE, III
3300 Edinborough Way, Suite 700
Minneapolis, MN 55435
612 -835 -2000
July 26, 1988
Mr. William L. Lewis
City of Edina
Planning Commission
5210 Villa Way
Edina, MN 55436
Dear Mr. Lewis:
Re: Proposed subdivision of 5400 Interlachen Boulevard
I am writing as a concerned property owner in the neighborhood
that would be directly affected by the proposed subdivision of the
lot at 5400 Interlachen Boulevard. My wife, my family, and I are
adamantly opposed to this subdivision, and greatly concerned about
the harm this would bring to the character of the neighborhood,
particularly to the pond and woodland area which is situated to the
rear of approximately 20 lots in the area of the proposed sub-
division.
This proposed subdivision runs absolutely contrary to several
important provisions of the Edina Comprehensive Plan.
1. It interferes significantly with the character and
symmetry of the neighborhood.
2. It creates a "neck lot" where access is available only
through a narrow strip of land with a driveway running
directly under a large powerline.
3. The proposed home would have to be constructed on a very
steep slope on a lot which, when the NSP powerline is
considered, is not of sufficient size to accept such a
dwelling without destruction of the terrain and character
of the slope area. Minimum lot sizes must be increased to
accommodate homes on lots with steep slopes.
The proposed subdivision is further objectionable because,
a. It will have substantial negative impact on the unique
natural environment surrounding the pond behind the lot.
Mr. William L. Lewis -
July 26, 1988
Page Two
b. The subdivision is contrary to the intent of the original
developer who intended to provide large wooded lots around
the pond without further development which would injure
the neighborhood setting.
C. The visual aesthetic value of the pond area, and the view
from neighboring lots, would be damaged.
d. The native animals, birds, and waterfowl that inhabit the
pond and surrounding woodlands would be disturbed.
e. The drainage characteristics and flood storage capacity of
the pond would be adversely affected.
f. Approval of the subdivision would establish a precedent
encouraging the subdivision of the numerous other large
lots in the neighborhhod, drastically altering the
character of the area.
g. The market value of single homes appropriately situated on
the large lots in the neighborhood, which were positioned,
erected, and improved in reliance on the existing plat for
the neighborhood, would be diminished if this kind of
replatting were permitted where suddenly a new house might
appear next to a quiet, wooded back yard.
I have been a resident of Edina since 1945. I have lived at my
present residence at 6 Spur Road since 1985 with my wife and four
children. I purchased this home primarily because of the superb
natural surroundings that produced one of the finest lots in Edina.
Situated behind my home is a small jewel of a wilderness area which
extends all the way up from the Minnehaha Creek flowage. The
central feature is the beautiful three acre pond, but there are two
subsidiary ponds, and the entire area behind all the homes sur-
rounding the pond is a thick and pristine woodland with water
flowage down the middle during wet periods. The pond and woodland
area is home to abundant wildlife, including deer, racoon, fox, sev-
eral varieties of turtles, fish and tremendously varied birdlife,
including many nesting places for the waterfowl that populate all
three ponds.
The character of this neighborhood cannot be comprehended
merely by studying a plat map, which shows lots backing up to each
other. In fact, due to the natural terrain of the area, all the
homes are situated on the high rim which surrounds this natural
area, and virtually all the area descending from this rim where the
dwellings are placed is in its natural and most beautiful state.
Many of the homeowners in the neighborhhod including ourselves, have
done extensive remodelling and improving of the older original homes
L'
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
____Page Three -
to upgrade the property without in any way disturbing the quality of
the setting. I am sure that every homeowner in the neighborhhod
invested in their property in great part because of the value of the
natural environment that is the central feature of the neighborhood.
It is important to note that the steepness of the surrounding•
terrain leading to the ponds, and the dense woodlands, have served
as a natural limitation on additional building below the rim, and
undoubtedly were a key factor in the establishment of the original
plat and development plan. The natural area surrounding the pond is
relatively inaccessible and lovely, simply due to the God -given
topography, and, unless the present state is permitted to change,
man will not be able to deprive this area of its natural attributes.
The pond is landlocked, and we all were justified in assuming no
further development could affect it.
Not only is this special natural area an irreplaceable asset to
the property owners there, it also is an irreplaceable asset to the
city of Edina and all Edina residents. It provides flood storage
capacity off the Minnehaha Creek watershead. It is home to the
wildlife of the area. It provides beauty to all who pass by. It is
a pocket of quiet and peace, without traffic and human interlopers.
Mr. Berenberg's proposed subdivision constitutes a direct and
irreversible assault on the character of this neighborhood. He
proposes to initiate the precedent of subdividing one of the large
lots surrounding the pond, and changing the terrain and natural
surroundings to accommodate his personal inclinations (not to
mention increasing the balance in his bank account with the sale of
one or both of the two lots to be created). If this is to be the
perquisite of Mr. Berenberg, then others are sure to follow. Anyone
familiar with trends in development and urban planning knows this to
be so. All of us around the pond area have large lots that can
likewise be excavated and subdivided. Indeed, my lot would be much
more buildable than Mr. Berenberg's without destroying the natural
terrain. And, as much as I treasure the neighborhood now, I would
feel I would have no choice but to subdivide my property, sell both
lots, and then move, if the neighborhood were changed so that my
view over the pond was into Mr. Berenberg's back yard, or that of
the other residences sure to follow.
I have personally seen an alternate plan, which I understand
was prepared for Mr. Berenberg, wherein four additional residences
are proposed for his existing lot. Does not this fact alone clarify
the danger to the character and symmetry of the neighborhood that he
poses with his desire to change a superb plat plan that has produced
one of the nicest and most unique neighborhoods in Edina.
I ask that the Planning Commission do two things:
a
Mr. William L. Lewis
July 26, 1988
Page Four
1) Please personally visit the neighborhood, walk down below
the rim and experience the environment of the pond and the
neighborhood. This is essential to an understanding of
the changes the subdivision will precipitate.
2) Please deny unanimously this proposed subdivision as'an
unjustified interference with the rights of all other
property owners in Edina.
FPJ:rew
f�
ro
/� r
G� G" / c - - - --
� G� /'
<� °� -�
� � �
!�
��
� ��
LOCATION MAP v
1 �I
HIS
min
mom
SUBDIVISION
NUMBER
S -88 -7
L
O
C
A
TI O N
North of Interlachen Blvd, west of Oxford Avenue
REQUEST
Create one additional lot
EDINA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JULY 6, 1988
S -88 -7 Preliminary Plat Approval,
Berenberg First Addition.
Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Hilldale
General Location: North of Interlachen Boulevard and west of
Oxford Avenue
The subject property measures approximately 61,009 square feet in area and
is developed with a single family dwelling. The lot area includes an NSP
easement covering the easterly 50 feet of the lot. The easement area is
approximately 20,250 square feet.
The preliminary plat proposes to create one, new buildable lot. The new
lot would contain 46,609 square feet including the NSP easement. Excluding the
easement, the_lot' would contain 26,359 square feet. The lot would have 76 feet
of frontage on Interlachen Boulevard including the 50 foot easement. The
proposed driveway would encroach on the easement, but the new building pad would
not encroach. The preliminary plat proposes to retain the existing dwelling in
its present location. The plat proposes a lot 102 feet wide with 120 feet of
depth with an area of 14,400 square feet.
The property is characterized by severe topography. Ground elevation falls
from 940 feet near Interlachen Boulevard to 890 feet at the northerly boundary
of the property. The proposed building pad is approximately 30 feet below
street grade. Development of the new lot will require extensive cut and fill
activity. Soil's engineering would be required to insure protection of the
house and pond from retaining wall collapse or erosion of the steep slopes.
Currently storm water enters the northerly portions of the property from
the east and drains to the pond north of the property. The preliminary plat
proposes an easement for drainage and utilities. The engineering department
would like to enlarge the easement area as illustrated in the attached exhibit.
Recommendation:
Staff believes, for several reasons, the proposed subdivision does not
represent sound community planning.
Lot size. The subject property is part of the Hilldale Addition. Lots
in the Hilldale Addition are quite large. A �ypical lot on Circle East or
Circle West is about 160 feet wide. The four lots immediately west of the
property are 125 or 130 feet in width. Lots is the proposed subdivision would
be 102 and 76 feet in width. It appears the reason this lot was made wider in
the original plat was to account for the NSP easement, and, possibly, because of
the severe topography of the lot. These physical constraints continue to exist
today.
Character and Symmetry. The Comprehensive Plan states "Allow further
subdivision of developed single family lots only if neighborhood character and
symmetry are preserved." The NSP easement forces the new house to be located in
the rear yard of the existing dwelling. Although the new lot will meet minimum
Zoning Ordinance size requirements, it will appear to be a neck lot when
developed, which will have a negative impact on the existing character and
symmetry of the neighborhood.
Site Development. The Comprehensive Plan states, "Require increased
minimum lot sizes for single family and two family dwelling lots on steep
slopes." The property contains very steep slopes which require substantial
alteration for development. The existence of these slopes seems a logical
reason why the lot was platted as a larger lot than some adjacent lots in the
original Hilldale Addition.
Based on the preceding reasons staff recommends denial of the preliminary
plat.
.. .. 2616.13Res. - .
P.
,EAST i
ALVER R., FREEMAN
Zo
.. .. 2616.13Res. - .
P.
,EAST i
ALVER R., FREEMAN
P-1
V.- 17
CIPqz
c4o�. C;Pe..Oa
rlGr
,VS/1,
1,Z . nr
.CZ i e • ' n
O ' i
rr ! Ci
• �'�<bRKfM� �,
REPORT/RECOMMENDATION
To: Kenneth Rosland
Agenda Item #
II.A.2
From: Craig Larsen
Consent
[�x
Information Only
F—]
Date: October 3, 1988
Mgr . Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject: s -88 -9 -
❑�
To Council
Preliminary Plat Approval for
Lot 6, Block 1., Edina Highlands
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
Recommendation:
Refer to Planning Commission.
Info /Background:
The proponent has elected to re- submit a modified Preliminary Plat for
consideration by the Planning Commission.
'4
If ' ..
\h�bHPORIAt�O�
�aee
REPORT /RECOi1 MENDATION
To: . Mayor & City Council
From: Francis Hoffman
Dir. of Public Works
Date: 30 September, 1988
Subject: 50th & France
Maintenance Assessment
Agenda Item # III-A.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
0 To Council
Action ❑ Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
Discussion
Recommendation:
Conduct public hearing and set up business group with staff to review
Commercial Area maintenance and reconstruction activities. Joint
proposal to be returned to Council on 11/7/88.
Info /Background:
Attached is the notice of public hearing sent to all owners of record and
tenants of buildings at the 50th and France Commercial Area. The public
hearing is being held tb discuss the potential of moving a portion of the
cost of parking ramp maintenance to the annual maintenance assessment for
the Commercial Area.
The income from the parking stickers the last two years was approximately
$10,500.00 per year. The parking ramp expenditures varied from $32,573.00
to $37,924.00.
1/ S
CITY OF
EDINA
4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424
612 - 927 -8861
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
50TH AND FRANCE MAINTENANCE AREA
The Edina City Council will meet on October 3, 1988 at 7:00 P.M. in the
Edina City Council Chambers at 4801 West 50th Street to discuss the annual
maintenance assessment at 50th and France Commercial Area.
The Council will levy the 1988 maintenance assessment proposed at 14.289
cents per square foot (the total cost being assessed is $42,158.29). Addi-
tionally, the Council will discuss future maintenance assessments regarding
maintenance on the parking ramps.
Currently, the annual maintenance assessment includes only the costs of
maintenance on the concrete and tile sidewalks, fountain, trees, shrubs, and
lighting as it relates to the walkways. The construction of the new level
on the 51st Street ramp is not going to be assessed to the 50th and France
area.
The potential additional future assessment to the 50th and France Commercial
Area would include routine maintenance costs for the parking ramps to
include weekly sweeping, snow removal, power costs for lighting and general
maintenance of the parking structures. These costs would be offset by the
parking fees collected for employee parking stickers.
The resulting effect of assessing for parking ramp maintenance could cause
the annual maintenance assessment to rise to twenty -five to thirty cents per
square foot depending on how much snowfall occurs and parking ramp sticker
sales.
If you wish to discuss this issue please contact Fran Hoffman, Director of
Public Works at 927 -8861 or send a letter to City Council
III.A.
ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT
COUNTY NO. M -88
LEVY NO. 11183
FOR: MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -88.
LOCATION: 50th Street and France Avenue Business
District.
CONTRACTOR: City of Edina
Payroll - Ed Lancello
$
28,016.49
Public Works Crew
2,710.76
Extra Summer.Help
1,662.55 ,
$
32,389.80
CONTRACTED SERVICES:
Mileage - Ed Lancello
$ 261.03
Contract - Sidewalks
1,355.82
$
1,616.85
COMMODITIES: Cleaning Supplies
$ 77.70
Seeds, plantings & trees
1,174.00
Repair parts
3,410.35
General supplies
3,354.37
Concrete
84.60
$
8,101.02
$
42,107.67
PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES:
49.17
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . .
. . . . ...
. . . $
42,156.84
ASSESSABLE UNITS: 295,030 ASSESSABLE
SQUARE FEET.
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT: $0.14289
ASSESSABLE COST:
$
42,156.84
COUNTY CHARGE:
1.45
TO BE ALLOCATED TO TAXES DUE AND PAYABLE IN 1989.
FIRST YEAR INTEREST FIGURED AT 9.0% OF TOTAL PRINCIPLE x 1.28219 YEARS.
ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT
III.B
COUNTY NO. A -178
LEVY NO. 11194
FOR: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO.
A -178.
LOCATION: Between 3913 and
4001 West 48th Street.
CONTRACTOR: City Force Account
Project
$ 2,891,18
ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL:
None
PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES:
None
CAPITALIZED INTEREST:
None
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
$ 2,981 18
ASSESSABLE UNITS: 2 ASSESSABLE
LOTS.
ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT:
$
1,429.48 PER ASSESSABLE
LOT.
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT:
$
1,445.69 PER ASSESSABLE
LOT.
ASSESSABLE COST:
$ 2,981-18
COUNTY - CHARGE:
y. L,JVL• IV
TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1989 THROUGH 1998.
FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1989
FIRST YEAR INTEREST FIGURED AT 9.0% OF TOTAL PRINCIPLE x 1.28219 YEARS-.,
III.C.
ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT
FOR:.. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -29.
LOCATION: York Avenue from West 74th Street to West 78th Street.
CONTRACTOR: Collins Electric Company. $49,050.00
ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL: 4,905.00
$53,955.00
PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: 75.00
CAPITALIZED INTEREST AT 9.0% $54,030.00
FROM: December 21, 1987
TO: September 19, 1988
274 days at $13.32 per day. $ 3,649.68
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$57,679.68
LESS STATE AID: $24,746.03
NET TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $32,933.65
ASSESSABLE UNITS: 4,936.44 LINEAL FEET
ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT: $10.00 /FT. FOR' MULTI-FAMILY PROPERTY.
$20.00 /FT. FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT: $ 5.00 /FT. FOR MULTI - FAMILY PROPERTY
$10.00 /FT. FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
ASSESSABLE COST: $32,933.65
COUNTY CHARGE: 2.50
$32,936.15
TO BE SPREAD IVER 10 YEARS - 1989 THORUGH 1998.'
FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1989.
FIRST YEAR INTEREST.FIGURED AT 9.0% OF TOTAL PRINCIPLE x 1.28219 YEARS.
III.D
ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT
FOR: STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-30.
LOCATION: West 76th Street from Xerxes Avenue to Edinborough Way.
CONTRACTOR: Collins Electric Company: $28,992.00
ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL: 2,899.20
$31,891.20
PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES: r%n nn
�31,y41.LU
CAPITALIZED INTEREST AT 9.0%
FROM: December 21, 1987
TO: September 19, 1988
277 days at $7.88 per day. $ 2,159.12
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $34,100.32
LESS STATE AID: 22,116.17
NET ASSESSABLE AMOUNT: $11,984.15
ASSESSABLE UNITS: 1,977.20 ASSESSABLE LINEAL FEET.
ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT: $10.00 /FT. FOR MULTI - FAMILY PROPERTY
$20.00 /FT. FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT: $ 5.00 /FT. FOR MULTI- FAMILY PROPERTY
$10.00 /FT. FOR COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
ASSESSABLE COST:
COUNTY CHARGE:
$11,984.15
2.00
11,986.15
TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1989 THROUGH 1998.
FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1989.
FIRST YEAR INTEREST FIGURED AT 9.0% OF TOTAL PRINCIPLE x 1.28219 YEARS.
III.E
ANALYSIS OF ASSESSMENT
FOR: STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -31.
- LOCATION : Edinborough Way from York Avenue to West
76th Street.
CONTRACTOR: Collins Electric Company:
$44,166.00
ENGINEERING AND CLERICAL:
4,416.60
$48,582.60
PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES:
50:00
CAPITALIZED INTEREST AT 9.0%
$48,632.60
FROM: December 21, 1987
TO: September 19, 1988
274 days at'$11.99 per day.
$ 3,845.02
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . $52,477.62
ASSESSABLE UNITS:., 1,028,973 SQUARE FEET.
ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT: $0.085 PER ASSESSABLE
SQUARE FOOT.
PROPOSED ASSESSMENT: $0.051 PER ASSESSABLE
SQUARE FOOT.
ASSESSABLE COST:
$52,477.62
COUNTY_CHARGE:
2.00
$52,479.62
TO BE SPREAD OVER 10 YEARS - 1989 THROUGH 1998
FIRST YEAR PAYABLE WITH TAXES DUE IN 1989.
FIRST YEAR INTEREST FIGURED AT 9.0% OF TOTAL PRINCIPLE
x 1.28219 YEARS.
50TH AND FRANCE
COMMERCIALAREA
ANNUAL MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT
A- MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL
B. COST ASSOCIATED WITH EXTRA ACTIVITIES
1. FOUNTAIN
2 TILE PAVERS
3_ F -S $PLANTS & PLANTERS/
GUARDS
CITY MAINTENANCE COSTS
A- STREETS
B_ RAMPS & PUBLIC LOTS
C. STREET UGHTING/PED. LIGHTING
D_ STANDARD SIDEWALK
POSSIBLE CHANGE:
A- PARKING RAMP MAINTENANCE
1. ROUTINE - SNOW REMOVAL
- SWEEPING
- LIGHTING
(INCLUDES PED. LIGHTING)
2. RESTORATION
A.
o e?"
ch
J • , ~�URPOnw� 4v�
�etle
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To_:
MAYOR AND
COUNCIL
From:
GORDON L.
HUGHES
ASSISTANT
CITY MANAGER
Date:
OCTOBER 3,
1988
Subject:
ASSESSMENT PW -88 GARAGE
LEVY NO.: 11340
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
Agenda Item # III • F
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
Eil To Council
Action ❑ Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
See memorandum of September 29, 1988 attached.
0
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: GORDON HUGHES
SUBJECT: ASSESSMENT PW -88 GARAGE
LEVY NO.: 11340
DATE: SEPTEMBER 29, 1988
In 1987, the HRA entered into an agreement with Jerry's Enterprises
relative to the Grandview Parking Ramp /Public Work garage project. This
agreement obliges Jerry's to accept a special assessment for a portion
of the cost of the Public Works Garage. According to the agreement, the
amount of this assessment is equal to 20% (twenty) of the cost of the
parking ramp. The following is a summary of the proposed assessment.
TOTAL PROJECT COST: $ 2,049,962.32
COST ALLOCABLE TO THE RAMP: $ 1,557,140.02
ASSESSABLE COST $ 311,428.00
In accordance with our agreement, the assessment should be spread in
equal annual installments over fifteen (15) years at an interest rate of
8.3% with the first year payable with taxes due in 1989.
4 11 t
ALLOCATION OF COST
GRANDVIEW PARKING FACILITY
T. I. COST
RAMP
GARAGE
TOTAL
JAMES STEEL CONSTRUCTION
$1,327,955.53
$ 422,880.47
$1,750,836.00
HAYMAKER CONSTRUCTION
9,307.17
-0-
9,307.17
N.W. ASPHALT
6,525.00
-0-
6,525.00
NIESEN TILING
28.969.00
28,969.00
EGAN FIELD
186.47
59.53
246.00
CON -TECH
492.70
157.30
650.00
MINNEGASCO
1,137.00
363.00
1,500.00
BRAUN ENGINEERING
50,489.40
-0-
50,489.40
WALKER PARKING CONSULTANTS
113,724.57
36,307.85
150,032.42
STAFF /INSPECTIONS
12,795.63
4,085.15
16,880.78
LEGAL
34,526.55
-0-
34,526.55
$1,586,109.02
$463,853.30
$2,049,962.32
ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS
BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT
$1,586,109.02
LESS DEMOLITION
(28,969.00)
$1,557,140.02
X 20%
ASSESSABLE TO JERRY'S
$ 311,428.00
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF
VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The City has given notice of hearings as required by law on the proposed
assessment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to, and at such
hearings held on October 3, 1988, has considered all oral and written objections
presented against the levy of such assessments.
2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the
office of the City Clerk for the following improvements:
Maintenance Improvement No. M -88
Alley Improvement No. A -178
Street Lighting Improvement No. L -29
Street Lighting Improvement No. L -30
Street Lighting Improvement No. L -31
Public Works Garage Improvement No. PW -88
does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvements upon the lot,
tract or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said assessments are hereby
adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments on account of said respective
improvements to be spread against the benefitted lots, parcels and tracts of land
described therein.
3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first of
said installments, together with interest at a rate of 9.0% per annum on the
entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1989, to be payable with
the general taxes for the year 1989, except that the interest rate for Public
Works Garage Improvement No. PW -88 shall be 8.3% per annum. To each subsequent
installment shall be added interest at the above rate for one year on all then
unpaid installments. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows:
Name of Improvement
MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M -88
ALLEY IMPROVEMENT NO. A -178
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -29
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -30
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L -31
PUBLIC WORKS GARAGE IMPROVEMENT NO. PW -88
Number of Installments
1
year
10
years
10
years
10
years
10
years
15
years
4. The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a
copy of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessments with each
then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the
tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution.
5. The City Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may be
payable by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the owner of any
right -of -way as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subdivision 4,
and if any such assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer
shall arrange for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said
Section.
4
o e
77, • . O
POMv
' � • YR7R�t •
Bee
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis Hoffman
City Engineer
Date: 30 September, 1988
Subject: Vacation of W. 76th St.
Between Edinborough Way
and France Ave.
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # IV. A.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
7
To Council
Action 0
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Vacate existing W. 76th Street subject to reservations of utility companies
and appropriate easements being granted in lieu of the existing street
right -of -way.
Info /Background:
This vacation of W. 76th Street is part
Lakes project. A new location is being
Edinborough Way and France Avenue. The
utilities beneath the street which must
companies would agree to vacate the exi
conditions:
of the platting of the new Centennial
platted for W. 76th Street between
existing street has all types of
be relocated. The City and utility
sting street subject to the following
A. Granting of new easements and street right -of -way.
B. Adequate time to relocate existing utilities.
C. Reimbursement to utility companies for relocation costs.
FA
3ANCE
Soo
)5.65
94.45
CD
0
O
28i'l
2631.25
.-(C0.RC,.No-17)--
,FIea 2-2- 65 NtC)
33 33
!71
(6000)
11`4 �;-i, .,� I
(6eOO)
(6400)
A'0*19'45 'W 65906
Doc. No. 164Y022
AVE.
C,
Q� PARKLAWN
—6—U—G — 7,7- WA 't�
)R 1119,04 Y 904
7 7 V
I I 1VO*O 7.31.E T
AVENUE-
ti
i�
Z
w9tN�� U�
>.
REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Francis Hoffman, City Engineer
,.z VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5.000
DATE: 36 September, 1988 AGENDA ITEM VI. A, B & C
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Utilities for Minnesota Dr., Ryan Ave. & Malibu Dr.
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1. See Attached Tabulation
2. 2.
3. 3
4. 4.
5. 5.
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: Annandale Contracting, Inc. - $189,559.93
GENERAL INFORMATION:
These are bids for previously approved projects. All projects will
be special assessment projects.
Signa re
The Recommended bid is
within budget not
Public Works - Engineering
Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
September 29, 1988
11:00 A.M.
BID TABULATION
CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA
CONTRACT # 88 -8 (ENG)
SANITARY SEWER, WATER MAIN. STORM SEWER AND GRADING & GRAVELLING
RYAN AVE.. MALIBU DR. & MINNESOTA DR.
BIDDER
TOTAL
Annandale Contracting, Inc.
$ 189,559.93
F.F. Jedlicki, Inc.
$ 214,523.86
Rice Lake Contracting, Inc.
$ 218,846.27
_Orfei Contracting. Inc.
$ 229,092.38
Glendale Contracting. Inc.
$ 229,912.65
G.'L. Contracting. Inc.
$ 231,576.51
Northdale Construction
$ 233,414.85
_Dave Perkins Contracting, Inc.
$ 235,867.05
Engineers Estimate $ 248,534.75
N+` REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
v°
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Francis Hoffman, Director of Public Works
VIA: Kenneth Rosland, City Manager
SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5 000
DATE: 30 September, 1988
AGENDA ITEM VI. D .
ITEM DESCRIPTION: Replacement of Motor Starters for Reservoir Pumps
Company Amount of Quote or Bid
1. United Electric 1. $ 7,594.00
2. ABTECH 2. $ 9,705.60
3. Dakota Electric 3. $ 18,971.72
4. 4.
5. 5
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID: United Electric $ 7,594.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This purchase will replace the electric motor starters for our two large
pumps on our 4 million gallon reservoir. These starters are thirty years
old and one failed last week. The funds for replacement are from the
Utility Fund.
9
' Public Works - Utility
Si atur Department„
The Recommended bid is
within budget not
Kenneth Rosland( City Manager
Director
° ' N. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE
rg HASE
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Ted Paulfranz, Fire Chief
VIA: Kenneth Rosland City Manager
SUBJECT. REQUEST FOR PURCHASE IN EXCESS OF $5 000
DATE: September 29, 1988
AGENDA ITEM vs.. E
ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Company Amount of Quote or &d
1. Motorola Communications
1. $6,552.00
2. (sole supplier -- Seven County Fire 2.
3. Consortium Bid)
3.
4. 4
5. 5
RECOMMENDED QUOTE OR BID:
Motorola Communications at $6,552.00
GENERAL INFORMATION:
This purchase will replace 18 existing pager units. Replacement is
necessary to.provide group tones for selective recall of off -duty and
volunteer personnel and to upgrade older pagers.
The existin pagers are too costly to service, convert and repair.
Service cos s gxzP_ed current value.
The Recommended bid is
Fire
Department p
within budget not
Kenneth Rosland, City
Wallin, nance Director
V1a iger
0
• '�Q7RPOSN019 •
000
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis Hoffman
City Engineer
Date: 30 September, 1988
Subject: France Avenue
Reconstruction -
Mavelle Drive
Collins Interiors
Parking
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # VILA.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr . Recommends ❑ To HRA
❑ To Council
Action ❑ Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
0 Discussion
Consider a public hearing to vacate a portion of Mavelle Drive.
Info /Background:
Hennepin County is reconstructing France Avenue which results in property loss as
illustrated in the attached sketch. The Collins Interiors building needs about 150
parking spaces to meet our City ordinances. Currently, there are only 40+ spaces
on the site. The County reconstruction project would eliminate about 15 spaces and
render the site to an even less usable location. The County has requested that the
City look at a solution which would result in no loss of parking for the Collins
Interiors site.
The proposal would be to vacate a portion of the north side of Mavelle Drive to
develop a parking layout somewhat similar to the attached sketch. The City staff
believes that this would be a reasonable solution. It would result in'Seaving
Mavelle Drive open as a public street and provide some relief to the Collins site
in terms of loss of parking.
FRANCE AVENUE
m
I
I
.HGA (RO M 'AND BOARD ;BUILDING
7100 FRANCE AVE. • _EDINA, MINNESOTA
May 2;1988
w
-' i
o e.Y
O
• aPOpul •
1886
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Francis Hoffman
City Engineer
Date: 30 September, 1988
Subject: I -494 Corridor
Commission Appointments
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # VII. B.
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
0
To Council
Action ❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Appoint official representatives to I -494 Corridor Commission.
Info /Background:
Per the approved joint powers agreement, the'City Council must designate
two persons and an alternate to serve on the joint powers group known as the
I -494 Corridor Commission.
Currently, the I -494 Project Management Team from the City consists of Leslie
Turner and Fran Hoffman. The I -494 Project Management Team oversees all the
other activity groups. The other groups that will be working on the I -494
issues are:
A. The Joint Powers Group (I -494 Corridor Commission) who will;wprk
primarily on City issues (i.e., land use, etc.).
B. The Travel Management Organization (TMO) group who work on travel
demand management (spearheaded by the private sector and transit
operators).
C. The EIS for I -494 Selection Committee who will work to assist Mn /DOT
in selection of a consultant for the I -494 EIS.
Report /Recommendation
I -494 Corridor
Commission Appointments
30 September, 1988
__ _ . _ Page Two
The City staff members involved in the above processes include Craig
Larson, Gordon Hughes and Fran Hoffman. The City staff would recommend
..that Craig Larson be appointed as a staff member to the Joint Powers
Group and that a City Council member be appointed with either a
Council person or Fran Hoffman selected as the alternate member to
the Joint Powers Group.
Leslie Turner and Fran Hoffman will provide additional information at
the meeting if requested.
w
A.
o e
Cn
v t 3O
e.e
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Kenneth Rosland
From: David A. Velde
Date: October 3, 1988
Subject: Edina Community Health
Services Committee
Recommendation on
Radon Testing
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # vzz.c
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
0
To Council
Action
El
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
The Edina Community Health Services Advisory Committee recommends that
the City of Edina appropriate $250.00 for the purpose of purchasing
10 Radon Test Kits.
Info /Background:
On September 19, 1988, the Edina City Council referred the Health Departments
request for purchasing Radon Test Kits to the Edina Community Health Services
Advisory Committee for their recommendation. The Edina Community Health
Services Advisory Committee recommended approval of the $250.00 appropriation
at their September 22, 1988 meeting. The Radon Test Kits would be used to
sample Radon levels in 10 Edina homes for the purpose of determining the
range of Radon levels in the Community.
Springfield, Massachusetts
September 15, 1988
Editor, Union News
1860 - -Main Street
Springfield, MA 01102
Dear Sir:
As a radiologist with particular interest in the tragic worldwide
epidemic of lung cancer in the second half of the twentieth century,
I found the media attention on September 13 to -radon gas.of par -
ticular interest.
I am reassured by the fact that although radon has been emanating
from the earth for centuries, the total of lung cancer deaths i'n
the United Stated in 1930 was 2,837. Then and since then males
have predominated. If the now 20,000 estimated radon induced lung
cancers annually pertained then, the U.S. population of 122.million
in 1930 should have had a total of more than 10,000 lung cancer
deaths.
Finland has a great deal of near surface uranium and the population
is exposed to much higher levels of radon than in the United States.
Finnish scientists have studied 30,000 women by analyzing a quarter
century of lung cancer data. These women show no more lung cancers
than the Finnish natio.nal average. In household activities women
encounter a greater exposure to radon within homes than do males
involved in farming, manufacturing, and other commercial pursuits
outside of homes. To apply the Environmental Protection Agency
risk estimates to the women studied, there should have been 10 -20
times more lung cancer in the study group than was found.
The E.P.A. has set a radon limit of four picocuries per liter in
contrast to Canada and Finland using 20 picocuries per liter as a
rational limit.
Meanwhile, I have no interest in moving to the attic or seeking
residence at third floor and higher levels. On the basis of the
extensive Finnish study mentioned above, the selection of the 20
picocurie level for testing homes would be much more realistic.
A L/ MORE and MORE
CIGARETTES 1914 to 1961•
and up went LUNG CANCER Deaths
115 times while
POPULATION up 2.2 times
Sincerely yours,
C'
John W. Turner, M.D. (FACR, FACNM)
_ i
cz
Fr, v� y0 cn
J • ' �CURP(1fUZ�J/
ItlHtl
REPORT /REECOMMENDATION
To: Mayor & City Council
From: Bob Kojetin, Director
Park & Recreation Dep
Date: September 30, 1988
Subject: Approval of Park
Board Recommendatio
Braemar Golf Association,
Dekhockey at Lewis Park, and
1989 Fees and Charges
Recommendation:
II. BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE (BOARD)
Agenda Item # VI I. D
Consent ❑
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑
To HRA
FAI
To Council
Action 0
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Andy Montgomery MOVED TO ACCEPT THE BRAEMAR GOLF ASSOCIATION. Don Wineberg
seconded the motion.
MOTION CARRIED. Itti Furlong, Jean Rydell, Bill Jenkins, Bob Christianson
opposed the motion.
1
III. DEKHOCKEY PROPOSAL FOR LEWIS PARK
Jim Fee MOVED THAT THE PARK BOARD ENDORSE AND ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL AS
PRESENTED BY BREAKAWAY DEKHOCKEY, INC. AND ALSO ENCOURAGE THEM TO WORK WITH
PARK DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL IN SETTING UP AND ESTABLISHING PROGRAMMING AT
LEWIS PARK FOR ONE YEAR AT $500 /MONTH WITH AN OPTION ON A SECOND YEAR.
Jean Rydell seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
V. 1989 FEES AND CHARGES
Scott Johnson MOVED TO ADOPT THE 1989 FEES AND CHARGES AS PRESENTED. Jim
Fee seconded the motion.
Andy Montgomery MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR BY LOWERING-THE
RESIDENT FAMILY SEASON TICKET AT THE ARENA TO $55 AND THE RESIDENT
INDIVIDUAL SEASON TICKET TO $35 AND BY LOWERING THE RESIDENT FAMILY SEASON
PASS AT THE POOL TO $46 AND THE RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL SEASON PASS TO $30.
Jim Fee seconded the amendment. AMENDMENT PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
AMENDED MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
INFO /BACKGROUND on page two.
VIII. D. (cont.)
INFO /BACKGROUND
II. BRAEMAR GOLF ASSOCIATION
It was moved to accept a Braemar Golf Association, however the Park Board
did not agree on the appointment of a Park Board member to this particular
board. They felt since no other association board had a Park Board member
assigned, this one would not need one. There was no concern one way or
another whether a staff member was assigned to this board as other
associations' boards that the Park Director has assigned staff people to be
a liaison between the department and the board. This topic was discussed
in the Park Board minutes of June 14, 1988, and August 9, 1988.
III. DEKHOCKEY PROPOSAL FOR LEWIS PARK
The Park Board considered a policy of a park having long -time leases or
contracts when renting parks to private individuals for a rental fee.
Their recommendation is since the park was not being used during the summer
months that it would be permissible to rent the hockey rink and the warming
house facility in the off season during the spring, summer, and fall for
this recreational activity.
V. FEES AND CHARGES
The Park Board recommended that in the fee structure of the resident season
ticket for the municipal pool and the arena, the increase was too great.
They felt the increase should be cut back to 50 percent of what the park
staff had recommended.
v
r
EDINA PARK BOARD
C7:30 p.m.
September 13, 1988
Edina Sity Hall
'\
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bob Christianson, Jim Fee, Mac Thayer, Itti Furlong, Jean Rydell
Andrew Montgomery, Bill Lord, Don Wineberg, Bill Jenkins, Scott
Johnson
STAFF PRESENT: Bob Kojetin, John Keprios, John Valliere, Stacey Kness
OTHERS PRESENT: Dr. John Hoyt, Mr. Roger Harrold
Mr. Christianson called the meeting to order at 8:00 p.m.
I. APPROVAL OF AUGUST 9. 1988, MINUTES
Jean Rydell MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 9, 1988, MEETING. Scott
Johnson seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED.' Mr. Montgomery questioned an item in
the minutes. Mr. Kojetin stated the majority of athletic associations were formed in
the 50s and 60s. The Soccer Association and Wrestling Association were formed in the
70s and 80s. Minutes stand corrected.
II. BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE (BOARD)
Mr. Christianson said the Braemar Golf Association has been formed, has appointed I
members, and has.requested that the Edina Park Board appoint a representative;
apparently as part of that request, they wish that the Edina Park Board give
"official" standing by participating in the Association's activities and accept what
they have done. From a procedural standpoint the issue is on the table, and it seems
that the matter has changed to a degree because as it was previously presented there
was not an association and now there is. The discussion is open on what we want to
do, if anything, with the proposal that we give official sanction to the-Braemar Golf
Association, to what extent we should become involved, and if we should appoint a
representative to the Association.
Dr. Hoyt stated the Association has been formed. The prior motion and discussion
dealt with the Park Board approving the development or formation of a board. We have
done that. What we are asking of you is simply an indication on your willingness to
work with us by initiating the invitation to appoint a member of the Park Board. If
you wish to take any other form of action, that is up to you. We will be meeting 6
p.m. this Thursday at Braemar.
Mr. Christianson said he thinks as far as the membership of John Valliere and Joe
Greuppner, he does not see that it is a Park Board decision.
Mr. Kojetin said he usually appoints the person to the board. Generally he assigns
one of the staff people from his office to sit on the boards.
Dr. Hoyt said their two additional ex officio members at large have not been
appointed, and they would solicit Mr. Kojetin's advice on that.
- 1 -
C
f
Mr. Christianson said that summarizes the status of the Association; he opened the
floor for discussion or motions.
Andy Montgomery MOVED TO ACCEPT THE BRAEMAR GOLF ASSOCIATION. Don Wineberg seconded
the motion.
Mrs. Rydell asked why would a Park Board member have to be appointed when there are
_two city employees on the Board; there is not a Park Board member on any other
association board.
Mr. Fee asked Mr. Wineberg to express his view.
Mr. Wineberg thinks if this is the will of the people at large at Braemar, he has no
objections to it.
Mr. Fee asked if he sees it as conflicting with the Park Board.
Mr. Wineberg answered no; if something came up that required Park Board approval, he
is sure they would do that.
Mr. Fee asked Mr. Wineberg if he thinks these people would be taking advantage of a
power situation at Braemar in any way.
Mr. Wineberg said not to his knowledge. When we had the meeting a year ago and a
number of league members were present, he had strong feelings about non - residents in
leagues. That is his only concern.
Mr. Johnson asked if a resident has a problem regarding the management of the golf,
course, i.e, excessive time is devoted to leagues, procedurally would that be handled
by the Golf Association and then the Park Board.
Mr. Christianson said as he perceives the operation of the golf course, John Valliere
is the manager who is taxed with the day to day operation. The general policies
relating to the golf course are established by the Park Board subject to approval or
disapproval by the City Council. To the extent that a problem'is not taken care of
to the satisfaction of the person, it would first go to Mr. Kojetin. If it related
to a policy and not and administrative matter, it would come to the Park Board.
Mr. Montgomery stated the swimming pool has a board, the Historical Society has an
association, and the baseball complex has an association that uses it. He looks at
the golf course as one huge chunk of the City's investment that does not have an
association that gives feedback relating to that facility. He does not understand
why there is resistance to this Association.
Mrs. Furlong said she has come full circle on a lot of things :, It is real important
for her to read carefully everything that has come to her. What you Mr. Montgomery
just said would have been her first inclination three meetings ago and is now at a
totally different point - -not for the fact that you people want to help the golf
course because you know what is going on; she sees that as nothing but a healthy and
good intent. On the other hand, she thinks that it has implications structurally
that we are not even thinking about right now because we do not know what is down the
road.. If the Association had not been made, she would have pleaded the case of
an Edina Golf Association rather than a Braemar Golf Association. The golfers do not
own the golf course. The golfers should not be in control of that facility.
- 2 -
Whenever you have an association is formed with a special interest in mind, it does
carry more weight. When you have a special interest group in place, something will
happen and policies directly or indirectly will be made. She would rather see a golf
association that promotes golf than a Braemar golf club that looks at the interest.of
the Braemar golfers. She was disappointed when she read the letter that said the
association was formed. The process that.is working right now is working well. She
hopes that their intent plays itself out. She does not suggest that Park Board
appoint a board member to the Golf Association. Just by appointing someone does not
mean we are willing to work with your board. She is in opposition to the motion.
Mr. Montgomery asked if the baseball association (for example) is self centered.
Mrs. Furlong said a golf association would have one thing in mind, but it wouldn't be
tied to a facility.
Mr. Fee asked for Mr. Lord's and Mr. Jenkins' opinions.
Mr. Lord said these people have already formed their association and we have to
realize it and keep the doors open to these people. He does not think a Park Board
member should be a member of their board because there are no precedents from other
boards.
Mr. Jenkins has a reservation on appointing a Park Board member.
Mr. Fee asked Mr. Wineberg if he thinks this has any more power than the Hockey
Association, for example.
Mr. Wineberg answered he does not think they have more power. I
C Mr. Kojetin referred to the information from the November 1977 Park Board Meeting,
"Athletic Associations Relationship with the Park Board and the Park and Recreation
Staff ". He said there have been other times when people have become upset with a
particular board and have made their own board. Because the Park Board has
recognized the eleven associations as the governing body for their sport, it has
stopped the splintering of other groups. He believes we endorse one group to prevent
the splintering.
Mr. Kojetin mentioned that he had not been approached by the proposed golf
association before they were formed. He has spoken with Mr. Valliere but never any
of the board people.
Mr. Christianson said he thinks that is regrettable. He said to give this
association our blessing at this time is not wise; it may well create problems down
the line that will be more trouble than they are worth. He stated he believes the
system is working now. He said we have one of the finest public facilities in the
country; it is extremely well run.
Mrs. Furlong said if all a group who wanted Park Board's approval had to do was to go
ahead and do it, it would not be a good precedent.
Dr. Hoyt said the name "Braemar" Golf Association was picked because Braemar is the
only public course in the city. He has no problem with changing the name if it would
make a difference. He agrees with the concept of the Park Board not appointing a
member to the Golf Board. Dr. Hoyt suggests when the golf board meets on Thursday
3 -
that Mr. Kojetin be asked to serve as an ex officio board member or be invited to any
meeting. It was Dr. Hoyt's understanding that Mr. Kojetin had been contacted by
several people in the board. Dr. Hoyt apologized for not contacting Mr. Kojetin
prior to the formation of the Association.
Mr. Christianson asked for any additional discussion. He asked for a vote.
MOTION CARRIED. Itti Furlong, Jean Rydell, Bill Jenkins, Bob Christianson opposed
the-motion.
III. DEKHOCKEY PROPOSAL FOR LEWIS PARK
Mr. Kojetin introduced Mr. John Griffith of Breakaway Dekhockey, Inc. Mr. Griffith's
company would like to rent Lewis Park for a commercial venture. They intend to make
money on it, and they intend to run a good, successful, recreational /leisure
program. Mr. Kojetin said this is important as a policy because we are getting into
different things that are coming up of starting to rent to different types of people.
Mr. Griffith said dekhockey is very big in the northeast part of the country. The
game is run similar to ice hockey except it is on a deck. It is played on top of a
special plastic surface. The equipment includes a stick with a wooden shaft and
plastic blade, shin guards, helmet, and a 2" diameter hollow.ball. The ball is a
little bigger than a bandy ball but much lighter. There is no checking in the game.
Mrs. Furlong asked if this is a family sport or if it is very competitive.
Mr. Griffith said the leagues are divided into the following age divisions: 4 -6
years, 7 -9 years, 10 -12 years, 13 -15 years,.16 -19 years, and over 17. For the youth
leagues there would be 12 games per season with three seasons during the year. The
C participants sign up individually. Volunteer coaches help form the teams and work
with them through the season.
Mr. Jenkins asked what the relationship between Breakaway Dekhockey and the
Recreation Department would be.
Mr. Kojetin said they would run their own program; we would just rent the facility to
them.
Mr. Montgomery asked what dekhockey will do to the roller blade concept.
Mr. Kojetin said we have not been able to get the roller blade program started. We
would like to have a one year lease to try it out with a second year option.-
Mr. Johnson asked what the registration fee is.
Mr. Griffith said in Pittsburgh they charge $30 per player for 12 games with 10 to 12
minute periods. The shin guards are about $10 per pair; the stick is $7- $8,and the
ball is $1. Any other protective pads or guards can also be used. Every player must
wear a helmet with full face cage or shield.
Mr. Johnson asked how many people participate in dekhockey in Pittsburgh.
Mr. Griffith said they have 110 teams per season with 10 -12 players per team.
4 -
Mr. Fee said there are a lot of people who would play hockey but do not skate that
this sport would be good for.
Mr. Keprios asked if the fee covers the leagues and jerseys.
Mr. Griffith said they would get sponsors to supply jerseys and usually fathers of
participants volunteer to coach.
Mr: Keprios asked about practice schedules.
Mr. Griffith said.when teams practice against each other, the practices are free.
For individual team practice for players over 17-years old there would be a fee. In
Pittsburgh they pay $35/hour to practice.
Mr. Keprios said the concept is exciting. He said it looks great for kids who are
skaters and for kids who are not skaters. He was sold on the idea of dekhockey
because the asphalted -rink at Lewis Park will have a purpose.
Mr. Jenkins asked if the rink is used for anything else at that time.
Mr. Keprios said no other activities are planned on the rink during those months.
Mr. Fee asked what the cost was to asphalt the Lewis Park rink.
Mr. Kojetin said it cost around $5,000. It was asphalted for a possible roller blade
program, and in principle it enables an ice rink to be made within a week and not the
traditional three to four weeks on regular ground.
Mr. Fee asked if this would be marketed through the Park Department.
CMr. Keprios said it would be listed in the calendar, but it would give a few details
and the name of a contact person. He mentioned the proposal to some Edina Hockey
Association board members and they thought it was a great idea.
Mr. Montgomery asked what the staff sees as the impact on spring sports.
Mr. Keprios said since there will be more than just a spring season, he doesn't see
it as diminishing any other programs.
Mrs. Furlong asked who covers liability when a private group rents a facility.
Mr. Griffith said their insurance would cover all the spectators and anyone getting
injured during the game.
Mr. Keprios said he is in support of the proposal but the only thing-he questions is
having a schedule recreation activity at Lewis Park which has been a passive park in
the summer time. If we get negative feedback from the neighbors, we do have an out
at the end of the year. He thinks it is worth a try.
Mr. Johnson asked if the rental would include the rink and the warming house.
Mr. Keprios said it would include the warming house. They are in charge of all clean
up and facilities.
5 -
Mr. Lord asked if it would impact the new Arena East and West.
Mr. Keprios said it would not impact it, but we could ask Larry Thayer.
Mr. Johnson asked if the Recreation Department will attempt to limit times to limit
impact.
Mr. Keprios said part of the agreement would be it would be March through November.
Mrs. Rydell said the spring league would start and finish before the other sports are
beginning.
Mr.-Christianson said it is our responsibility to provide as many choices as possible
to people in the city.
Mr. Keprios said they many find that it is in their best interest to schedule around
our activities.
Mr. Johnson asked if there are any other youth opportunities run by a for - profit
operation.
Mr. Keprios said there seems to be a trend that the public sector is starting to get
into the private sector to get some monies to offset some of our deficits.
Mr. Wineberg asked if the $500 rental per month plus expenses is cut and dry.
Mr. Keprios said yes, that is the agreement.
Mrs. Furlong asked Mr. Montgomery to explain his comment on conflict with other
activities.
CMr. Montgomery said the kids can play both soccer and baseball without conflict until
the upper grades, and now this sport could provide a conflict.
Mrs. Furlong asked if it is the Park Board's responsibility to decide when certain
athletics can be played, or is it up to each association.
Mr. Kojetin said it is generally a staff decision.
Mr. Keprios said scheduling conflicts occur because in baseball, ability levels are
split at the same leagues. There is no way around that between soccer and baseball.
Jim Fee MOVED THAT THE PARK BOARD ENDORSE AND ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL AS PRESENTED BY
BREAKAWAY DEKHOCKEY, INC. AND ALSO ENCOURAGE THEM TO WORK WITH PARK DEPARTMENT
PERSONNEL IN SETTING UP AND ESTABLISHING PROGRAMMING AT LEWIS PARK FOR ONE YEAR AT
$500 /MONTH WITH AN OPTION ON A SECOND YEAR. Jean Rydell seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Montgomery asked if this means we are giving up the facility.
,Mr. Keprios said all we are doing is leasing the facility and giving up the rights to
use it.
6 -
C
Mr. Kojetin said whenever that building is open, other people in the park can use the
restrooms. °
IV. EVERGREEN BIBLE CHURCH PROPOSAL TO RENT ARNESON ACRES
Mr. Kojetin indicated the Evergreen Bible Church approached him requesting to rent
the Grange Hall on Sundays and Wednesdays. Mr. Kojetin denied this request. The
Church came back and asked about Arneson Acres Park. We really have not rented the
building on a year -round basis. We have never rented as a City to a church group.
They have approximately 30 people in the congregation with a possibility of 60 people
attending including family members. The capacity of the Terrace Room is 70 - 80
people. The Church proposed to pay the utilities. In 1987 the heat expense was
$547; electric $659; telephone $658. The electric bill was averaged because there_
was not a meter at the building for about three months.
Mr. Fee asked if the Garden Council and the Historical Society generated any revenue
to cover expenses.
Mr. Kojetin said yes, they have committed that they would pay the utilities. We
could charge the Church $50 per day rental instead of having them pay utilities.
Mr. Lord asked why we would consider diverting from this schedule of rental fees.
Mr. Christianson asked if the Garden Council and the Historical Society have reviewed
this proposal.
Mr. Kojetin indicated he had discussed it with the Garden Council Monday, September 12
They did not seem against it.
Mrs. Rydell asked about separation of church and state.
Mr. Wineberg said this group is a new church. He asked if they have purchased ground
to build a church to grow into.
Mr. Kojetin said they have not purchased any land.
Mr. Wineberg said we should learn more about this group.
Mr. Lord asked why we would divert from the scheduled of rental fees.
Mr. Christianson said they either pay what we charge or they look somewhere else.
Mr. Montgomery said there should be some kind of discount when people want to use it
for 52 weeks a year.
Mr. Christianson said the Historical Society and the Garden Council are already
committed to covering the operating expenses, so this will not deter from that.
Mr. Kojetin said what we have to do is rent it to help support the building other
than the utilities for things such as general upkeep, painting, and so on.
Mr. Montgomery said you cannot charge a one - time -only rate for a year -long use.
- 7 -
Mr. Christianson asked what the Community Center would charge for a comparable rental
on a year basis. He said the Community Center has established different rates for
different tenants. On a smaller basis a tenant would pay more than on a large basis.
Mr. Fee asked if we want the money.
Mrs. Furlong said we should watch out on who they are.
- Mr- Wineberg said this is how a new church gets established; it rents a building and
starts up.
Mr. Johnson suggested that the staff get more information from the church group.
Mr. Christianson said it seems we have crossed the threshold of renting to private
enterprises. We should find out what the Community Center does charge on a
comparable basis.
V. 1989 FEES AND CHARGES
Mr. Kojetin indicated the Council asked the staff to increase their fees and charges
four to seven percent. The Council makes the final decision, but they like to have
the Park Board look at the fees and charges before they do.
Scott Johnson MOVED TO ADOPT THE 1989 FEES AND CHARGES AS PRESENTED. Jim Fee
seconded the motion.
Mr. Montgomery stated his disagreement with the proposed arena season ticket
increase. He said with an economy that is not great, these are not reasonable
increases. He said how much more can you get from the taxpayer of Edina.
CMr. Jenkins asked if these arena prices are comparable to other areas.
Mr. Kojetin said Mr. Valliere, Mr. Thayer, and Mr. MacHolda have checked with other
facilities to compare the golf course, arena, and swimming pool prices. We try to
stay in the upper half of fees and charges. Some areas we are higher, but we are
pretty close.
Mr. Lord said he understands the comments, but each individual manager has okayed
these numbers. We have to believe and trust their judgement.
Mr. Johnson asked if the staff and other board members feel there is a wide enough
difference between resident and non - resident fees.
Mr. Christianson asked Mr. Valliere what Edinburg Golf Course charges non - patrons for
18 rounds.
Mr. Valliere stated Edinburg had proposed to charge $20 but dropped to $17. They
have a different structure that allows a non - resident to buy a patron card at a
different price.
Mrs. Furlong asked Mr. Valliere why there isn't a non - resident fee separate and
higher than the resident fee at Braemar.
8 -
Mr. Valliere said it is a policing nightmare, and 79 percent of our traffic is
patron. The numbers of non - residents is not that great.
Mr. Christianson asked why the golf course raised its prices such a small amount.
Mr. Valliere said his increases are four percent or even a little less. He said he
is coming off a year of tremendous revenue. The golf course is experiencing a very
profitable year, and he did not want to charge the golfer.
Mrs. Furlong said it makes sense but the arena's and the pool's increases are out of
line.
Mr. Montgomery said traffic at the pool has slowed so much that this increase will
surely slow it even more.
Mr. Wineberg said keeping the pool at the 1988 rate will not bring more traffic.
Mrs. Furlong said if the Council asked for a four to seven percent increase, why does
it jump so high now.
Mr. Christianson said the arena has not been raised for three years. Maybe it should
have been raised a little bit each year.
Mr. Montgomery said he does not want to be a part of a recommendation with some of
these increases.
Mr. Lord said how can we sit here and make these kind of decisions. We have to put
some faith in the managers' judgement.
Mr. Kojetin said each manager really looks at the market in the metropolitan area.
The thing that you can be flexible on is when you charge non - residents.
Mrs. Furlong said she still disagrees with three resident rates. When she had
studied with the Task Force on comparing other cities' fees and charges, she found
they were all over the place on participation fees. She doesn't think there is a
basis for comparison.
Mr. Lord said he would suggest having Mr. Thayer come in to make a presentation
before making a recommendation.
Mr. Christianson asked Mr. Kojetin the amount of time before Council required the
1989 fees and charges.
Mr. Kojetin said the Council would probably like to see the fees and charges Monday,
September 19.
Mr. Montgomery said there should not be an increase of more than 10 percent.
Mr. Johnson asked Mr. Kojetin if the overall impact would be seriously affected if
the resident rates were lowered at the arena and the pool.
Mr. Kojetin said the overall impact would not be affected.
9 -
Andy Montgomery MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR BY LOWERING THE RESIDENT
FAMILY SEASON TICKET AT THE ARENA TO $55 AND THE RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL SEASON TICKET TO
C $35 AND BY LOWERING THE RESIDENT FAMILY SEASON PASS AT THE POOL TO $46 AND THE
RESIDENT INDIVIDUAL SEASON PASS TO $30. Jim Fee seconded the amendment. AMENDMENT
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
AMENDED MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
VI. - OTHER— -
Mr. Kojetin indicated the Council received the appraisal of the golf dome, and the
Council discussion was tabled until Monday, September 19.
Mr. Lord said Mr. Richards suggested Park Board discuss this tonight.
Mr. Kojetin answered questions put to the Council by Mr. McFadden (see attachment).
1. Does the city now.own any part of the dome? If so, what value? What is the
value of the remainder? Who owns the fence?
The City owns the building used as a picnic shelter valued at about $100,000. It
is rented to Golf Dome Associates for $6000 per year. The appraisers' value is
$620,000 excluding the building which includes electrical system, artificial
turf,,concrete around the perimeter, heaters. Golf Dome Associates own the
fence.
2. Do we have any appraisal of the life expectancy of the dome?
Life expectancy is 12 to 14 years.
3. What is the status of the auxiliary heating unit that is necessary for operation
in cold weather?
Golf Dome Associates rents a portable heating system.
4. Is there an operating projection to include original cost, plus interest, plus
replacement cost, and does that projection show a profit or loss? How much rent
have we collected in five years.
We have collected at least $27,000 in three years. See attachment for
projections.
5. What is the cost of insurance coverage for fire and liability?
Golf Dome Associates pays $14,000
6. Are any repairs currently needed to operate the dome effectively?
No repairs are needed to operate the dome.
upgrading such as the revolving door.
10 -
There are some things that need
7. What would a brand new dome from scratch cost and how much more efficient would
it be?
The appraisers have two quotes of what a new structure would cost, and Mr.
Kojetin is not sure of those total prices.
8. What is the salvage value of the current installation?
Mr. Kojetin is not sure at this time.
Mr. Johnson asked if the Council was going to vote on this.
Mr. Kojetin said if we indicate an interest in purchasing it, there would be further
negotiation.
Mr. Johnson asked if at the right price we would want to get involved in this type of
business?
Mr. Lord and Mr. Valliere both said yes.
Mr. Fee said we still do not have enough information. It seems that the potential
risks outweigh the revenue we can make from it.
Mr. Christianson asked what we are.receiving from rentors from this facility.
Mr. Kojetin said about $10,000 per year.
Andy Montgomery MOVED THAT THE PARK BOARD REJECT THE PURCHASE OF THE DOME AT THIS
( TIME BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF RISK INVOLVED VERSUS FIXED INCOME WE ARE RECEIVING
NOW. Scott Johnson seconded the motion.
Mr. Thayer asked what is the alternative to purchasing the dome.
Mr. Kojetin said Golf Dome Associates are under contract for ten more years, so we
would carry on as we have been. We are not sure if the new nine hole course will be
completed in 1990 as expected. The purchase of the dome would have been a cushion if
the new course is not ready.
Mr. Fee said he doesn't know if it is worth the risk for a $30,000 revenue.
Mr. Valliere said there are some down sides and up sides to the proposal. We cannot
get insurance for the dome, but down the road he thinks it will make money.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
VII. ADJOURNMENT
Jean Rydell MOVED TO ADJOURN AT 10:00 P.M. Itti Furlong seconded the motion. MOTION
CARRIED.
- 11 -
AGENDA ITEM VII..E
TO: Mayor Courtney September 27, 1988
Council Members
Ken Rosland
FROM: Leslie Turner
RE: Edinamite Silent Auction
-- As you know, we have been asked to contribute a party
to the Edinamite silent or live auction October 15th.
While the winter party at Braemar may have run its
course, I think we should offer something for the auction.
The Edina Foundation has contributed a great deal to the
City and it is appropriate for us to assist in their fundraising.
There are many other options that would be less time
consuming for the council and the staff, and yet bring in
money and provide a good time for us and the winning bidder.
1. Progressive dinner party for 12 to 20.
2. Catered dinner at Edinborough with entertainment
3. Summer picnic at Cornelia Park
4. Add you ideas
Kay Bach asked if I would coordinate such a party; I
would be happy to. But we should decide together what we
should do, if anything for the Edinamite silent auction.
}
AGENDA ITEM VII. ,F
P R O M P T A C T I O N R E Q U E S T E D
September 20, 1988
Dear City Administrator /Manager:
The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities:and the Municipal
Legislative Commission have been working for sometime with the
League of Minnesota Cities Coordinating Committee discussing
property tax computer analysis for 1989• The LMC has committed to
developing computer analysis capability for the 1990 legislative
session but a transition year is necessary to be able to react and
participate knowledgeably in the 1989 session. The Coordinating
Committee has been negotiating with the Coalition of Greater
Minnesota Cities for development of a property tax reform proposal_
for 1989, a key element of which, will be retention of the
principles of a Homestead Credit. Additional background data on the
research elements and product are enclosed.
This effort will cost approximately $185,000 for computer data
update and proposal development. To raise this amount, Minneapolis,
St. Paul, the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities, the Small City
organization, and the Metro Area suburbs are being asked to make
contributions. The suburbs share of funding has been targeted for
between $35,000 and $50,000, which will be raised voluntarily, not
through any type of mandatory assessment by either the AMM or.MLC.
Thus, a request for financial contribution is being made of all
suburban cities. Your city, along with other larger metropolitan
suburbs is being asked to contribute $2,000 to this effort. Smaller
suburbs are being asked.to contribute an amount commensurate with
their size and budget constraints. This financial.pledge is
'183 university avenue east, st. paul, minnesota 55101 (612) 227 -4008
� 7
I
I
contingent upon two factors:
1) AMM and MLC Boards approvel to proceed with this project,
and
2) 'Sufficient funding from the suburbs to raise the required
amount of dollars.
It may be imperative for all cities, especially suburban cities to
develop a common proposal for the 1989 legislative session. Based
on the 1987 and 1988 tax and school funding bills, counties and
school districts are committing to a significant effort for
additional funding in 1989, probably at the expense of cities. This
is primarily possible because of the elimination of Homestead
Credit in 1990 in favor of an aid type program. Since the suburbs
are at the greatest risk if Homestead Credit is exchanged for aid,
it is paramount that a strong effort be made to restore the
Homestead Credit.
The data base or information which should result from this one time
effort will help assure that the professional staffs of AMM and MLC
that represent the suburban cities will be on an equal footing with
other city lobbyists in the state during the 1989 session. Without
the availability.of this information and a unified position
supported by all cities, success in protecting the suburban interest
is, in doubt.
Please, strongly consider this request with your council and reply
using the enclosed pledge sheet or verbally no later than Wednesday,
October 5., 1988 to the AMM Office. If you have any questions, call
Vern or Roger at 227 -4008.
Respectfully,
Gary Bastian, President
Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities
W
Richard Wedell, President
Municipal Legislative
Commission
a
TO: ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN MUNICIPALITIES
MUNICIPAL LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION
183 UNIVERSITY AVE., EAST
ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101
FROM: CITY OF
YES, OUR CITY WILL PLEDGE $ _
IF THIS EFFORT CONTINUES.
NO, OUR CITY WILL NOT CONTRIBUTE.
CITY ADMINISTRATOR /MANAGER
LEAGUE COORDINATING COMMITTEE
ECOMMENDED RESEARCH PROGRAM FOR
_._ OCTOBER THROUGH JANUARY
The major research tasks re.commended.for the League
Coordinating Committee through January 15, 1989 are briefly described
below.
The research tasks have been organized into three major
areas of research work.
I.' Data Base Additions and Modifications
Add data on homeowner income related to home value and
tax burden, and develop analytical model for using this
data in conjunction with the property tax model.
Enhance ability to do regional totals and averages,
constituency group totals and averages and average impact
by property type.
Add county welfare data.
Add State Auditor's data on city revenues and expenditures
for 1987.
Update data base with estimated 1989 data when available
from the Department of Revenue or House Research. Most
recent information indicates that valuation data will
become available in .late October, and levy data will be
available one or two months later.
II. Background Research and Analysis of the 1990 Law
The first major research task is the analysis of the 1990
law, including its structural features and estimated impacts on
property tax burdens. This research work may include analysis of
the fiscal characteristics of cities in different regions of the
state, and how those characteristics play a role in determining the
impact of the 1990 law.
III. Research to Develop Specific Proposals for Consideration by the
egislature
The primary objective of this work plan is to develop two
specific proposals that are acceptable to the Constituency Groups.
One of the proposals would include a homestead credit and the other
would not.
The research involved in developing a specific proposal is
difficult to describe in detail. It is generally an interactive
process where-alternative proposals and their impacts are described
to the Committee, the Committee reacts to those proposals and
provides direction for further research to refine or redirect those
alternatives. Dozens or even hundreds of individual computer runs
may be needed in order to design a specific proposal that is
acceptable to the participants.. the elements of the system that
will -'be considered in designing a proposal may include the
following:
Classifications and assessment ratios.
LGA, disparity aid,.and other equalization formulas.
The homestead credit, other credits, and, in the case of
the alternative proposal, transition aid payments or other
programs that replace the homestead credit.
Categorical aids, such as the welfare takeover that are
either in addition to or in lieu of other state -paid aids.
Fiscal disparities or „tax base sharing programs.
Income adjusted property tax refunds or an income adjusted
homestead credit.
Extensive computer analysis is needed to assess the
inter - related impact of changes to all elements of the system. I't'
will be necessary for the Constituency Groups to focus the research
effort very early in the process. without some initial policy
agreements, the research effort could become unfocused and would
more likely be unproductive. The research work for the first
several meetings would be designed to help the members of the
Committee reach a preliminary agreement on the direction that the
proposals should take.
The research needed to develop specific proposals may
include some of the more specific research tasks already suggested
by Committee members, assuming that the Committee agrees that these
specific research tasks are needed.
Some of the specific items suggested so far include:
- Analysis of impact and appropriateness of using city size
as a basis for distributing aids.
- Elimination of split classifications; impact on tax
burdens and on the distribution of,aid.
- Research on the design of new property tax systems that do
not require.or encourage mill rate buy -downs or mill rate
equalization.
- Research on single aid programs that could replace the
multiple programs in current law.
f
Research on modifications.to 1990 law to refine aid
programs and classification system.
Analysis of property tax burdens by income class.
Research on impact of property tax system changes on the
existing education aid formula and on school district
levies.
Analysis-of projected school levy changes for 1990.
Analysis of ways to reduce tax burden differences due to'
differences in tax base.
These items illustrate the types of specific research that
would be undertaken for the Committee. This research is consistent
with the general structure of the recommended research program. The
Committee would have to decide as the negotiations and meetings
progress on the specific research to be done.
Membership of the League Coordinating Committee would in
include three members from each of the following groups:
Minneapolis
St. Paul
Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
Municipal Legislative Commission
Association of Small Cities
�1
A.
o e
Cn
.�y
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Kenneth Rosland
From: Craig Larsen
Date: October 3, 1988
Subject: LD -88 -8, 6315 -6319
Timber Trail
Recommendation:
Agenda Item #VII ' H.
Consent 0
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
❑ To Council
Action ❑. Motion
Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Amend minutes to reflect corrected legal description:
info /Background:
On August 1, 1988, the City Council approved the above referenced lot
division. The legal description prepared by the proponent and recorded
-in the minutes contains a minor error and does not accurately reflect
the item considered and approved.
The current legal description has been submitted and verified. For recording
purposes the proponent requests that the August 1, 1988 minutes be amended to
contain the correct legal description.
Amended legal description
w
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 "):
That part of Lots 10 and 11, Block 1, Indian Hills 3rd Addition, lying
northerly of a line drawn easterly.of a point on the West line of said Lot 11
distant 32.00 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Lot 11 as measured
along said West line to the Northeast corner of said Lot 11.
Lot 11, Block 1, Indian Hills 3rd Addition EXCEPT that part lying North of
a line drawn easterly from a point on the West line of said Lot 11, as measured
along said west line, distant 32.00 feet Southerly of the Northwest corner
thereof, to the Northeast corner of said Lot 11.
N *LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR LOTS 10 AND 11 BLOCK 1 INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITION
�• -- ''6315 AND 6319 TIMBER TRAIL). Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by
Member Turner for adoption of the following resolution:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land constitute various separate
parcels:
Lot 10, Block 1, INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITION and
Lot 11, Block 1, INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITION
WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to subdivide said tracts
into the following described nev'and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels "):
That part of Lots 10 and 11, Block 1, INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITION, lying
Southerly of a line drawn from a point on the West line of said Lot 11,
distant 32.0 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof to a point on the
East line of Lot 10, distant 7.65 feet North of the Southeast corner
thereof
and
That part of Lots 10 and 11, Block 1, INDIAN HILLS 3RD ADDITION, lying
Northerly of a line drawn from a point on the West line of said Lot 11,
distant 32.0 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof to a point on the
East line of Lot 10, distant 7.65 feet North of the Southeast corner
thereof,
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 conveyance 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, five ayes.
d by Member .Turner setting August 15
following planning matters:
1) Preliminary Plat A s of Interlachen 2nd Addition -
Generally loc. a Road and vest of Fox Meadow Lane extended
2) P Approval - Hed Addition - Lot 1, Block 10, Indian Hills
Use Permit - Edina Communitv L
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
lass
To: KENNETH ROSLAND
CITY MANAGER
From: GORDON L. HUGHES
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
Date: OCTOBER 3, 1988
Subject: 1988 SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT -
HENNEPIN COUNTY
Agenda Item # YII .I.
Consent Fx�
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends ❑ To HRA
❑ To Council
Action 0 Motion
❑ Resolution
❑ Ordinance
❑ Discussion
Recommendation:
Authorize Mayor and Manager to execute the Agreement.
Info /Background:
Attached is the proposed current year contract with Hennepin County
which provides partial funding (60 %) for Edina's recycling program.
This contract is essentially the same as those entered into the past
two years for the recycling program.
•• n
Contract No. 80170
SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN, STATE OF MINNESOTA,
hereinafter called the "County ", through its Bureau of Public Works, A -2400 Government
Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, and the CITY OF EDINA, hereinafter called the
1= C- i -ty9, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the County Board, by Resolution No.. 88 -6 -423, on the Twenty First day of
June, authorized funding for the City of Edina to use for its Recycling Program from
January 1, 1988, through December 31, 1988,. and
WHEREAS, said Recycling Program is consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Section
115A.02 and 115.03, as amended by the Laws of Minnesota 1988, Chapter 685, and
Minnesota Statutes 473.801; the Metropolitan Council's Solid Waste Management
Development Guide /Policy Plan; Hennepin County's Solid Waste Master Plan; and Hennepin
County's source separation /recycling policies.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED:
1. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
a. The City will operate its (curbside, drop -off, composting) Recycling
Program as more fully described in Attachment A incorporated and made
part of this Agreement.
b. In addition to the services as referred to above, the City agrees to:
(1) The City will state that the County is a project co- sponsor in
publicity materials and presentations: This statement shall
visually and /or verbally be as prominent as the City's name. All
promotional materials printed for distribution shall include the
statement, this program is 60% funded by the Hennepin County
Board of Commissioners." In addition, all publicity materials
should make use of the "Hennepin Recycles" logo.
(2) The City will furnish the County with a written annual report on
calendar year 1988 recycling -and composting activities by
February 28, 1988, evaluating all aspects of the programs including,
but not limited to, information on:
- Total costs as compared with the budget;
- Publicity strategies used and samples of publicity materials;
- Presentations made including dates, locations, organizations,
• speakers, and number of people in attendance;
- Tonnage of material recovered (both yard wastes and recyclables);
(Page 1)
- Participation rates;
- Market(s) for collected material, as available; and
- Every effort should be made to identify other recycling
activities (e.g., volunteer church - sponsored paper drives, retail
paper recovery efforts, etc.) and to verify and document their
recycles tonnages for 1982 (based year) and for the year of 1988.
2. TERM OF THIS AGREEMENT
This Agreement shall commence on January 1, 1988, and terminate on
December 31, 1988.
3. COMPENSATION
a. In consideration of the services as described above and contained in
Attachment A, the County agrees to pay the City a sum not to exceed
$26,019 for collection services, operating supplies, equipment costs,
labor, advertising and administration.
b. The City shall submit invoices semiannually to the County for
reimbursement for net costs incurred.
c. The County will retain 20 percent of each payment. Funds retained will
be disbursed (1) upon receipt and approval of the final written report
(2) in accordance with the table below and upon verification of recovered
tonnages; and (3) after final termination of net program expenditures.
EDINA
Reimbursement Schedule
Total
Solid Waste Materials
Year Tons Recovered
1988 54,233 0 -2711
2712 -5423
5424 -8677
8678+
% Funding Assistance
(Of Net Program Costs)
50
60
70
80
d. Payment to the City will be made as provided by law for payments of
claims against the County.
4. LIABILITY, INDEMNIFICATION, AND INSURANCES
a. The City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the County, its officers,
and employees harmless from any liability, claims, damages', costs,
judgements, or expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees, resulting
directly or indirectly from an act or omission including, without
(Page 2)
limitation, professional errors or omissions of the City, its agents,
officers, employees, or contractors in the performance of the services
provided by this Agreement; and against all loss by reason of the failure
of the parties to fully perform, in any respect, all obligations under
this Agreement.
b. The City shall by separate policy or under its self- insurance program
maintain and keep in force at all times during the term of this Agreement
-- - or any renewal thereof the following insurance coverage:
(1) Single limit or combined limit or excess umbrella commercial
general liability insurance policy of an amount not less than
$600,000 for property damage arising from one occurrence, $600,000
for damages arising from death and /or total bodily injuries arising
from one occurrence, and $600,000 for total personal injuries
arising from one occurrence.
(2) A single limit or combined limit or excess umbrella automobile
liability policy, if applicable,.covering owned, non - owned, and
hired vehicles used regularly in the provisions of services under
this Agreement in an amount not less than $600,000 per accident for
property damage, $200,000 for death and bodily injuries and /or
damages of any one person, and $600,000 for total bodily injuries
and /or damages arising from any one occurrence.
C. Contemporaneously with the execution of this Agreement, the City shall,
furnish the County with certificates of insurance evidencing the
above- required coverage.
5. NON- DISCRIMINATION
The City further,agrees that no person shall be excluded from full
employment rights or participation in or the benefits of any program,
service, or activity connected with this Agreement on the grounds of race;
color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status,
affectional /sexual preference, public assistance status, ex- offender status,
or national origin; and no person who is protected by applicable. Federal or
State laws against discrimination shall be otherwise subjected to
discrimination.
6. NON- ASSIGNMENT OF SERVICES
The provisions of this Agreement shall not be assigned, sublet, or
transferred without the prior written approval of the County.
7. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended, or should be
construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of
co- partners between the parties hereto, or as constituting the City as the
(Page 3)
agent, representative, or employee of the County for any purpose in any
manner whatsoever. The parties are to be and shall remain independent with
respect to all services performed under this Agreement. The City represents
that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in
performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of the City
or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services
required by the terms of this Agreement, shall have no contractual
relationship with the County, and shall not be considered employees of the
County, and any and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers'
Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or
other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf
of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged
employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against
the City, its officers, agents, contractors, or employees, shall in no way
be the responsibility of the County; and the City shall defend, indemnify;
and hold the County, its officers, agents, and employees harmless from any
and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent
tribunal, agency, board, commission, or court. Such personnel or other
persons shall not require, nor be entitled to, any compensation, rights, or
benefits of any kind whatsoever from the County including, without
limitation, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation
leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, disability,
severance pay, and PERA.
B. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
The City agrees to comply with
ordinances pertaining to solid
not limited to, the applicable
115A, and 473.01 now in force
9. DATA PRIVACY
all State statutes, regulations, and
waste management and recycling including, but
provision in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
or hereafter enacted.
All data collected, created, received, maintained, or disseminated for any
purposes by the activities of the City in the performance of the provisions
of this contract is governed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13, and all other statutory provisions governing
data privacy, the Minnesota Rules implementing such Act now in force or
hereafter adopted, as well as Federal regulations on data privacy.
10. MERGER AND MODIFICATION
It is understood and
contained herein and
negotiations between
items referred to in
deemed to be part of
modification of this
as an Amendment to tl
11. CANCELLATION
agreed that the entire Agreement between the parties is
that this Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and
the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. All
this Agreement are incorporated or attached -and are
this Agreement. Any material alteration or
Agreement shall only be valid when reduced to writing
its Agreement signed by both parties.
This Agreement may be cancelled by either party upon thirty (30) days'
written notice.
(Page 4)
The City, having signed this Agreement, and the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners
having duly approved this Agreement on , 19_, and pursuant to such
approval and the proper County officials having signed this Agreement, the parties hereto
agree to be bound by the provisions herein set forth.
Approved as to legality,
form, and execution.
Assistant County Attorney
Date:
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA
By:
Chairman of Its County Board
And:
Associate County Administrator
ATTEST:
Clerk of the County Board
CITY OF EDINA
By:
Its Mayor
ATTEST:
(Title)
0
5015 Wooddale Lane
Edina, MN 55424
September 18, 1988
Dear Mr. Richards:
We received a letter from The Church of St. Stephen
concerning their plans for the St. Francis Memorial Garden
Project which will change the function of the current garden
which was used during weddings, cruseos, and membership
activities. The proposed plan allows for the internment of
members ashes. We do not like the idea of having a cemetery
behind our house. We realize that many of you are members of
St. Stephens but your first obligation is to the community.
Churches are very important to our spiritual growth but
they should not be given special considerations against
public wishes. The parking lot at Grace Church is an example
of a neighborhood being totally changed because of a churches
need. Churches need to be good neighbors .lust like the rest
of us. We are sure you would not allow us to take in peoples
ashes for internment in our parklike yard.
If there are city ordinances which require our approval
in order to grant their building permit we would decline to
approve of this usage of their property.
Thank you for the time and effort you put into serving
on our city council.
Sincerely.
Sue nd Greg Wa ing
o e
Cn
O
_ •'N�UAPOW ��v •
�BeB
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To:
KENNETH ROSLAND
Agenda Item #
IX.A
From:
CITY MANAGER
GORDON L. HUGHES
Consent
❑
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER
Information Only
0
Date:
OCTOBER 3, 1988
Mgr . Recommends
❑
To HRA
Subject:
RESPONSE TO
❑
To Council
DOCTOR ARMSTRONG
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
Attached is a draft response to Dr. Armstrong's letter of September 14,
1988, concerning the subdivision request of Mr. Erhardt. I have also
included a letter from last November to Dr. Armstrong for your information.
W96INA
4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424
612 -927 -8861
_October 3, 1988
Dr. Byron H. Armstrong
4119 W. 62nd Street
Edina, MN 55424
Re: Z 88 -6, S 88 -11
Dear Dr. Armstrong:
Thank you for your letter of September 14, 1988 concerning the subject
rezoning and subdivision case. The City Council considered this request
on September 19, and continued the matter until the October 17 meeting,
after directing the applicant to consider revisions to his plan. In
response to one of your questions, the plan proposed to the Council on
September 19 would require variances for lot area, lot depth and .rear
yard setback. I have enclosed a copy of the Planning Departments staff
report which explains the details of these requested variances.
You have inquired again regarding your rights relative to the
development by Folke Victorsen of the property adjoining yours. As you
know, you and I have spoken on several occasions concerning this matter
and the City has responded to your past letters. Specifically, you
allege that Mr. Victorsen has constructed a fence on your property and
caused other damages for which you are due compensation. As we have
advised in the past, the City and the city Attorney cannot serve as your
representative concerning your dispute with your neighbors. We have no
knowledge that any of our ordinances are being violated in regard to the
construction located next to you. You must pursue the removal of the
fence and the triple damage allegedly due you through the private
remedies available to you through the courts. As to your complaints
about harassment and violations of our animal control ordinances,
please direct your complaints to the Police Department at the time of
the occurrence such that they may investigate and take appropriate
action.
I trust this responds to your letter.
Sincerely.
Gordon L. Hughes
Assistant City Manager
GLM /drs
cc: Kenneth Rosland_, City Manager
Mayor and City Council
14 September 1968
Edina City Council
City of Edina Planning Dept.
4801 W. 50th Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
To Whom it May Concern
AGENDA ITEM III.A.2
BYRON H. ARMSTRONG. M.D.
SKIN DISEASES
.jOCSOUTHDALE MEDICAL BLDG.
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55435
TELEPHON E: SS2=W.L-- /Z7- /019(:Z
Re: Case file Z88 -6, 588 -11
Before I bought my home I lived at b241 in the same block of Brookview Ave. wnere the
proposed rezoning and creation of a new lot are proposed by Ronnie P. Erhardt.
That was 20 years ago. I also know that someone else in that block slipped in an extra
..building on one of the lots on that same east side of Brookview.
What happens when the city council okays building an oversized building on an undersized
lot and then locates it so far off the street that it sits in my backyard and shades my
garden plot? Just look next door.
From what I have been able to learn, the fact that I cared for this strip of property along
the west border of my lot at 4119 W. 62nd street for so many years means it is mine. Then
when the neighboring property is sold to a young couple of scofflaws who tear down my
garden fence 75 times, first allow and then lead•thei� large dog to defecate on my lot,
then Robert Kidd assaults me 4 times (once in the presence of an Edina officer).and both
he and Becky make harassing phone calls, then they and Viktorsen tear down bushes and
trees on my land and.then build a metal fence on my land and design the runoff from their
property to roll down the hill onto my lot... and on and on.
How do I get the triple damages due me by statute? And how do I get that fence offmy land?
Resurveying on two subsequent days, letters and calls to the mayor, the chief of police, the
city manager, both city attorneys have produced no results to date. (At least with the
fence, their unattended dog no longer craps in my garden and backyard. Now they nave
-trained him to do his job in Pamela Park, off the leash, and they never pick up after him.).
If existing lots are of such a size that they can be divided without granting multiple
exceptions to the statutes on the books and new construction is done in such a way that it
does not have adverse effects on the adjoining properties and the neighborhood, permission
should be granted to do so. There should also be some provision made to compensate
adversely effected nearby property owners and consideration be made to requiting adjust -
ments to the landscaping to lessen the impact of new construction (or "planting it out" as'
they do in California and other places).
In the case at point here, How many variances would have to be granted to make construction
of yet one more duplex on the ground available? Who determines how much compensation I
have coming as the result of past actions by the council? How do I get this fence off my
property?
Looking forward to your r ies,
BYR N H. ARMSTRONG, M.D:
4119 W. 62nd Street
Minneapolis, Mn. 55424
CITY OF
E ®I NA
4801 WEST 50TH STREET, EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424
612 -927 -8861
November 16, .1987
Dr. Byron Armstrong
4119 West 62nd Street
Edina, Minnesota 55424
Dear Dr. Armstrong:
This letter is in response to your letter of October 3, 1987, which was
addressed to the City Attorney. Mayor Courtney received a copy of the letter.
We•apparently thought that the City Attorney had responded to your letter. You
have asked, however, that the City offices also respond.
You have asked three questions in your letter:
1) How do I get this spite fence removed from my property?
2) What steps are necessary to receive the triple damages due me?
3) How do I get an order halting any further activity until this long-
standing property line dispute is satisfactorily resolved?
Several weeks ago, Mayor Courtney wrote you a letter summarizing the City's
position as to this dispute. This position remains valid. In response to your
particular questions, however:
1) You must pursue the removal of the "spite fence" through the private remedies
available.to you; i.e. you must seek an appropriate court action ordering
removal of the fence.
2) You must pursue triple damages allegedly due you through the private
remedies available to you; i.e. you must seek such an award through the
courts.
3) You must pursue an order halting'further activity by seeking a court
order halting construction.
Dr. Armstrong, the City of Edina and the City Attorney cannot serve as your re-
presentatives concerning your dispute with the Victorsens and Kidds. The City
has no knowledge that any of its ordinances are being violated. The lot in
question was duly subdivided by the City, a building permit was properly applied
for and has been issued, and our inspections indicate that our ordinances are
being followed.
I trust that this letter responds to your re
Sin c ej, 6'ly
Cordon L. Hughes
Assistant City Man ger
GLH /sw
cc: Wayne Courtney, Mayor of Edina
PUBLIC FINANCIAL
512 Nicollet Mall, Suite 550 • Minneapolis, MN 55402 • (612) 333 -9177
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 3, 1988
TO: City of Edina, Minnesota
City Council and Staff
FROM: Public Financial Systems, Inc.
SUBJECT: Results of Bond Sale
Attached are the results of today's bond sale. The results compare the Price
(amount of discount taken), Interest Rates., Net Interest Cost, and Net
Interest Rate for each bid. The award is based on the lowest Net Interest
Rate. The low bid for three of the issues was submitted by the syndicate
(bidding group) headed by First Bank Systems Capital Markets. This syndicate
represents the majority of the public finance industry in this region. The
Miller Securities submitted the low bid for the $5,100,000 taxable issue. We
recommend that the City accept the low bids for each issue.
Market Response: The City received excellent response to these issues. Six
bids were submitted for each of the tax - exempt issues. Four bids were
submitted on the taxable bonds. All of the major investment banking firms in
Minneapolis /St. Paul, Chicago, Milwaukee, and New York are represented in the
bidding groups. The $5.1 taxable tax increment bonds even attracted a bid
from a Dallas -based investment banking firm, MBank. The number of bids
reflects the strong quality of Edina as a municipal credit.
Rate Comparison: The actual interest rates are between 16 and 56 basis points
lower than the rates unsed for planning purposes. The table below compares the
low Net Interest Rate with the Net Interest Rate used for planning.
Planning Actual
Issue Rate Rate
$5,100,000 G.O.
Taxable Tax Increment
10.26599'0
9.6981%
$10,175,000 G.O. Tax Increment
7.5698
7.2684
$3,160,000 G.O.
Utility Revenue
6.8533
6.6870
$2,470,000 G.O.
Recreational Facility
7.5500
7.2656
The interest cost
savings generally occurred
in the later years. The interest
rates increased slower than projected in
the later
maturities. A more
complete analysis
of planning vs. actual rates will be
included in our post -
sale report.
It has been our pleasure serving as your financial advisor on these issues.
We hope that you share our satisfaction with the sale results.
PUBLIC FINANCL4L
512 Nicollet Mall, Suite 550 • Minneapolis, MN 55402 • (612) 333 -9177
RESULTS OF SALE
$5,100,000 G.O. Taxable Tax Increment Bonds of 1988
City of Edina, Minnesota
3 3 �A*A
Moody's: Aal
Standard & Poor's: Aa
BIDDER
MILLER SECURITIES INC.
NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY
Smith Barney, Harris
Upham & Co. Inc.
Dougherty, Dawkins,
Strand & Yost
M. H. Novick & Co., Inc.
THE FIRST BOSTON CORPORATION
GRIFFIN, KUBIK, STEPHENS &
THOMPSON, INC.
BLUNT ELLIS & LOEWI, INC.
CLAYTON BROWN AND ASSOCIATES,
INC.
MBANK CAPITAL MARKETS
COUPONS
9.20 -1995
9.25 -1996
9.30 -1997
9.35- 1998/99
9.40- 2000/01
9.45- 2002/03
9.50 -2004
9.55 -2005
9.60 -2006
9.65 -2007
9.70 -2008
9.75 -2009
9.10 -1995
9.25 -1996
9.30- 1997/98
9.40- 1999/00
9.50- 2001/02
9.60- 2003/07
9.70- 2008/09
9.20 -1995
9.30 -1996
9.40 -1997
9.50 -1998
9.60- 1999/00
9.70 -2001
9.75 -2002
9.80- 2003/04
9.90- 2005/09
9.40- 1995/96
9.50- 1997/99
9.60 -2000
9.70 -2001
9.80- 2002/03
9.90- 2004/05
10.00- 2006/09
PRICE
$5,023,500.00
$5,008,475.75
$5,018,776.00
$5,005,000.00
October 3, 1988
NIC NIR
$8,061,587.50
9.6981%
$8,080,224.24
9.7205%
$8,261,507.33
9.93860
$8,337,516.67
10.0301%
PUBLIC FINANCIAL SYSTEMS
512 Nicollet Mall, Suite 550 • Minneapolis, MN 55402 * (612) 333 -9177
RESULTS OF SALE
$10,175,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1988
The City of Edina, Minnesota
BBI - 7.62
Moody's: Aal
Standard & Poor's: Aa
BIDDER
FBS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP
DAIN BOSWORTH INC
NORWEST INVESTMENT SERVICES
PIPER, JAFFRAY & HOPWOOD, INC.
THE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY OF
CHICAGO
ALLISON- WILLIAMS CO.
AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK ST. PAUL
CRONIN & CO., INC.
MILLER SECURITIES INC.
MILLER & SCHROEDER FINANCIAL,
INC.
SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM
& CO. INC.
Robert W. Baird
Craig - Hallum
Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand
& Yost
John G. Kinnard & Co.
Marquette Bank Minneapolis
Moore, Juran & Co. Inc.
M. H. Novick & Co., Inc.
Park Investment Corporation
Summit Investment
SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON, INC.
PRUDENTIAL BACHE CAPITAL
FUNDING
DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS INC.
DREXEL BURNHAM LAMBERT
GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO.
Rodman & Renshaw, Inc.
COUPONS PRICE
6.40 -1995
6.50 -1996
6.60 -1997
6.70 -1998
6.80 -1999
6.90 -2000
7.00 -2001
7.05 -2002
7.10 -2003
7.15 -2004
7.20 -2005
7.25- 2006/07
7.30- 2008/09
6.50 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
7.00 -2000
7.10 -2001
7.20 -2002
7.25- 2003/07
7.30- 2008/09
October 3, 1988
NIC NIR
$10,047,812.50 $12,065,025.00
7.26840
$9,991,313.66 $12,182,278.01
7.3390%
BIDDER
MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS
MANUFACTURER'S HANOVER
SECURITIES CORP.
MARINE MIDLAND BANK, N.A.
Irving Trust Company
State Street Bank and Trust
First Charlotte Corporation
GRIFFIN, KUBIK, STEPHENS
& THOMPSON, INC.
BLUNT ELLIS & LOEWI, INC.
CLAYTON BROWN AND ASSOCIATES,
INC.
HARRIS TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK
MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS
JOHN NUVEEN & CO. INCORPORATED
BEAR, STEARNS & CO., INC.
Bank of Oklahoma, N.A.
Mercantile Bank N.A.
Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley
& Co.
Juran & Moody, Inc.
Stern Brothers & Co.
Blair (William) & Company
Van Kampen Merritt Inc.
Illinois Company, Inc.
T ;mkl
6.40 -1995
6.50 -1996
6.60 -1997
6.70 -1998
6.80 -1999
6.90 -2000
7.00- 2001/02
7.10- 2003/04
7.20 -2005
7.25 -2006
7.30 -2007
7.35 -2008
7.40 -2009
6.70- 1995/97
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
7.00 -2000
7.10 -2001
7.20- 2002/03
7.30- 2004/06
7.375- 2007/09
6.50 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
7.00 -2000
7.10 -2001
7.20 -2002
7.30- 2003/04
7.375- 2005/09
6.50 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
7.00 -2000
7.10 -2001
7.20 -2002
7.30 -2003
7.40 -2004
7.45- 2005/09
PRICE
$9,985,531.33
$9,986,519.75
$9,994,855.50
$9,985,032.75
IC NIR
$12,183,135.34
7.3396%
$12,286,690.67
7.4019%
$12,303,509.08
7.41210
$12,413,571.42
7.4784%
PUBLIC FINANCL4L SYSTEMS
512 Nicollet Mall, Suite 550 • Minneapolis, MN 55402 • (612) 333 -9177
RESULTS OF SALE
$3,160,000 G.O. Utility Revenue Bonds, Series 1988
The City of Edina, Minnesota
BBI - 7.62 October 3, 1988
Moody's: Aal
Standard & Poor's: Aa
BIDDER
FBS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP
DAIN BOSWORTH INC
NORWEST INVESTMENT - SERVICE- -S-
PIPER, JAFFRAY & HOPWOOD, INC.
THE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY OF
CHICAGO
ALLISON - WILLIAMS CO.
AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK ST. PP
CRONIN & CO., INC.
MILLER SECURITIES INC.
MILLER & SCHROEDER FINANCIAL,
INC.
SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM
& CO. INC.
Robert W. Baird
Craig - Hallum
Dougherty, Dawkins, Strand
& Yost
John G. Kinnard & Co.
Marquette Bank Minneapolis
Moore, Juran & Co. Inc.
M. H. Novick & Co., Inc.
Park Investment Corporation
SL=it Investment
MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS
COUPONS PRICE
NIC NIR
5.90 -1990 $3,128,400.00 $1,365,720.00
6.00 -1991 6.6870%
6.10 -1992
6.20 -1993
6.30 -1994
6.40 -1995
6.50 -1996
6.60 -1997
UL 6.70 -1998
6.80 -1999
5.85 -1990
6.00 -1991
6.10 -1992
6.20 -1993
6.30 -1994
6.40 -1995
6.50 -1996
6.60 -1997
6.70 -1998
6.75 -1999
$3,122,576.05 $1,369,234.78
6.70420
BIDDER COUPONS PRICE NICAIR
GRIFFIN, KUBIK, STEPHENS 6.00 -1990
& THOMPSON, INC. 6.10 -1991
BLUNT ELLIS & LOEWI, INC. 6.20 -1992
CLAYTON BROWN AND ASSOCIATES, 6.30 -1993
INC. 6.40 -1994
6.50 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1997
6.90 -1999
HARRIS TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK 5.90 -1990
MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS 6.00 -1991
JOHN NUVEEN & CO. INCORPORATED 6.10 -1992
BEAR, STEARNS & CO., INC. 6.25 -1993
Bank of Oklahoma, N.A. 6.40 -1994
Mercantile Bank N.A. 6.50 -1995
Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley 6.60 -1996
Juran & Moody, Inc. 6.70 -1997
Stern Brothers & Co. 6.80 -1998
Blair (William) & Company 6.90 -1999
Van Kampen Merritt Inc.
Illinois Company, Inc.
MANUFACTURER'S HANOVER 5.80 -1990
SECURITIES CORP. 5.90 -1991
MARINE MIDLAND BANK, N.A. 6.10 -1992
Irving Trust Company 6.25 -1993
State Street Bank and Trust 6.40 -1994
First Charlotte Corporation 6.40 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON, INC. 5.90 -1990
PRUDENTIAL BACHE CAPITAL 6.00 -1991
FUNDING 6.15 -1992
DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS INC. 6.25 -1993
DREXEL BURNHAM LAMBERT 6.40 -1994
GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO. 6.50 -1995
Rodman & Renshaw, Inc. 6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.85 -1998
6.90 -1999
$3,133,140.00
$3,129,032.00
$1,381,403.33
6.763849%
$1,383,134.67
6.7723%
$13,128,115.00 $1,383,241.67
6.77285%
$3,125,240.00 $1,387,385.00
6.7931%
PUBLIC FINANCL4L SYSTEMS
512 Nicollet Mall, Suite 550 • Minneapolis, MN 55402 • (612) 333 -9177
RESULTS OF SALE
$2,470,000 G.O. Recreational Facility Bonds, Series 1988
The City of Edina, Minnesota
BBI - 7.62 October 3, 1988
Moody's: Aal
Standard & Poor's: Aa
BIDDER
COUPONS PRICE NIC AIR
FBS CAPITAL MARKETS GROUP
6.10 -1992 $2,439,125.00 $2,854,143.75
DAIN BOSWORTH INC
6.20 -1993 7.2656%
NORWEST INVESTMENT SERVICES
6.30 -1994
PIPER JAFFRAY & HOPWOOD INC
6.40 -1995
THE NORTHERN TRUST COMPANY
6.50 -1996
OF CHICAGO
6.60 -1997
6.70 -1998
ALLISON- WILLIAMS CO.
6.80 -1999
AMERICAN NAT.BK ST. PAUL
6.90 -2000
CRONIN & CO., INC.
7.00 -2001
MILLER SECURITIES INC.
7.05 -2002
MILLER & SCHROEDER
7.10 -2003
FINANCIAL, INC.
7.15 -2004
SMITH BARNEY, HARRIS UPHAM &
7.20 -2005
CO. INC.
7.25- 2006/07
Robert W. Baird
7.30- 2008/09
Craig - Hallum
Dougherty, Dawkins,
Strand & Yost
John G. Kinnard & Co.
Marquette Bank Minneapolis
Moore, Juran & Co. Inc.
M. H. Novick & Co., Inc.
Park Investment Corporation
Summit Investment
MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS 6.10 -1992 $2,424,020.95 $2,885,754.68
6.20 -1993 7.34600
6.30 -1994
6.40 -1995
6.50 -1996
6.60 -1997
6.70 -1998
6.80 -1999
6.90 -2000
7.00 -2001
7.10 -2002
BIDDER
MANUFACTURER'S HANOVER
SECURITIES CORP.
MARINE MIDLAND BANK, N.A.
Irving Trust Company
State Street Bank and Trust
First Charlotte Corporation
SHEARSON LEHMAN HUTTON, INC.
PRUDENTIAL BACHE CAPITAL
FUNDING
DEAN WITTER REYNOLDS INC.
DREXEL BURNHAM LAMBERT
GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO.
Rodman & Renshaw, Inc.
GRIFFIN, KUBIK, STEPHENS
& THOMPSON, INC.
BLUNT ELLIS & LOEWI, INC.
CLAYTON BROWN AND ASSOCIATES,
INC.
COUPONS
7.20 -2003
7.25 -2004
7.30- 2005/09
6.10 -1992
6.25 -1993
6.40 -1994
6.50 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
7.00 -2000
7.10 -2001
7.20 -2002
7.25 -2003
7.30- 2004/05
7.375- 2006/09
6.15 -1992
6.25 -1993
6.40 -1994
6.50 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
7.00 -2000
7.10 -2001
7.20 -2002
7.25 -2003
7.30 -2004
7.35 -2005
7.40- 2006/08
7.45 -2009
6.20 -1992
6.30 -1993
6.40 -1994
6.50 -1995
6.60 -1996
6.70 -1997
6.80 -1998
6.90 -1999
7.00 -2000
7.10 -2001
7.20 -2002
7.30- 2003/04
7.40- 2005/09
PRICE
$2,428,021.00
$2,434,185.00
$2,424,124.05
NIC NIR
$2,908,071.19
7.40290
$2,923,124.05
7.4152%
$2,923,124.05
7.4412%
BIDDER COUPONS
HARRIS TRUST AND SAVINGS BANK 6.10 -1992
MERRILL LYNCH CAPITAL MARKETS 6.25 -1993
JOHN NUVEEN & CO. INCORPORATED 6.40 -1994
BEAR, STEARNS & CO., INC.
6.50 -1995
Bank of Oklahoma, N.A.
6.60 -1996
Mercantile Bank N.A.
6.70 -1997
Hutchinson, Shockey, Erley
6.80 -1998
& Co.
6.90 -1999
Juran & Moody, Inc.
7.00 -2000
Stern Brothers & Co.
7.10 -2001
Blair (William) & Company
7.20 -2002
Van Kampen Merritt Inc.
7.30 -2003
Illinois Company, Inc.
7.40 -2004
7.45 -2005
7.50- 2006/09
PRICE
$2,428,346.75
NIC AIR
$2,946,346.63
7.5004%
C
41�1J 1:
o e ' s:
C.
fir\
J J,.
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: Ken Rosland, Manager
From: John Wallin, Finance Dir.
D ate: September 30, 1988
Subject: Cancelling Levy for
Bonds
Recommendation:
Agenda Item # -x—.c & X.D
Consent Fx]
Information Only ❑
Mgr. Recommends [l To HRA
El To Council
Action ❑ Motion
E Resolution
❑ Ordinance
Adopt Resolutions cancelling levy for 1989 on $5,400,000 General Obligation
Improvement Bonds, Series 1984, and $2,200,000 General Obligation Redevelopment
Bonds.
Info /Background:
The principal and interest on the Improvement Bonds of 1984 and the Redevelopment
Bonds are payable primarily from special assessments. In the event that the
special assessments fell short, additional ad valorem taxes were required by law
to be levied on all taxable property in the City for each of the years that
principal and interest payments are to be made. Since the special assessments
will again be sufficient to pay principal and interest, the taxes levied for
1989 should be cancelled.
s
0
RESOLUTION CANCELLING AD VALOREM TAXES.
COLLECTIBLE WITH 1989 GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED
FOR $5,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1984
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has, by resolution adopted
September 10, 1984, levied a special ad valorem tax for the pavment of
principal and interest of its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series
1984; said ad valorem tax in the amount of
and as a part of other general taxes for the year , 1098 9; and collectible with
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, permits the cancellation of said
levies providing moneys are on hand for payment of principal and interest for
said bond issue; and it has been determined by this Council that the required
moneys are on hand for the payment of said principal and interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that
those ad valorem tax levies made by resolution of this Council adopted
September.l0, 1984, and collectible with and as a part of other general
property taxes in said City for the year 1989, be and hereby are cancelled:
and
BE IT'FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Auditor of Hennepin Countv, Minnesota,
be authorized and directed to cancel the above described ad valorem tax levies
and to delete said levies from taxes to be spread for the year 1989.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of October, 1989.
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 October 3, 1989, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 4th day of October, 1989.
Citv Clerk
RESOLUTION CANCELLING AD VALOREM TAXES
COLLECTIBLE WITH 1989 GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED
FOR $2,200,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REDEVELOPMENT BONDS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has, by resolution adopted
November 3, 1975, levied a special ad valorem tax for the payment of principal
and interest of its $2,200,000 General Obligation Redevelopment Bonds, said
ad valorem tax in the amount of $283,900 being collectible with and as a part
of other general taxes for the year 1989; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, permits the cancellation of
said levies providing moneys are on hand for payment of principal and interest
for said bond issue; and it has been determined by this Council that the
required moneys are on hand for the payment of said principal and interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that
those ad valorem tax levies made by resolution of this Council adopted
November 3, 1975, and collectible with and as a part of other general property ,I
taxes in said City for the year 1989, be and hereby are cancelled; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota,
be authorized and directed to cancel the above described ad valorem tax levies
and to delete said levies from taxes to be spread for the year 1989.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of October, 1989.
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 October 3, 1989, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said Citv this 4th day of October, 1989
City Clerk
RESOLUTION CANCELLING AD VALOREM TAXES
COLLECTIBLE WITH 1989 GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED
FOR $2,200,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REDEVELOPMENT BONDS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has, by resolution adopted
November 3, 1975, levied a special ad valorem tax for the payment of principal
and interest of its $2,200,000 General Obligation Redevelopment Bonds, said
ad valorem tax in the amount of $283,900 being collectible with and as a part
of other general taxes for the year 1989; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, permits the cancellation of
said levies providing moneys are on hand for payment of principal and interest
for said bond issue; and it has been determined by this Council that the
required moneys are on hand for the payment of said principal and interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that
those ad valorem tax levies made by resolution of this Council adopted
November 3, 1975, and collectible with and as a part of other general property
taxes in said City for the year 1989, be and hereby are cancelled; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota,
be authorized and directed to cancel the above described ad valorem tax levies
and to delete said levies from taxes to be spread for the year 1989.
ADOPTED this 3rd day of October, 1988.
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 October 3, 1988, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 4th day of October, 1988.
City Clerk
RESOLUTION CANCELLING AD VALOREM TAXES
COLLECTIBLE WITH 198'9;GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED
FOR $5,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1984
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Edina has, by resolution adopted
September 10, 1984, levied a special ad valorem tax for the payment of
principal and interest of its General Obligation'Improvement Bonds, Series
1984; said ad valorem tax in the amount of, .$T,127,,000 being collectible with
and as a part of other general taxes for the year 198+,9; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, permits the cancellation of said
levies providing moneys are on hand for payment of principal and interest for
said bond issue; and it has been determined by this Council that the required
moneys are on hand'for the payment of said principal and interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that
those ad valorem tax levies made by resolution of this Council adopted
September 10, 1984, and collectible with and as a part of other general
property taxes in said City for the year 1989', be and hereby are cancelled;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota,
be authorized and directed to cancel the above described ad valorem tax levies
and to delete said levies from taxes to be spread for the year 1989,`-
ADOPTED this 3rd day of October, 1988.
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 ceftify that the attached and foregoing Resolution was duly adopted
by the Edina City Council at its Regular Meeting of October 3, 1988, and as
recorded in the Minutes of said Regular Meeting.
WITNESS my hand and seal of said City this 4th day of October, 1988.
Citv Clerk
RESOLUTION ADOPTING BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF EDINA
FOR THE YEAR 1989, AND ESTABLISHING TAX LEVY FOR
THE YEAR 1989 PAYABLE IN 1989
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, DOES RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Budget for the City of Edina for the calendar years 1989
is hereby adopted as hereinafter set forth; and funds are hereby
appropriated therefore.
GENERAL FUND
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Mayor and Council
$ 58,920
Administration
502,521
Planning
186,770
Finance
296,858
Election
23,802
Assessing
313,073
Legal and Court Services
309,000
TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT
$ 1,690,944
PUBLIC WORKS
Administration
$ 103,912
Engineering
414,456
Highways
2,480,821
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS
$ 2,999,189
PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY
Police $ 3,122,170
Civilian Defense 24,993
Animal Control 53,415
Fire 1,896,117
Public Health 273,308
Inspection 235,819
TOTAL PROTECTION OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY $ 5,605,822
PARK DEPARTMENT
Administration $ 526,448
Recreation 107,050
Maintenance 952,855
TOTAL PARK DEPARTMENT $ 1,586,353
City of 1989 Edina Budget
Page 2
NON- DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURES
Contingencies $ 120,000
Special Assessments on City Property 80,000
Capital Plan Appropriation 140,000
Commissions and Special Projects 166,300
TOTAL NON- DEPARTMENTAL EXPENDITURES $ 506,300
TOTAL GENERAL FUND $12,388,608
Section 2. Estimated receipts other than General tax Levy are hereby
established as hereinafter set forth:
GENERAL FUND
Licenses and Permits $ 637,000
Municipal Court Fines' 510,000
Department Service Charges 767,000
Other 166,120
Transfer from Liquor Fund 350,000
State Apportionments - Sales Tax 561,431
Income on Investments 70,000
Aids - Other Agencies 185,666
Police Aid $ 145,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED RECEIPT $ 3,392,217
Section 3. That there be and hereby is levied upon all taxable real and
personal property in the City of Edina a tax rate sufficient to produce
the amounts hereinafter set forth:
FOR GENERAL FUND
Adopted this 3rd day of October, 1988.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
$ 8,996,391
Mayor
A.
O e
rn
r O
�y
•'��bRPOMtt'9 •
lean
REPORT /RECOMMENDATION
To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
From: KENNETH ROSLAND
CITY MANAGER
Date: OCTOBER 3, 1988
Subject:
TWO -DAY EFFECTIVE
PRESENTATIONS SEMINAR
Recommendation:
Info /Background:
Agenda Item #
Consent
❑
Information Only
❑
Mgr. Recommends
❑
To HRA
❑
To Council
Action
❑
Motion
❑
Resolution
❑
Ordinance
❑
Discussion
A Two -Day Effective Presentations Seminar will be held Tuesday, October 18
from 8:30 A.M. - Noon, Thursday, October 20 from 8:30 A.M. - Noon, Tuesday
October 25 from 1:00 P.M. - 4:30 P.M., Thursday October 27 from 8:30 A.M. -
Noon. Staff attending will be Ralph Campbell, Phil Dommer,.Fran Hoffman,
Ralph Johnson, John,Keprios, Bob Kojetin, Craig Larsen, Ted Paulfranz, John
Schirmang,'Ceil Smith, Craig Swanson, Craig Velde and John Wallin.
The Seminar will be given by Dean and Stan Berry of Dean V. Berry Associates,
Inc. with the main goal being to learn techniques to improve natural speaking
styles. 'Attendees will practice speaking skills, point making skills.and
building cases skills.
09/26/88 45.00 CAROL VOGT
- - - - -- 450.0 � _ -- ----- - - - - -- -
09/26/88 45.00 CAROL CUTSHALL
AC AO •
09/26/88 45.00 KATHY SHIDEMAN
- -- 45__0-0 + - - - - - --
09/26/88 16.97 TOM STACY
IA 07 i
09/26/88 45.00 STARRI HEDGES
- 45 -• -0 -0 + - - - - -- _ -- -
09/26/88 45.00 MOLLIE PAULSON
45.00 +
09/26/88
45.00 KATHY GUSTAFSON
SKATING REFUND
SKATING REFUND
'PROF SERVICFS
MISC
PROF SERVICES
PROF SERVICES
PROF SERVICES
28- 4201 - 701 -70
28- 4201 - 701 -70
26- 4201 - 701 -70
40- 3800 - 000 -00
10- 4201 - 627 -62
10- 4201 - 627 -62
10- 4201 - 627 -62
0
11
13
277713
-
277714
277715
48
277716
277717
5J
SA
277718
277719
1988 CITY
OF EDINA
,CHECK REGISTER
10 -03 -88 PAGE 1
CHECK._NO..—DA.TE_
AMOUNT
ItE.ND_QR_
ITEM DESCRIPTION
ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 _P_0_II MESSAGE
277702
09/27/88
75.00
UNDERGROUND PIERCING
MISC
10 -1139- 000 -00
3119
6990
-
- - - - --
78_...0.0 - � - -
-- - - -- -- - -- --
+ ++ -CKS
ii +• +i
277704
09/22/88
96.00
CAREERTRACK INC.
SEMINAR
30- 4202 - 781 -78
96.00 +
- - --
+ii -CKS
277706
09/22/88
179.55
RICHARD_J HERKAL
PROF SERVICES
10- 4120 180 -18
_
277706
09/22/88
4.73
RICHARD J HERKAL
MILEAGE
10-4208- 180 -18
I.
i
277707
09/22/88
497.80
HOWARD NORBACK
ELECTION SERVICES
10- 4120 - 180 -I8
277707
09/22/88
85.15
HOWARD NORBACK
ELECTION TRAINING
10- 4120 - 184 -16
277707
0- 9/32L88
3_L..28
H01�ARD NORBACK
MILEAGE
10-4208- 180 -18
614.23 +
277708 - - -
- -- .09/22/88_
— 778...24..—
OUALITY_.WOOD TREAT - - -- _LUMBER-
10= 460.4- 646 -64
29767-6545
6545
277708
09/22/88
1,456.64
QUALITY WOOD TREAT
LUMBER
10- 4604 - 646 -64
29689
2,234.88 +
277709
09/22/88
INTERSTATE DIESEL
TOOLS
189645
6824
10 -4580- 301 -30
165.00
277709
09/22/88
700.00
INTERSTATE DIESEL
EQUIP REPLACEMENT
10 -4901- 650 -64
189645
6824
--
-
865...0.0 ±
-- --
I:
277710
09/26/88
211.84
E -Z SHARP
GENERAL SUPPLIES
28- 4504 - 702 -70
8495
6972
- -
—
211_84 +
- --
277711
09/26/88
45.00
JAY COULD
SKATING REFUND
28 -4201- 701 -70
-
450-0– +
– -- --
-- —
-- —
277712
09/26/88
19.00
CAROL SLETTOM
REG FEES
10- 3500 - 000 -00
I
IQ an i
09/26/88 45.00 CAROL VOGT
- - - - -- 450.0 � _ -- ----- - - - - -- -
09/26/88 45.00 CAROL CUTSHALL
AC AO •
09/26/88 45.00 KATHY SHIDEMAN
- -- 45__0-0 + - - - - - --
09/26/88 16.97 TOM STACY
IA 07 i
09/26/88 45.00 STARRI HEDGES
- 45 -• -0 -0 + - - - - -- _ -- -
09/26/88 45.00 MOLLIE PAULSON
45.00 +
09/26/88
45.00 KATHY GUSTAFSON
SKATING REFUND
SKATING REFUND
'PROF SERVICFS
MISC
PROF SERVICES
PROF SERVICES
PROF SERVICES
28- 4201 - 701 -70
28- 4201 - 701 -70
26- 4201 - 701 -70
40- 3800 - 000 -00
10- 4201 - 627 -62
10- 4201 - 627 -62
10- 4201 - 627 -62
0
11
13
277713
-
277714
277715
48
277716
277717
5J
SA
277718
277719
09/26/88 45.00 CAROL VOGT
- - - - -- 450.0 � _ -- ----- - - - - -- -
09/26/88 45.00 CAROL CUTSHALL
AC AO •
09/26/88 45.00 KATHY SHIDEMAN
- -- 45__0-0 + - - - - - --
09/26/88 16.97 TOM STACY
IA 07 i
09/26/88 45.00 STARRI HEDGES
- 45 -• -0 -0 + - - - - -- _ -- -
09/26/88 45.00 MOLLIE PAULSON
45.00 +
09/26/88
45.00 KATHY GUSTAFSON
SKATING REFUND
SKATING REFUND
'PROF SERVICFS
MISC
PROF SERVICES
PROF SERVICES
PROF SERVICES
28- 4201 - 701 -70
28- 4201 - 701 -70
26- 4201 - 701 -70
40- 3800 - 000 -00
10- 4201 - 627 -62
10- 4201 - 627 -62
10- 4201 - 627 -62
0
11
13
1r
r.
rr '
I�
r
z�
I .,I
277723 09/26/88
277724 09/26/88 -
277724 09/26/88
277724 09J..2.6L88
75.00 s
861.02 JOHN SCHIRMANG CONF d SCHOOL
861.02 •
1,448.73 FLORENCE NORBACK PROF SERVICES
290.51 FLORENCE NORBACK PROF SERVICES
- -4.05 FLORENCE-NORBACK— MILEAGE
1,743.29 »
277726 09/26/88 135.00 MRPA CONF & SCHOOL
- - - -- t35._4-9 -- — —
10-4202- 490 -49
10- 4201 - 180- 18_- _____ -- -
10- 4201- 184 -18
1n- APnA- 1An -1R
30- 4202 - 781 -78
•
+
er-
`,
sss » »s
»» »-CKS
1988 L OF EDINA
CHECK
STER
10 -03 -8k GE 2
r
�36
277728
09/26/88
�
•
-. CHECK. -NO-- -DATE
AMOUNT
VFNO-OR
LTEM -DE.SC.RIPTLON
ACCOUNT NO. INV.
• P.O. i MESSAGE
277728
09/26/88
96.00
SUCCESS BLDERS
SEMINAR REG
45.00 •
98
30
277720 09/26/88
45.00
JO RUTH
PROF SERVICES
10-4201 - 627 -62
iel
�►
45.00 s
,
r,'''
277729
09/22/88
8.40
WIN STEPHENS
e
10-4540- 560 -56
I"
277721 09/26/88
45.00
BARBARA NELSON
PROF SERVICES
10- 4201- 627 -62
10
»
45.00 +
+d
1
1
277730
277722 09/26/88
75.00
NAOMI JOHNSON
PETTY CASH
23- 1030 - 000 -00
�!'
6696
1r
r.
rr '
I�
r
z�
I .,I
277723 09/26/88
277724 09/26/88 -
277724 09/26/88
277724 09J..2.6L88
75.00 s
861.02 JOHN SCHIRMANG CONF d SCHOOL
861.02 •
1,448.73 FLORENCE NORBACK PROF SERVICES
290.51 FLORENCE NORBACK PROF SERVICES
- -4.05 FLORENCE-NORBACK— MILEAGE
1,743.29 »
277726 09/26/88 135.00 MRPA CONF & SCHOOL
- - - -- t35._4-9 -- — —
10-4202- 490 -49
10- 4201 - 180- 18_- _____ -- -
10- 4201- 184 -18
1n- APnA- 1An -1R
30- 4202 - 781 -78
•
+
er-
`,
sss » »s
»» »-CKS
�36
277728
09/26/88
96.00
SUCCESS ELDERS
SEMINAR REG
10 -4202- 420 -42
77
277728
09/26/88
96.00
SUCCESS BLDERS
SEMINAR REG
10 -4202- 440 -44
98
30
1 92.0 0 •
+oJ
,1
r,'''
277729
09/22/88
8.40
WIN STEPHENS
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540- 560 -56
148965
6563
43
___8_40
»
+d
• "I
277730
09/22/88
305.00
PREST EQUIPMENT
GENERAL SUPPLIES
40 -4504- 801 -80
2268
6696
a1
- --
- -- - - --
*
48I,i
» » » -CKS
°O
40
277732
/2
096/88
12.00
JACQUELYN KNUTSON
REFUND PARK PERMIT
10 -1145- 000 -00
53
�
0,1
12.00 »
Sd
6D/
-
277733
09/26/68
130.00
J&W INSTRUMENT INC
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 801 -80
39499
6148
6'
I76
• '
130.00 s
eo
I
277734
09/26/88
427.60
UNISTRUT NORTHERN
GUARD RAIL MATERIAL
10- 4546- 343 -30
022483
6690
161
P
427.60 •
°'
6J
277735
09/26/88
4,960.00
TONKA EQUIPMENT
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
40- 4248 - 801 -80
5792
6457
ad
63
277735
09/27/88
2,992.00
TONKA EQUIPMENT
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
40 -4248- 801 -80
5794
7017
ea
277735
- -- 09/26/88
— 2.,759.00
— _TONKA EQUIPMENT ____ _
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 805 -80
5790 _
6357
160
277735
09/26/88
1,876.48
TONKA EQUIPMENT
REPAIR PARTS
40 -4540- 805 -80
5789
6358
leg
277735
09/26/88
880.00
TONKA EQUIPMENT
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 805 -80
5786
6359
°,
277735
09J_25/_8.S
400.00
TONKA EQUIPMENT
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 805 -80
5787
6360
72�
277735
09/26/88
852.00
TONKA EQUIPMENT
REPAIR PART8
40-4540- 805 -80
5786
6361
�;'„
�
6
14,799.48 •
74 76
0
IL
1988 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 3
CHECK NO. DATE ---- _._- __AMOUNT____________._ -_.- __VENDOR- _ _ -_ _ - ITEM_DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT_NO._ INV.- _Y_P.O. -A MESSAGE-_
l
277736 09/26/88 75.00 MARCELS KINGMAN PROF SERVICE. 'I
30 -4201 -781 -78
75.00 * '
e i
277737 09/26/88 75.00 - __. LYNNY PETERSON PROF SERVICES_ -_- 30- 4201 - 781 -78___
277737 09/26/88 125.00 LYNNY PETERSON PROF SERVICES 30- 4201 - 781 -78 °
200.00 •
277738 09/26/88 100.00 DAVID KWIAT PROF SERVICES 30- 4201 - 781 -78 "I
100.00 * :1
277739 09/226/88 100.00 CAROL MCCORMICK PROF SERVICES 30- 4201 - 781 -78
100.00 *
277740 09/26/88 75.00 NANCY ROZYCKI PROF SERVICES 30- 4201- 781 -78 2'
75.00 * 2,..
277741 09/26/88 100.00 JIM LARRANAGA PROF SERVICES 30- 4201 - 781 -78 2ti
1 00 .00 « 2r
27 ..
za
277742 09/26/88 75.00 TAMARA ROGERS PROF SERVICES 30- 4201 - 781 -78 2�
75.00 * ;;V
- - - *** -CKS
6r I•'�
277744 09/26/88 25.00 _JUDY LIEBER PROF SERVICES _30 -4224- 781 -78 3' l
25.00
Jr 1
277745 09/26/88 __- . 40
50.00 __- KENNETH GRINDELAND _ - -__ PROF _SERVICES__ 30_4224- 781 -78 ao
50.00 141
a�
14,
277746 09/26/88 _ -. 50.00 FRANK EVANS PROF SERVICES ___-- 30-4224 - 781 -78 _ aal
50.00 * aS
277747 09/26/88 25.00 _ BILL - DIETRICKSON _ _ PROF-SERVICES _ 30- 4224_781 -78 I<nh
25.00 e -- - - - - -- - -- - - -- -- ,a
^.i
277748 09/26/88 X12
_- ___.____25.00. ._ __. ___NICHOLAS_LEGEROS PROF SERVICES 30- 4224.- 781 -78 .�
25.00
en
277749 09/26/88 - _ ___- .50.00 _ PHYLLIS _HAYUA. -_-_ _ - -_- PROF SERVICES_ -_ 30 -4224- 781 -78 sr
50.00 • - - -- -- -- -- - - - - - - - --c
277750 09/26/88 _._.__. _25.00 -._ -._ BOB CONNOLLY PROF SERVICES 30-4224- 781 -78 61k
25.00
.ez .
277751 09/26/88 -__ - _ _. 25.00AGNES FINE PROF- SERVICES 30 -4224- 781 - -78 - - _ as
- - - - - - - -- -- -- -
25.00 s G
277752 09/26/88 25.00 KATHY GUSTAFSON PROF SERVICES -__ _- ___,__- 30- 4224- 781 -78
25.00 *
7
277753 09/26/88____ 150.00 JANET _- CHANDLER . _- CONF b_ SCHOOL 10- 4201 - 507 -50
150.00 s - -- - -- - - - -..
277754 09/26/88 4,384.00 MIDWEST AQUA CARE SERVICES .10- 4201- 358 -30 5688 ,
1988 C_
OF EDINA
CHECK 3TER
10 -03 -86
GE 4
�1
•
CHECY.
N0. DATE
AMOUNT
_
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION. ----------ACCOUNT
N0. _ INV.
-Y P.O. w MESSAGE
J"
277754
09/26/88
195.00
4,579.00
*
MIDWEST AQUA CARE
SERVICES
10 -4201- 358 -30
5688
Zl
r
277755
09/26/88
32.88
AUTO WHOLESALERS
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540-560 -56
85687
6613
; r
- -
- -- -- - -- -- -32.88
-*
- -
n
t
* *s-CKS
r
277757
09/26/88
127.00
ELECTROL EQUIPMENT
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
23650
6803
1s
'
'r
127.00
*
�1v
277758
09/27/88
29.84
SETH JOHNSON
WATER REFUND
40- 3800 - 000 -00
71
Y
29.84
*
277759
09/27/88
525.00
THOMAS HORWATH
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 644 -64
Z'
Ur
277759
09/27/88
405.00
THOMAS HORWATH
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10 -4248- 644 -64
277759
09/27/88. _.
_ ___ _ 525.00_
_ THOMAS HORWATH
CONTRACTED_REPAIRS -__
10 -4248- 644 -64
-
- -- - -
- -- :a
1,455.00
*
277760
09/27/88
_ 195.00
_
-- _ RAGNHILD PETERSON
AMBULANCE- - -___. ____.___-
_.__..10 -3 -180- 000 -00
195.00
*
zc
I�
b
310
277761
09/26/88
- _. - - -_ 68.05
_
_ _ ACT ELECTRONICS INC. -
LUMBER
-__10- 4604 - -260_- 26_7240
6782
- --- --- __1321
68.05
*
3
1f
�3
,. •
277762
09/27/88
97.39
NOR -LAKE
CONTRACTED REPAIRS -------
28- 4248- 703 -70
97.39
*
J7I
nl
277763
09/27/88_
45_.00
BETH_ YELENSKY_________SKATING_REFUND
28- 4201 - 701 -70
-
_ -_
45.00
•
"
277764
09/27/88
- 45.00
SHERYL ARNOLD
SKATING REFUND _____._______28-4201-701-7O
45.00
277765
09/27/88
176.61
NANCY KNUDSON
ADMIN SERVICES
28 -4201- 701 -70
-
- .49.00
>?
- -- - - - --
176.61
-- - - - - --
-
- --
-
- - - -- --
;
a
* * * **
- - -- -
--
- - --
- _
* ** -CKS
a
277767
09/26/88
170.00
QUAD STATE SERVICE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 560 -56
13769
6927
_4
-- - - 170.00
*
277768
09/26/88
54.63
GARDNER HARDWARE
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 803 -80
16731
6507
- - 54. 63
-*
- - -
- --
GI
277769
09/26/88
42.40
EDINA TOWING
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504- 314 -30
1753
6888
- - -- -
-- - 42. 40
-0
- - - - --
- -
277770
09/26/88
242.24
JAY B. KEISER
PARTS
10 -4620- 560 -56
6800
242.24
`I
277771
09/27/88
251.92
SPECIAL RISK INC.
INSURANCE
10 -4260- 510 -51
654589
1
_ --
251._ _9.2_
•
1]
"I
277772
09/27/88
.84.94
VIDEO MIDWEST
CABLE TV
10- 2149 - 000 -00
35314
6848
R
I
I
1:
1988 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 5
T
J
CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. R P.O. # MESSAGE _
84.94 * z1-
7
277773 09/27/88 52.29 WM WALSH MILEAGE 10 -4202- 460 -46 '
52.29 s a
277774 09/27/88 206.41 JAMES M. FISCHER UNIFORM ALLOWANCE 10 -4266- 420 -42 I'
206.41 *
277775 09/27/88 59.00 HEALY -RUFF CO. SERVICES 10 -4201- 460 -46 40603 '4I
59.00 s 141.
277776 09/27/88 147.43 DAVID BLOOD CONFERENCE 10- 4202 - 420 -42 7I
147.43 * B
277777 09/27/88 186.00- DICTAPHONE CORP CREDIT 10- 4288- 420 -42 505865 2
277777 09/27/88 1,013.00 DICTAPHONE CORP SERVICE CONTRACTS 10 -4288- 420 -42 197209 2JI
- - _.827.00
277778 09/27/88 52.35 MPH INDUSTRIES EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 420 -42 40375 271
7
277778 09/27/88 117.50 MPH INDUSTRIES EQUIP MAINT _ 10- 4274 - 42220 -42 40371 zn
2277778 09/27/88 117.50 MPH INDUSTRIES EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 420 -42 40369 z
277778 09/27/88 153.15 MPH INDUSTRIES EQUIP MAINT 10 -4274- 420 -42 40370 3
- - 440.50 * 3.I
277779 09/27/88 787.50 THOMAS P. GALLAGHN SERVICES 10- 4201 - 140 -14 }q
787.50 •
277780 09/227/88 9,494.96 SOTH & FRANCE REFUSE COLLECTION 10 -4201- 395 -30
-- 9,494.96_ s- - ;
277781 09/27/88 15.08 JERRY KARSCHNIK MILEAGE 10- 4208 - 480 -48 'Z
15. 08 • _ __ _ _ _ ______
277782 09/27/88 142.71 MEL SATTER REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 L71176 7076
47
142.71 s 4n
277783 09/27/88 346.75 WARNING LITES OF IL GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 343 -30 408605 6829
346.75*
.,
277784 09/27/88 296.79 MID AM BUS SYS GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 560 -56 41685 6084 34
- - - 296.79
277785 09/27/88 321.12 TEXGAS GENERAL SUPPLIES 10-4504- 301 -30 7078
_ 321.12_•
277786 09/27/88 10.00 CHARLES R. PETERSON CONFERENCE 50- 4202 - 820 -82 ez
277786 09/27/88 15.00 CHARLES R. PETERSON CONFERENCE 50- 4202 - 840 -84 ra
25.00 s -- - -- - - - - -- -- -- - - - - -- ��
277787 09/27/88 44.75 BERG BAG CO. GENERAL SUPPLIES_ - - -.- _____.10-4504- 420 -42 T5315 6881
44.75 *
y
171
277788 09/27/88 32.84 INDUSTRIAL BRUSH GENERAL SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 440 -44 4216
32.84 s - -- -
)'1
277789 09/27/88 107.40 HERMAN MARKETING FIRE PREVENTION 10 -4650- 440 -44 469304
1988 C
OF EDINA
CHECK
STER
10 -03 -8E iGE 6
4'
•
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION_ -_ -__
- ACCOUNT NO._ INV.
• P.O. N MESSAGE
107.40
*
277790
09/27/88
488.97
DUSEK ENTERPRISES
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 100 -10 1236 7115
s
�+
488.97
s
, •
277791
09/27/88
61.42
MERWYN WALKER
MILEAGE
27- 4208 - 661 -66
61.42
*
277792
09/27/88
95.00
JOHN WALLIN
CONF & SCHOOL
10- 4202 - 160 -16
i�
95.00
s
277793
09/27/88
150.00
SUZIE KELM
ART ADVERTISING
23- 4214 - 611 -61
1r
150.00
»
277794
09/27/88
35.70
HELEN ZABEL
ART WORK SOLD
23- 3625- 000 -00
fw
2277794
09/227/88
180.00
HELEN ZABEL
ART INSTRUCTOR
23- 4201 - 611 -61
215.70
_s
I
10
277795
277795
09/27/88
09/27/88
490.00
_- -23.00
..
SUSAN FRAME
. - SUSAN FRAME
ART WORK SOLD
COST OF COMMODITIES
23- 3625 - 000 -00
-
Z�
: ^I
513.00
277796
09/27/88
_ _ __ 51 .00
-.
RAY GORMLEY
MAINTENANCE
- 23- 4120 - 612 -61
277796
09/27/88
31.20
RAY GORMLEY
MILEAGE
23- 4208 - 611 -61
'
•
2277796
09/27/88
113.93
RAY GORMLEY
CRAFT SUPPLIES
23- 4588 - 611 -61
2.11
196.13
s
00
277797
09/27/88
75.00
KEN TAPLIN
ART REFUND
23- 3265- 000 -00
J]
'
- - 75.00
- *-
- - - --
•
277798
09/27/88
75.00
SHIRLEY BARRETT
ART REFUND
i91-so-
a
75.00
277799
09/27/88 --
-_ 1. 12.00___
-__ __- TOBIE_DICKER.,.. -
_ART REFUND
--
112.00
*
- -- -- -- -- - -- - --
•
7
277800
09/27!88
245.00
DICK GREEN
ART REFUND _ _ - .-
- 23 -3625- 000 700
_
57,
245.00
•
3'
277801
09/27/88
_ -__ 499.22
EDINA- FOUNDATION
ART REFUND-
.23-3625-000-00.
-
499.22
s
sx�sn
*** -CKS
•
277803
09/27/88
37.80
ROXANNE SORENSON
ART WORK SOLD
23- 3625- 000 -00
'Al
- -
- -- 37.80!
-- --
277804
09/27/88
56.00
MONICA RUDOUIST
ART WORK SOLD
23 -3625- 000 -00
;74
56.00
«
•
277805
09/27/88
54.60
JEAN HAEFLE
ART WORK SOLD
23 -3625- 000 -00
-
- -
- -- -- --54.6 0
- '� -
- - - -- - --
•
277806
09/27/88
44.87
NANCY HAMMER
ART WORK SOLD
23- 3625- 000 -00
�' °�
1988 CITY
OF EDINA
' CHECK NO.
DATE
277807
09/27/88
277808
09/27/88
277809
08/30/88
277A01
09/22/88
277AOI
09/27/88
0 * * ***
277A10
277A10
277A10
277A10
277A10
277A10
277A10
277A21
a » » » »»
277A29
»a » »6a
277A39
277A39
277A39
ss » » »s
277A45
assns»
277A53
** *:6**
277A62
CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 7
AMOUNT- _ _ _ __VENDOR - _ ITEM DESCRIPTION_ _ACCOUNT -NO_._ INV. _ 11_PA. # MESSAGE
44.87 + ,
122.50 BETTY BELL ART WORK SOLD 23- 3625 - 000 -00 '
122.50 +
43.68 REGNHILD BERGSTOL ART WORK SOLD 23 -3625- 000 -00 I'I
43.68 + „
116.50 SCHWAB, VOLLHABER, LUBRATT GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 630 -62 2617 *** -CKS
116.50 * 14
364.31 3M CO GENERAL SUPPLIES -_ 10 -4SO4- 325 -30 02062 6616
252.58 3M CO GUARD RAIL MAT 10- 4546- 343 -30 05262 6929 171
10
616.89 +
s+ +-CKS 21
09/27/88
155.93 _
ACCOUNTEMPS
SERVICES
7122
09/227/88
154.00
ACCOUNTEMPS
SERVICES
50- 4201 - 820 -82
iI
09/27/88
123.20
ACCOUNTEMPS
SERVICES
50 -4201- 820 -82
7123
27
09/27/88
154.00
ACCOUNTEMPS
SERVICES
50 -4201- 840 -84
09/27/88
123.20
ACCOUNTEMPS
SERVICES
50- 4201 - 840 -84
7123
-
09/27/88
154.00
ACCOUNTEMPS
SERVICES
50- 4201 - 860 -86
:;I
09/27/88
123.20
ACCOUNTEMPS
SERVICES..
50 -4201- 860 -86
7123
987.53
ss» -CKS
09/27/88
175.83
ADT SECURITY SYS.
SERVICE CONTRACTS
30- 4288 - 781 -78
821908
'n!
,,
175.83 +
41
aas -CKS
;a
09/27/88
67.30
ALBINSON
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 646 -64
492214
6882
67.30 +
47
I47
ssa -CKS
an
09/26/88
75.60
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
GENERAL SUPPLIES -
10 -4504- 325 -30
1594
6896
e,
.,
09/26/88
72.96
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504- 440 -44
5745
6817
:I
09/26/88
78.59
ALTERNATOR REBUILD
REPAIR PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
12078
6868
.,
227.15 +
sss -CKS
;s
09/27/88
38.76
AMER. PHOTO COPY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 510 -51
F16952
07
38.76 +
09/27/88
128.44
AMERICAN SHARECOM
TELEPHONE
10 -4256- 510 -51
128.44 +
'�
aas -CK5
09/27/88
370.00
ANDERSON -TODD
SERVICES
10- 4201 - 630 -62
,
`I
,2
I
�I
I -.
I,
• iG
277818
_ _09/26/88 _-
-- 83.. 00_
BATTERY_
WAREHOUSE _
2T7B18
09/27/88
132.38
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
277818
09/26/88
23.18
BATTERY
1988 L
OF EDINA
-- .09/26/88
53.43
CHECK
STER
277818
10 -03 -8i
GE 8
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
`I
09/26/88
38.29
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
277BIS _
__ 09/26/88_
149.72
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE —
277B18
09/26/88
131.43
11
CHECK._NO._
-DATE-
AMO-UNT—
77.56
VENDOR
- I1EM_DESC.Ri.M QN
ACCOUNT NO. INV. A P.O. 9
MESSAGE
710.06 *
405736
370.00
•
3
* ** —CKS
•4
'
e
7
277A72-
- 9L26L88
197 45
A. SHLAND--HEMICAL_-
PAINT
10- 4544- 335 -30
733747
6674
e
I'I
147.45
t
ry1
10
13
r
277A76
09/22/88
295.90
ASPLUND COFFEE
CONCESSIONS
28 -4624- 703 -70
20957
6853
e�
-
2.95_-90-«_
- -- --------
- -- - --
-
- - -
-- - - - --
he
�r"
rr » »ra
** *—CKS
;ot
277A80
09/26/88
61.50
ASTLEFORD INTL
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
48653
21
W
-- - -- ---
61 .50
r
-- -
2z
:3j1%
12:
ras » »r
---.'
- --- - --
—
--
*** -CKS
2'
f
27
V
277A96
09/22/88
- __28.95-
_- AUTOMOBILE
CONTRACTED__REPAIRS._
10- 4248 - 560- 5698688
6605
20�
�'I
277A96
09/27/88
36.95
.SERV _CTR
AUTOMOBILE SERV CTR
____ _
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 560 -56
099306
6965
2�
65.90
i
r »» » »»
- - - - - --
-- - - - - -- - —
- - - - --
* * r -CKS
3
33
I3`
277807
09/27/88 _ ___
__- 189.40 ___
-_ BADGER- METER INC
CREDIT- _ _
- 40_1220- 000- 00.008036
277B07
09/27/88
4,185.60
BADGER METER INC
WATER METERS
40- 1220 - 000 -00
551916
2715
37I
40
3,996.20
*
30�
40I
r » » » »»
» ** —CKS
1411
`I
,2
I
�I
I -.
I,
• iG
277818
_ _09/26/88 _-
-- 83.. 00_
BATTERY_
WAREHOUSE _
2T7B18
09/27/88
132.38
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
277818
09/26/88
23.18
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
277618_. -
-- .09/26/88
53.43
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE_
277818
09/26/88
29.07
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
277818
09/26/88
38.29
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
277BIS _
__ 09/26/88_
149.72
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE —
277B18
09/26/88
131.43
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
277818
09/26/88
77.56
BATTERY
WAREHOUSE
--
SUPPLIES
710.06 *
405736
-GENERAL
SUPPLIES_
1 0 -4504- 301 -30
93122
6730
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 560 -56
95472
6879
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
93337
6740
_REPAIR_PART_S
49.L27/86
10- 4540 - 560 -56
93054_6698
09/27/88
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
92103
6949
REPAIR
PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
91168
6950
—REPAIR—PARTS
OFFICE
10 -4540- 560 -56
931536733
404024
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
91061
6598
PARTS
404492
10- 4620 - 560 -56
93168
6697
irr »rr
277829 09/22/88 167.40 BERNARD J MULCAHY CO CONTRACTED REPAIRS 28- 4248 - 702 -70 90287 6916
167.40 r
277830
09/27/88
25.62
277830
09/27/88
70.00
277830 - -
- 09/27/88
- _47.56_ -_
277830
09/27/88
23.28
277830
09/27/88
118.57
- 277B30
49.L27/86
4�4
277B30
09/27/88
186.70
BERTELSON
BROS.
476.17
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10 -4504- 627 -62
405737
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10- 4504 - 627 -62
405631
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.._ -.-
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 627 -62
405736
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10-4504- 627 -62
406008
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
OFFICE
SUPPLIES
10- 4516- 440 -44
404024
_BERTELSON_BROS_._INC.
OFFICE_SUPP_LIES
10- 4516 - 440 -44
404492
BERTELSON
BROS.
INC.
OFFICE
SUPPLIES
10- 4516 - 510 -51
405736
** *-CKS
-
1988 CITY OF EDINA
CHECK NO. DATE
*8: V:4**
277B32
x -* * *x
277842
277842
x *4: t. 44
277848
R• #8:4F
277860
277860
sr.asvt
277872
#:k**sfi
277879
277879
27778 0
277880
2:?:? 8 a 0
e4;98 9
i4:7;m0-
2 7990
2:; B c-
mao
2 6 90
z7 e--
2:; ? 195
a 779 off_
a 7-:7 B a 4-
azzaa-G.-
ssssss
277891
277891
277891
09/22/88
09/22/80
09/22/88
09/27/88
09/26/88
09/26/88
AMOUNT -_
188.05
188.05 s
5.95
105.04
35.96
105.04 s
41.91
s
85.00
33.05
85.00
s
24.84
26.46
51.30 #
09/26/88
105.04
105.04 s
09/26/88
206.40
09/22/88
33.05
239.45 s
09/22/88
316.95 _
09/22/88
52.79
09/2222/88
168.11
09/222/88
316.95
09/222/88
56.35
09/22/88
52.82
09/222/88
_- 26.38
09/22/88
79.24
09/22/88
211.27
09/22/88
52.79
09/22/88
158.60
09/22/88
158.60
09/22/88
280.60
09/22/88
280.60
2,212.05 s
CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 9
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT N0. INV. 8 P.O. k MESSAGE
2
*ss -CKS
BEST LOCKING SYSTEMS CONSTRUCTION 29-1320- 000 -00 85092 6975 7
J- - 1
o
sss -CKS
BLACK PHOTOGRAPHY OFFICE SUPPLIES 30- 4516 - 781 -78 820804
BLACK PHOTOGRAPHY OFFICE SUPPLIES 30 -4516- 781-78 821188 ;
1,1 l
sss -CKS
BLMGT LOCK & SAFE CONTRACTED REPAIRS 50- 4248- 841 -84 39492 21
22 .
23
24
- ss *- CKS - -. :9
27
BORCHERT- INGERSOL REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 134922
BORCHERT-INGERSOL REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 134955 2'
is
31
3;.
--- - - --- - - * *s -CKS J3,
r
BRAEMAR CLUBHOUSE SERVICES _ .__ ._ 10 -4212- 510 -51
3:
30
37
sss -CKS
BROCK WHITE GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 314 -30 250205 6762 "'
BROCK WHITE REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 322 -30 501519 6544 4,
- AVAGE -
RUBBISH REMOVAL 10 -4250- 301 -30 Ia�l
BROWNING FE4R-&S- RUBBISH REMOVAL 10- 4250- 440 -44
BROWNING FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 10- 4250 - 520 -52 ry'
RROWN� � R =o RUBBISH REMOVAL 10- 4250- S40 -S4
RRQWN ;NS FFR- &S RUBBISH REMOVAL 10 -4250- 645 -64 s'
RUBBISH REMOVAL 10- 4250 - 645 -64
BROWNING FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 23- 4250 - 612 -61
BROWNING FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 26- 4250 - 682 -68
BR9WN;NG FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 27- 4250 - 662 -66
BROWN;NG FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 27 -4250- 664 -66 erl
BROWNING FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 28 -4250- 702 -70
BRQWN;NG FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 30- 4250 - 782 -78
RUBBISH REMOVAL 50 -4250- 841 -84 -I
BROWNING FERRIS RUBBISH REMOVAL 50 -4250- 861 -86
- sss -CKS
09/22/88 _ _. -_. 682.11 BURY It CARLSON INC. SERVICES ___- -. - - -- -.10-4201- 647 -64 30874
09/22/88 174.92 BURY d CARLSON INC. BLACKTOP 10 -4524- 301 -30 30874
09/22/88 67.44 BURY d CARLSON INC. BLACKTOP 40- 4524 - 803 -80 30874 ; -
�
�
»=
| voon (,' . or sozwo
c*ccx mo.oA7c_-_
IV
_--_Amoumz--__-___-_'-
yeo.*r *
****~*
n�
avruyu__�-oo/ea/a
' 1os.*o *
�
n*sox
errom ov/ea/oo 3*5.75 Cl o oIoTaIuurImo
.,
'
******
'
e77C31
---
oy/eo/oo
*m` /
277oee
oy/ua/oa
77 .76
~�
erroue
09/27/88
1e8.99
errcss
oy/er/ne
«m ' crrcsz
oy/ar/uo
. arross_--_-oy,erzuo
e77n7e oy/ea/on
| arrcss
on/er/oa
�
errcus
on/ea/uo
-
107.10
nm '
errces
on/ce/an
78.20
oIr,
CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO
ADVERTISING
'
******
'
e77C31
---
oy/eo/oo
*m` /
358-61241
***^**
--- ---
�
38187
arruss
- oo/er/oa
errcss
oy/er/ne
«m ' crrcsz
oy/ar/uo
. arross_--_-oy,erzuo
e77n7e oy/ea/on
| arrcss
on/er/oa
V ' a77c33
`
oy/er/on
'
e77n3*
Vy/ez/on
tm
******
10-4S40-560-S6
'' ---
e77o44 oy/ee/ou
x�l
.1
358-61241
CERT POWER TRAIN
--- ---
10-4540-S60-S6
38187
r
277uss '09/27/88_-
cr-*csa-aoc-»�
'
CITY
-/
49 .
e77n7e oy/ea/on
10
CRAFT ooppLIcm 23-*s88-611-61 07*1so
�
�
CERT POWER TRAIN
REPAIR PARTS
10-4S40-560-S6
37666
67S4
358-61241
CERT POWER TRAIN
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540-S60-S6
38187
7080
u«rsm
cr-*csa-aoc-»�
20.50
CITY
or
soIwA
u«rsn
c7-*esa-664-66
-----_-__e0..so-----__-oJIv-VF_s0
1 N*--_-_-____—
Js
r
I'lss.ss
oIr,
CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO
ADVERTISING
10-4210-140-14
89167
5286
CHAPIN PUBLISHING CO
ADVERTISING
10-4210-140-14
89168
S286
31
1'*30.00 cIry or oLounIwwrow Aovsnr/aImo 10-*e1e-sIo-sI 7*16
v.400.00 *
901.14 nnn« COLA onT7LzmG oomosoaIowo
yov.1« *
eo-*ae«-uos-ao
***-cwo /'|
. �
-__ao7-7o_-onm PONE wT-7sc*_ REPAIR PARTS sy6p3e______ .~|
75.89 ' oopY oopLzcATIwn pmo GsmsnaL auppLY 10-4504-540-54 91e839 6770
***-uwo i721
soIwA'_____-_'uArsn
358-61241
619.16
CITY
or
soIw«
u«rsm
cr-*csa-aoc-»�
20.50
CITY
or
soIwA
u«rsn
c7-*esa-664-66
-----_-__e0..so-----__-oJIv-VF_s0
1 N*--_-_-____—
Js
r
I'lss.ss
oIr,
OF
coIwA
WATER
so-*esa-rua-ro
47.60
nzTv
or
soIwA
uArsn
50-4258-8*1-84
334.97
czTr
OF
nInopzsLo
pousn
10-*ese-345-30
901.14 nnn« COLA onT7LzmG oomosoaIowo
yov.1« *
eo-*ae«-uos-ao
***-cwo /'|
. �
-__ao7-7o_-onm PONE wT-7sc*_ REPAIR PARTS sy6p3e______ .~|
75.89 ' oopY oopLzcATIwn pmo GsmsnaL auppLY 10-4504-540-54 91e839 6770
***-uwo i721
1988 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 11
CHECK N0. DATE __ AMOUNT VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. k MESSAGE___ _
277C72 09/27/88 82.18 COPY DUPLICATING PRO GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 540 -54 930572 6770 ;l
158.07_»
kR #R ## k #k —CKS
277C88 09/22/88 696.50 CURTIS 1000 GENERAL SUPPLIES 10-4SO4-510-51-995501 6968 s
696.50 » „I
Rk #A+i:x kk# —CKS
14
277097 09/27/88 _ 240.00 CYLINDER CITY REPAIR PARTS 21544 6731
277C97 09/27/88 770.00 CYLINDER CITY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 21589 6731
277097 09/27/88 420.00 CYLINDER CITY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 21543 6731 a
1,430.00 »
# »» —CKS•
277D07 09/27/88 35.21 D. C. HEY CO. SERVICE CONTRACTS 30- 4288 - 781 -78 077239
35.21 # z
» » » # »» » »s —CKS P
z
277D09 09/22/88 42.82 DAEHN— MARCELLA MILEAGE 10 -4208- 140 -14
277D09 09/222/88 74.46 DAEHN — MARCELLA ELECTION SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 180 -18
117.28 k
;i
k » » » »»
» »» —CKS
aa
277D21 09/27/88 160.00 DANNYS CONSTR. CO. CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 460 -46 5525 6860
160.00
- — — k »k -CKS 1�
277D31 09/26/88 112.80 DAVIES WATER EQUIP REPAIR PARTS 40- 4540- 803 -80 8775 6683 °„
112.80 « - �I
k »» -CKS
277033 09/27/88 178.50 DAVIS- EUGENE WEED INSPECTING 10- 4201 - 600 -60
277033 09/27/88 22.95 DAVIS- EUGENE' MILEAGE 10- 4208 - 600 -60 "I
- 201.45 k — - - -- - - - -- — - -- - -- ',I
57
• » » » »» » »k -CKS „I
_ P^
277065 09/22/88 2,194.02 DIXIE PETRO -CHEM INC WATER TREATMENT 40- 4622 - 805 -80 306011
277D65 09/26/88 2,682.81 DIXIE PETRO -CHEM INC WATER SUPPLIES 40- 4622- 805 -80 309795
4,876.83 0 -- --
P;
**o-CKS
277D71 09/26/88 236.50 DON STREICHER GUNS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 53366
277D71 09/26/88 140.00 DON STREICHER GUNS REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 53462 ,i
- - - 376.50.+
co
I 1988 L_ . OF EDINA
CHECK N0.__DATE -- AMOUNT _.VENDOR
v
277D87
'hw 277E
� sees
277E
yr 277E
277E
v
v 277E
277E
b
_27.7E
b 277E
277E
277E
277E
277E
277E
277E
i
b� ^I 277E
277E
b I.
'
r " 277E
CHECK STER
09/26/88 -- - - - - -- 29.00 - -- DUNE BUGGY SUPPLY
29.00 »
10 -03 -8, 4GE 12
I.T_EM_DESCRIP7LO.N A_CCO_UNT N0. INV- .- #._P__O._N-ME_S_SACE
2
,►
GENERAL_SUP_PLIES._ -_ 28-4.50.4- Z02 -70 28324. 7054- _ 'AI
a
PRIFIRMMIT" M-7
e
0
21
e
7�
7
ss» -CKS
08
09/27/88
50,357.00
EAGAN CONSTRUCTION
PAYMENT
28 -1300- 000 -00
- - -
- - - -- 5 0 ,-3 S T . 00 s -
-- -- - - - -
- -- - ----
- - - - -- --
- --
-
««
sss -CKS ;
14
09/22/88
670.00
EARL F. ANDERSON
GENERAL SUPPLY
10- 4504 - 314 -30
81909
6428
14
09/27/88
386.66
EARL F. ANDERSON
SIGNS d POST
10 -4542- 325 -30
82709
6558
14
- 09/27/88 - --
- - - -- - -- 418.50 _ _-
___- _EARL_F. ANDERSON -. ._ ____
__ - SIGNS- 6.._P_OST _ -.
1_ 0-4.592-325- 30_82740_
-6821_
1,475.36 »
12
2
s»
2
» »» -CKS 2
2.
20
09/27/88
85.00
ECOLAB PEST ELIM.
MISC LAUNDRY
30 -4262- 782 -78
05093
z
«»
2
»»» -CKS 3
60
09/26/88
148.00
ELECTRIC MOTOR REP.
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
28- 4248 - 702 -70
110432
6904
3
148.00 s
a
«»
--
- - --
-- - --
» »» -CKS 7
,
63
09/271x8
20.91
ELECTRONIC CENTER
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540- 540 -54
487690
6799
20.91 »
4
4
4
_s »» -CKS_ 4
71
09/27/88
78.07
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 301 -30
167
7030
4
71 _ --
09/27/88.
84.30
ELVIN - SAFETY SUPPLY-
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 45_0_4- 440 -44
4
71
09/22/88
141.86
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504- 482 -48
88237
6635
4
71
09/26/88
150.00
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLY
10 -4504- 646 -64
6828
09/26/88
150.. -00
ELVIN - SAFETY_ SUPPLY------SAFETY
EQUIPMENT
1_0- 4642 - 301 -30
6828
e
71
09/26/88
155.48
ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY
SAFETY EQUIPMENT
10- 4642 - 560 -56
6828
e
- -
- --
759.71 s
--
e'.
e
s»
s »» -CKS '
�m
75 - --
-- 09/27/88 -_
230-00_
EMPLOYEES- CLUB
_ -- SUPPLIES
10- 4504- 500 -SO
-
I °
- - - - -- ,6
230.00 s
e.
«»
a:
» »» -CKS a.
-
78
09/27/88
180.88
-
EMRICH BAKING CO.
CONCESSIONS
27- 4624- 663 -66
-
loi
a
78 _ - -
- -0- 9/26/_88
1.32_._14_
EMRICH- BAKING_CO,
_CONCESSIONS
27- 4624 - 663 -66
313.02
7,
«»
» »» -CKS �.
94
09/27/88
495.00
ESS BROTHERS
REPAIR PARTS
40 -4540- 812 -80
4803
7.
7!
7-
PRIFIRMMIT" M-7
e
0
21
e
7�
1968 CITY OF EDINA
CHECK NO. DATE
* * *k*k
277F02
277F02
277F11
277F23
* ***:k*
277F26
277F26
277F26
277F56
277F59
277G22
277G24
277G24
277G24
277G24
277G24
277G24
277G32
277G32
277G32
09/22/88
09/222/88
AMOUNT
495.00 i
15.00
55.33
70.33
CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 13
VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO. INV. # P.O. 8 MESSAGE
FACILITY SYSTEMS
FACILITY SYSTEMS
09/27/88 146.00 FEED RITE CONTROL
146.00 •
09/27/88 2,011.54 FISCO
09/26/88 2,163.95 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL
09/26/88 579.43 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL
09/26/88 506.85 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL
3,252.23
09/27/88 492.13 FRANK B. HALL 3 CO
492.13 *.
09/22/88
32.80
FRANK J. ZAMBONI
32.80
09/22/88
108.00
GENERAL BINDING
e
108.00
25- 4924 - 520 -52
09/22/88
19.00
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
09/27/88
94.89
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
09/27/88
63.43
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
09/27/88
88.12
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
09/22/88
_ 266.25_
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
09/26/88
26.90
_
GEN. COMMUNICATIONS
558.59 i
09/26/88
13.78
GENUINE PARTS CO.
09/26/88
8.47
GENUINE PARTS CO.
09/27/88
15.66
GENUINE PARTS CO.
**» -CKS
e
MISC _ _ -
25- 4924 - 520 -52
30683
,I
MISC
25- 4924 - 520 -52
30455
*** —CKS
,a1
GENERAL SUPPLY
28 -4504- 704 -70
110715
EQUIP REPLACEMENT
10- 4901 - 440 -44
- - - --
5696
Z;I
-
--- -._...
» »s -CKS
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 801 -80
2241
6631
;I
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 801 -80
2238
6427
�I
REPAIR_ PARTS
40-4540- 801 -80
2248
6632
;
— - -- --
* ** -CKS
INSURANCE
10 -4260- 510 -51
; ^I
i ** -CKS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30 -4504- 782 -78
7353
4-
_
** »-CKS
S
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10 -4504- 510 -51
506704
R,
a** -CKS__
s,
t)
EQUIP RENTAL
10 -4226- 301 -30
29087
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10- 4248- 440 -44
94856
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 440 -44
94955
�I
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 440 -44
95129
RADIO SERVICE
10- 4294 - 560 -56
29086
'14
OFFICE SUPPLIES _
27- 4516 - 661 -66
94855
7046+
- -
* ** -CKS
,j
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
053595
6887
,I
REPAIR PARTS
_
10 -4540- 560 -56
053736
6874
REPAIR PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
056315
7002
' -- - - '-- --
^~
1988 ^ or soIwA
� m*ccemo--o
..
^�
37.91 *
ooscx oTsn 10-03-ok iGE ,*
ACCOUNT NO. INV. 0 P.O. 0 MESSAGE
^ a7zm�e-_---_uo�ez�a _oo_ GIL—REBARD—GUNS— — —TARGET 29-4648-722-72 56389 6973
|` 164.00 * /
errn*o wn/ee/no --__--_- e*-1s mLAmosn-so - _mILsaw eOu�an |
e77noa we/ce,nn ao � sy
e7rnaw wy/er/on y� sn
! --'-------'� � -------
e7rwon ny/ao/an 1r*�3o
--_ _- -- -' --
.^.
--- ------ ---- ---- -- - ---
mnovoAn sLsoTnzo CO. GswsnxL ouppLv 10-*5**-630-6e wueona usoa ||�m
wmAroAn sLsnTnzo CO.---- nspAzn p«nTo__
wnAroxn sLsnTnzn CO. nspAzn p*nrw
--'--'- -----'- CO. ---''- -'---
=� zrzGon nn/�u^no u*.vu oxo,w*x �L�o/w/� �o w�ra/x raw/w
******
!' eTrGro 09/e7v88 713.15 Gnssm *cnsw opRwwLn. wsnvxnsw
~~,1
713.15 *
/ . err000 oy/er/am__-___-__--_ey.*o____--__Gnssn-pA7--'__----_'-__-*mT.WORK SOLD-- 3-36e5 �000-00
' �
eTrnno oy�eu�eo voo no wnssn-pwT ART cnnnzwazom 30-3501-000-0*
w* 129.*0 *
mr
10-4540-540-54 aovyve upso
*0-4540-801-80 6633e9 uoro
*o-*s*n-mnz-on 66**42 uops
10-4e01-643-6* 880677 6838
277o9e -oy/zr/aw_' 8I--RomH_oo4
21.00 *
10-*540-646-6* nmeemw 6810
�
|^ - ------
*** Cma
-
'
277H19 '_ __ 26 ��A�� ED LUMBER
'^ ry ns
—4.T6_62 HARMON CLASS CONTRACTED RE
277H3P 09/26/88 45.00 HEDGES—DIANA PROF SERVICES
2.72H32 09/27/88 142_AQ�__ HEDGES—DIANA CRAFT SUPPLIE
3 _fI
-4248-s6*-56 159510 66e4
10-4e01-627-6e
v**-owa
87
7`�
�.
��
�
pl Copp""
pop
1988 CITY OF EDINA
CHECK NO. DATE
277H34 09/22/88
277H34 09/27/88
«« «k««
277H63
277H85
277H85
277H85
277H85
« «Ak «M«
277341
« « « « ««
277J74
s
CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 15
--AMOUNT-- _ _ -. -_ VENDOR_ ITEM DESCRIPTION__ - ___ACCOUNT NO. 0 P.O. 8 MESSAGE
z I.
37.50 HENN COUNTY TREAS. RUBBISH REMOVAL 10- 4250 - 644 -64 13381
27,223.12 HENN COUNTY TREAS. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 10- 4922 - 506 -50
7rZSG 6�� (2 CHECKS) n
�A
- - - -- - - s« *-CKS
09/26/88
174.50
HOFFERS
INC
174.50 s
- --
09/27/88
35.00
HUMPHREY
RADIATOR
09/26/88
35.00
HUMPHREY
RADIATOR
09/27/88
40.00
HUMPHREY
RADIATOR
09/27/88
35.00
HUMPHREY
RADIATOR
-
- 145.00
-
10- 4540 - 560 -56
09/27/88
351.18
JIM HATCH
SALES
10 -4540- 560 -56
351.18 +
_44*9_
24638
6236
09/26/88 _ 252.00 JUSTUS LUMBER
252.00
PAINT
10- 4544- 642 -64 65592
6892
- --
-- - - --
« «« -CKS •
«or-_CKS
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
7035
�I
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
6752
��
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
7007
='
REPAIR
PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
7026
_44*9_
24638
6236
*** -C KS
TOOLS
10- 4580 - 301 -30 8657
6931
ZrI
'
"I
09/27/88
- - --
- -- -- - -
**o-CKS
I
GENERAL
SUPPLY - -- - -
10 -4504- 314 -30 48961
-- -
6659
-
371
« « +a: «q=
- --
-- - - --
« «« -CKS •
c -»vor.
277K05
,
ec nn
,i K
S SS
R P•A I
PART6
110 49 - -54
5798;
��
v9"270's v
09/22/88
o
582.00
a
K & K
c
SALES
REPAIR
PARTS
540
- 40 -4540- 801 -80
_44*9_
24638
6236
7-8. ' -3 -
582.00 *
'
277KO6
09/27/88
200.13
K & K
DOOR SYSTEMS
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 540 -54
57981
6999
.1
«s• -CKS ;'i
200.13 *
-
- - - - --
--
-
277K09
09/27/88
14.61
KAMAN
BEARING &
SPLY
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
648809
6953
277K09
09/26/88
10.42
KAMAN
BEARING A
SPLY
REPAIR
PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
647686
6542
-I
277K09
09/22/88
20.42
KAMAN
BEARING d
SPLY
REPAIR
PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
647347
6542
-33
277K09
09/22/88
148.22
KAMAN
BEARING &
SPLY
REPAIR
PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
646774
6797
277K09
09/26/88
_ 70.49
-KAMAN
BEARING &
SPLY
REPAIR
PARTS
40- 4540 - 803 -80
647941
6750
-�
277K09
09/27/88
19.38
KAMAN
BEARING &
SPLY
REPAIR
PARTS
40 -4540- 803 -80
648333
6857
'nl
283.54 s
«k # « ««
« «s -CKS
277K35
09/27/88
22.64
KNOX _LUMBER
CO.
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
628059
6955
r,
_ 6',
277K35
09/27/88
93.50
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10 -4504- 646 -64
627778
6876
277K35
09/22/88
72.29
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 646 -64
593603
5188
,
277K35
09/27/88
130.49
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 520 -52
627994
277K35
09/27/88
26.40
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
REPAIR
PARTS
10 -4540- 520 -52
629821
6964
277K35
09/27/88
100.52
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 540 -54
642793
6218
277K35
09/26/88
_ 179.16
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
TOOLS
_
10- 4580 - 301 -30
630018
6681
277K35
09/27/88
147.12
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
LUMBER
10- 4604- 646 -64
642637
7037
_
277K35
09/26/88
33.86
KNOX
LUMBER CO.
PAINT
27 -4544- 662 -66
627885
6967
m
277L28 -
-- _09/26/88
37_19
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
_GENERAL_
SUPPLY
10- 4504_- 322 - 30.6914
6664
1988
OF EDINA
130.83
CHECK STER
PRODUCTS
GENERAL
10 -03 -8,
4GE 16
996913
6417
CHECK
NO_ DATE - -
AMOUNT -__ -_-
_ - -- .VENDOR __ -
ITEM_DESCR.tP-T-10N
ACCOUNT _NO. - _INV. _N P.O. Y
MESSAGE
t�
�.
277K35
09/27/88
80.86
KNOX LUMBER CO.
PAINT
27-4544- 664-66
627807
7052
'3
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 325 -30
277135
09/26/88
40.48 -
-- KNOX LUMBER CO.
GENERAL SUPPLIES_------
.__40- 4504.- 803-80
627745
6871
.4
SUPPLY
10- 4504 - 646 -64
6911
6559
927.32 s
277L28
09/26/88
130.50
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
'
SUPPLY
v
6912
6662
,'I
_277L28
09/.26/8S_
8.0 -80
LAWSON-
PRODUCTS_
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10- 4504_ -6 646 -_64
6205_
6554
'!
277L28
09/26/88
204.32
sss -CKS el
PRODUCTS
vl
277K63
09/27/88
86.26
KUSTOM ELECTRONICS
LEASE PMT
10-4901- 420 -42
09/26/88
294.28
0,
PRODUCTS
REPAIR
PARTS
10-4540- 560 -56
4186
6560
277L28 -
-- 09/26/68 - -_
__- 294.72_-
_LAWSON
PRODUCTS
♦, ",
sasaas
10- 4540 - 560 -56
5598
6615
i
277L28
09/22/88
433.24
*o*-CKS 14
PRODUCTS
PARTS
10-4620- 560 -56
996910
6414
277L28
09/27/88
358.01
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
PARTS
277L02
09/27/88
45.00
LABOR RELATIONS ASN.
FEES
10- 4206 - 140 -14
277L28
09.127/88
17
LAWSON-PRODUCTS
PARTS
45.00
�`'
--
277L28
09/22/68
288.53
LAWSON
saasas
PARTS
10- 4620- 560 -56
996911
6415
%0
277L28
sss -CKS 21
418.16
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
REPAIR
PARTS
40-4540- 803 -80
996912
6416
22
23
�
277L04._
_09/26/88
253..-10_
- LAHASS_CORPORATION
_CONTRACTED_ REPAIRS
10 -4248- 560 - 56_000811.6804
_ X24
277L04
09/26/88
270.00
LAHASS CORPORATION
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10- 4248- 560 -56
000786
6935
123
�.
277L04
09/26/88
286.20
LAHASS CORPORATION
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10 -4248- 560 -56
000897
6946
26
27-*
f,z
277L04
- - -. -- 09/26/88
- -- 94..60_
_LAHASS CORPORATION _
CONTRACTED REeAI_R_S
10-4248- 560 -56-
_000895
6948
1-,
277L04
09/26/88
275.20
LAHASS CORPORATION
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540- 560 -56
000822
6732
v
277L04
09/26/88
286.61
LAHASS CORPORATION
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
000892
6883
277L04
_ _09/26/88
_.- 94..00
LAHASS_CORPORATION__ _PARTS
10-4620- 560 -56
00_0823
6805
32r
277L04
09/22/88
4,874.00
--
LAHASS CORPORATION
___ _
EQUIP REPLACEMENT
10- 4901- 305 -30
000794
6349
33
*4.
6,433.71 s
-
-
------
- - - - --
- --
--
-
311
- -'
ss «sss
« «« -CKS
277L06.
09/27/_88-
87"0
LAKE_RESTORATION
SERVICES
10- 4201- 358_ -30
1173
4.1%
i i
277L06
09/27/88
870.00-
LAKE RESTORATION
SERVICES
10-4201- 358 -35
1173
4
%w
277L06
09/27/88
870.00
LAKE RESTORATION
SERVICES
10- 4201- 358 -35
1173
42
43
�1 I f1
b'`i
•assss
sss -CKS 47
277L18
09/22/88
17.85
LANCE
CONCESSIONS
27- 4624- 663 -66
7276 -7
3752
4P)
�r
17.85
I "i
sssaaa
sss -CKS i13
m
277L28 -
-- _09/26/88
37_19
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
_GENERAL_
SUPPLY
10- 4504_- 322 - 30.6914
6664
277L28
09/22/88
130.83
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 -322 -30
996913
6417
fir,
277L28
09/26/88
202.82
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10-4504- 325 -30
6913
6663
277L28 -
- 09/22/88
478. -16
- LAWSON
PRODUCTS- __- ____
- -_ GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 325 -30
996909
6378
277L28
09/26/88
156.42
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10- 4504 - 646 -64
6911
6559
r
277L28
09/26/88
130.50
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10-4504 - 646 -64
6912
6662
,'I
_277L28
09/.26/8S_
8.0 -80
LAWSON-
PRODUCTS_
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10- 4504_ -6 646 -_64
6205_
6554
'!
277L28
09/26/88
204.32
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
REPAIR
PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
6915
6671
%01"
277L28
09/26/88
294.28
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
REPAIR
PARTS
10-4540- 560 -56
4186
6560
277L28 -
-- 09/26/68 - -_
__- 294.72_-
_LAWSON
PRODUCTS
REPAIR
PARTS_ -.__
10- 4540 - 560 -56
5598
6615
i
277L28
09/22/88
433.24
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
PARTS
10-4620- 560 -56
996910
6414
277L28
09/27/88
358.01
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
PARTS
10 -4620- 560 -56
011638
6757
277L28
09.127/88
384_71
LAWSON-PRODUCTS
PARTS
10 -4620- 560 - 56_011640_6759
�`'
--
277L28
09/22/68
288.53
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
PARTS
10- 4620- 560 -56
996911
6415
%0
277L28
09/22/88
418.16
LAWSON
PRODUCTS
REPAIR
PARTS
40-4540- 803 -80
996912
6416
m
1988 CITY
OF EDINA
REGISTER
10 -03 -88
PAGE 17
I�
' CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
,CHECK
_ __ VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION___ -_
-ACCOUNT NO. INV.
4 P.O.
R MESSAGE
277L28
09/27/88
159.37
LAWSON PRODUCTS
REPAIR PARTS
40-4540- 803 -80
011639
6758
;L
4,052.06
_
^
srx:xs
*ss —CKS
?
.
277L30
09/26/88
4,190.00
LAYNE MINNESOTA
CO.
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 801 -80
16193
277L30
09/27/88
3,300.00
LAYNE MINNESOTA
CO.
REPAIR PARTS
40-4540 - 801 -80
16194
7005
„
7,490.00
saca+�
sys —CKS
"
277L38
09/27/88
4,160.00
LEITNER COMPANY
SOD & BLACK DIRT
27 -4562- 664 -66
o
+"I
4,160.00
s
s•• —CKS
21l
277L60
09/26/88 _
_ 2,569.44
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
10-4233- 160 -16
�+
277L60
09/26/88
1,737.02
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
10-4233- 200 -20
277L60
09/26/88
3,444.96
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
10-4233- 420 -42
27
277L60
09/26/88
1,287.20
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
40 -4233- 800 -80
277L60
09/26/88
201.76
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
50- 4233 - 820 -82
z'
277L60
09/26/88
201.77
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING
50- 4233- 840 -84
311
277L60
09/26/88 -
201.77
LOGIS
DATA PROCESSING__ _
50- 4233- 860 -86
—
9,643.92
•
s* x:e:x:►
— —
—
*ss —CKS
277L82
09/22/88
13.63
LYNDALE HARDWARE
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30- 4504 - 782 -78
210681
*I
13.63
•. __
sa x:x:x
sss —CKS
^'
277M02
09/26/88
23.36
MAC QUEEN EQUIP
INC.
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
87147
6808
277MO2
09/222/88
84.89
MAC QUEEN EQUIP
INC.
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
86679
6537
i
277M02
09/22/88
75.93
MAC QUEEN EQUIP
INC._
REPAIR PARTS _ _ _
_ 10 -4540- 560 -56
86665
6508
277M02
09/26/88
116.97
MAC QUEEN EQUIP
INC.
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
87071
6755
;^
301.15
•
sss —CKS
^'
277M12
09/26/88
_ 62.53
MATHISON CO.
COST OF COMMODITIES
23- 4624 - 613 -61
93674
6518
277M12
09/26/88
2.64
MATHISON CO.
COST OF COMMODITIES
23 -4624- 613 -61
93351
6516
+
65.17
#
277M13
09/26/88
1,950.00
MATT BULLOCK CONST
SAND GRAVEL 3 ROCK
27- 4522 - 664 -66
6627
1,950.00
«
277M14
09/22/88
50.00
MAUMA
DUES 6 SUBSCRIPTIONS
10- 4204 - 140 -14
50.00
e
*** —CKS
277M17
09/27/88 ._
80.00.
_ _- MCDOWELL— MARGARET
ART INSTRUCTOR — -- - -
23 -4201- 611 -61
- - -- -. -
—
:�
80.00
80.00
«
I
*:r.xsro
ass —CKS
�~
' -
/pon ^ o
or sozwA '
'
�(
-
CHECK ..NO.. o
o«rs___-
�
�
�
-
urrmee vy/ee/oo
arrmee ov/ce/oo
nosux .o7sm
moouIns «uro uoppLY
nonozns Aoro ooppL,
nnnozms AUTO noppLr
�_ -------------
S91.29 mcwcILoo arssL
20e.45 muwcILoo orcsL
_--7o3-7*--�--__'__-_________
' vo-oa-oL AGE vn
ITEM -usnoo xcuuuwr NO. INV. w P.O. # mcneAos
nsp»In pAnro - _- 10-4540-560-56
TOOLS 10-*580-560-56 "|
PARTS 10-46e0-560-56
---
|."
*** mwo
oomroAurso ocp«Inu 10-*5e8-31*-30 *oea* aaao
asp«In pxoTo 10-*540-s60-56 *oeo* aaay /^
..,
..'
r`r
e77n27 oo/eo/oo 365.00 mcnIr ouppL, oswsn«L auppLIcn 10-*so4-301-30 19922 6802 ------''-sl
errmar oo/ar/no 158.00 msnzr ouppL, osmsnxL yuppLIcu 10-*so4-301-30 20011 aosr
errmar-__oo/eo/au so.00--__---.mcn IT- SUPPLY
277m27 on/cr/oo *ns.vo MERIT aoppLr pxero �� 1o�4���
� �
�ao-s� uod�� -ano7---'-------'-
crrmcr oo/aa/nn *ys.vo wsnIr auppLr pxnro 10-*6e0-s6
277M27______ _ oy/ea�oo�-_----______aoz�oomso�z oopp�r_--��__--nLcxwIwo-nuPpLY.--_____-a7-*s1e-ao ^''
arrmar oy/ea/ao *4e.50 msnIr ooppL, oswsnAL ouppLIsa en-*so4-zoe-ro 19999 �698*-�-----�-----��
277m27 vp/ee/oo 478.1s MERIT uoprLr oswsnxL auppLIsn 30-450*-78e-78 e0010 ayys
---_-_-�-_---__ - ~� -__---_ __6 ------------'|�=| errwur _on/zr/oo-_ �'mcn�I_nopp��--_-_''ucwsnx��u�p�Jc8� 30-4504-782-78 20042 ?o55
ycrrmer oy/ea/oa 496-40 MERIT oorpL, osmsnAL ywppLIco 30-4504-782-78 1996e
|
%~ s'rcs.ss * ~
./
^~ �/
errmao__-__-oy/er 3 smLI a KnA MEV--_-_-__AMBKL ANC E
' errman oy/ar/on 150 .00 nsoosmLz a xnxmsm AnmoL»mcs
*� sno. oo *
�
*=***
-277m31 o.00---__-_MsIRV-F»wE- ._---_---_�sNE R � L -�VPpLI ES__
277M31 oy/zz/nn `45.80 msrno pnms COMM GENERAL nsmsmxL soppLIsn
277m31 oo/ea/nn 25.90 nsTno pnms COMM. GENERAL ooppLzsn
!
�
. � e77m35 oy,ea/oa tyl.ruy.y« nsrnn WASTE oowTmnL osusm nsnvIns
191.7e9.94 * �
] ****** ^
� -er7moy____-vnxe7/.8n y. MID
* A --
��-�---
co�oo
*w 1
277n4e vy/aa/oo 4.*51.10 nzowsar xnp**LT oom. mIac
'--
� ' ^
-
!7 �'1777TTTMT_Rwillm-
`
ua
40-4504-801-80 282073
40-4SO4-801-80 281415
40-4312-812-80 5894
10-4574-440-44 003454 6774
10-4201-647-64 1742
lb
%~ s'rcs.ss * ~
./
^~ �/
errmao__-__-oy/er 3 smLI a KnA MEV--_-_-__AMBKL ANC E
' errman oy/ar/on 150 .00 nsoosmLz a xnxmsm AnmoL»mcs
*� sno. oo *
�
*=***
-277m31 o.00---__-_MsIRV-F»wE- ._---_---_�sNE R � L -�VPpLI ES__
277M31 oy/zz/nn `45.80 msrno pnms COMM GENERAL nsmsmxL soppLIsn
277m31 oo/ea/nn 25.90 nsTno pnms COMM. GENERAL ooppLzsn
!
�
. � e77m35 oy,ea/oa tyl.ruy.y« nsrnn WASTE oowTmnL osusm nsnvIns
191.7e9.94 * �
] ****** ^
� -er7moy____-vnxe7/.8n y. MID
* A --
��-�---
co�oo
*w 1
277n4e vy/aa/oo 4.*51.10 nzowsar xnp**LT oom. mIac
'--
� ' ^
-
!7 �'1777TTTMT_Rwillm-
`
ua
40-4504-801-80 282073
40-4SO4-801-80 281415
40-4312-812-80 5894
10-4574-440-44 003454 6774
10-4201-647-64 1742
lb
-
!7 �'1777TTTMT_Rwillm-
`
ua
40-4504-801-80 282073
40-4SO4-801-80 281415
40-4312-812-80 5894
10-4574-440-44 003454 6774
10-4201-647-64 1742
lb
lb
1988 CITY OF EDINA CHECK REGISTER 10 -03 -88 PAGE 19
- -
CHECK NO. DATE AMOUNT _ VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION-_ -___.- ___ACCOUNT NO. INV. • P.O. 11 MESSAGE __ y
2 •
277M44 09/27/88 120.48 MIDWEST CHEM SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 440 -44 22655 °
120.48
*** -CKS aI
277M57 09/27/88 2,141.30 MILLER- DUNWIDDIE MISC 25- 4946 - 520 -52 8041
2, 1 41 .30
* ** -CKS °
277M68 09/27/88 213.36 MN. CELLULAR TEL. DUES 10- 4204- 140 -14 "I
277M68 09/27/88 3.66 MN. CELLULAR TEL. TELEPHONE 10- 4226- 420 -42
217.02
21
* ** —CKS ;.%
277M73 09/22/88 88.00 MN. ELEVATOR SERVICE CONTRACT 30=4288- 781 -78 080433 '
88.00
**4—CKS r'
1314
277M76 09/27/88 111.24 MN. GLOVE GENERAL SUPPLIES 10-4504-560-56 24591 7020
277M76 09/26/88 123.93 MN. GLOVE GENERAL SUPPLIES 10- 4504 - 560 -56 24112 6760
235.17 * "�
* ** -CKS
277M80 09/22/8'8 140.76 MN. SUBURBAN NEWS ADVERTISING- _ 10- 4210 - 140 -14 ____
277M80 09/27/88 76.32 MN. SUBURBAN NEWS ADVERTISING 30- 4214 - 781 -78 53212 °'
217.08
277M81 09/26/88 77.91 MN. TORO INC. REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 725799 6765 °I
277M81 09/27/88 926.66 MN. TORO INC. EQUIP REPLACEMENT 10- 4901 - 305 -30 727371 6764
277MSI 09/27/88 _ __..926.67 _ MN. TORO INC.. EQUIP REPLACEMENT _ 10- 4901 - 650 -64 727371 6764
277MBI 09/22/88 117.00 MN. TORO INC. REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 725744 6784
277M81 09/27/88 254.22 MN. TORO INC. REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 727287 6910 ry,k
277MBI 09/27/88 __. 926.67 MN. TORO INC. EQUIP REPLACEMENT- __-__-_ 40- 4901 - 800 -80 727371 6764
3,229.13
. * «r. « ** ** *-CKS •c
277M85 09/26/88 17.50 MN. WANNER CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 560 -56 070389
277M85 09/26/88 7.50 MN. WANNER GENERAL SUPPLIES _ 10- 4504 - 301 -30 070430
277M85 09/26/88 76.50 MN. WANNER REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 070282
277MSS 09/26/88 286.44 MN. WANNER REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 070301
387.94- + - - - -- - - - ,,
* ** -CKS .t
277M93 09/27/88 176.40 MOTOROLA EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 420 -42 777619
277M93 09/27/88 313.50 MOTOROLA EQUIP MAINT 10- 4274 - 420 -42 777620
277M93 09/27/88 _ 50.00_ ____ MOTOROLA _ _ GENERAL SUPPLY ___ _10 -4504- 420 -42 - 772472 —
539.90 * - - -- - - - -- , -,
277M94 09/27/88 _ _ ____.— _7.800..12.__ .. .__ ._ -_ MINNEAPOLIS FINANCE DEPT. _WATER - _ _ .__ .40- 4640 - 803 -80 - * ** —_CKS
7,800.12
_ L
1988 OF EDINA CHECK ASTER 10 -03 -8, AGE 20
CHECK NO.- DATE . - ------- _AMOUNT- _ ___ ____ _ _.._. VENDOR ITEM DESCRIPTION_ ACCOUNT_,NO._INV. M P.O. N MESSAGE J
ZI
277NO3 09/22/88 480.00 MPLS SEWER & WATER CONTRACTED REPAIRS 40 -4248- 801 -80 20666 6936
277NO3 09/22/88 510.00 MPLS SEWER 3 WATER CONTRACTED REPAIRS_. _ -.40 -4248- 801 -80 20666 6936
27:7N93 009/270,88 7,900.1-1 mP'-s Cr11r0 8_ WATER WAXER 40-4640-807-80 e
e 3 i 0--i a 990.00 * a
10
1I
277N07 09!22/88 - - - -.- 325.00__ _. MTS NW SOUND GENERAL SUPPLY ._ __ -- 30- 4504 - 781 -78 69517
277N07 09/22/88 189.37 MTS NW SOUND GENERAL SUPPLIES 30 -4504- 782 -78 69522 f3
277N07 09/27/88 26.28 MTS NW SOUND OFFICE SUPPLIES 30 -4516- 781 -78 69626 14
- -- - - -- - -- 540_._65 # - - -- - -- - - 8I
I- - -- - - - - - -• 1
» » » » »» » »» -CKS 17
I;9
I
277N13 09/27/88 40.23 MUZAK ADVERTISING 50- 4214 - 822 -82 508810
2 1
277N13 09/27/88 40.23 MUZAK ADVERTISING 50- 4214 - 862 -86 508810 zz
80_ 4b + - -- 241
z3
* ** -CKS 27
277N22 09/27/88 1.06 NATL GUARDIAN SYS. ALARM SERVICE 50 -4304- 821 -82
1.06 + -,
_ 1
* ** -CKS -J
3,
277N31 - 09/22/88 _1.63__1_0 -_ - NEBCO _D_I- STRIBUTING___CO.NCESS_ IONS_ 28 -4624- 703 -70 45047_4505- ___ -_ - -- 39
I` 163.10 + 37
39
+++ -CKS o
277N33 09/27/88 127.00 NELSON RADIO COMM REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 14962 7086 �43
277N33 - -_ __ 01/_26/88- 160_._00 — NELS_ON_RAOI-O COMM -_ R_EPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 14945 6952 44
287.00 + - - - - -- '40,
46
l -� 47
» »+ -CKS 4n
I. 49
277N56 09/27/88 66.03 NORTHERN POWER PROD. REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 560 -56 231960 6956 �1
- - - -- 6.6_ Q 3-+ - - -- - - -- ez
14 »a »a »» +» »-CKS 541
I„ - --
277N72 09/26/88 1,427.84 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO TIRES 10 -4616- 560 -56 'J
277N72 09/27/88 793.98 NORTHWESTERN TIRE CO TIRES 10- 4616- 560 -56 'n
- -- Ie3
21- E21._82 r_ Fc
16 l
» » »» »» * ** -CKS jez
Ie4,
277017 09/22/88 48.00 OFFICE PRODUCTS SERVICE CONTRACTS 10- 4288 - 510 -51 059172 6050 183
277017 09/22/88 262.00 OFFICE PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 30- 4504 - 781 -78 059353 la;
- -- - -.3.1 O...O.Q!— - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -- -- - -- - - -- 9n
* ** -CKS 17 ] 1
A 1
277024 09/27/88 38.00 OFFSET PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES 10 -4504- 430 -42 29319
74
"I 277024 09/27/88 227.70 OFFSET PRINTING PRINTING 10- 4600 - 420 -42 29288 75 I�
1988 CaiY
OF EDINA
_CHECK REGISTER
10 -03 -88
PAGE 21
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION ______
ACCOUNT NO. INV.
N P.O.
8
MESSAGE
_.
265.70 s
z
sss-CKS
277027
09/222/88
11100.00
OLD DOMINION BRUSH
BROOMS
10- 4534 - 310 -30
50986
6601
e
1 , 1 00.00
--
e
'n
aas -CKS
277P18
09/27/88
280.83
PAULSON
ART WORK SOLD
23- 3625- 000 -00
277P18
09/27/88
217.02 _.
- PAULSON -
PROF SERVI -CES
23- 41- 20- 61— 3 -61
497.85 «
—
- - - - —
-- --
,e
#a »-CKS
2277P24
2277P24
09/26/88
09/26/88
63.29
PBE
REPAIR PARTS
10 -4540- 560 -56
371523
6699
z.'I
- _ -71.50
_ _- PBE -
REPAIR PARTS.
10 -4540- 560 -56
371486
6699
,21
134.79 s
-
za
2,
z•
sss-CKS
zol
277P40
09/26/88
13.67
PHOTO FAST
ADVERTISING
23- 4214 - 611 -61
35912
Zv
''
13.67 s
1 31
a277P11
I
277P11
PARK NICOLLET MED CENTER
aaa-CKS
277P-42
09/222/88
102.00
P HYoaIGIANS "GALT-81
PERSONNEL --
10- 4212 - 510 -51
»I
102.00 s
30
-
- -
—
as »-CKS
— <'I
277P44
09/27/88
84.50
PHYSIO CONTROL
FIRST AID SUPPLY
10- 4510 - 440 -44
A29627
'?
84.50
- -
rsRS ».r
ass -CKS
,-,I
277P48
09/227/88
17.60
PIP PRINTING
PRINTING
30 -4600- 781 -78
3443
277P48
09/27/88
222.40
PIP PRINTING
PRINTING
30- 4600 - 781 -78
3478
277P48
09/27/88
72.05
PIP PRINTING
_
PRINTING
30- 4600 - 781 -78
3468
e.l
112.05 s
ea
-
t•
sas -CKS
277P54
09/26/88
11.50-
PLANT 6 FLANGED EQU
REPAIR PARTS
5202
6866
aaa
***-
!,
277P56
09/22/88
187.50
PLASTIC BAGMART
GENERAL SUPPLY
10- 4504- 507 -50
3369
6582
e
187.50 s
sasnsa
ssa -CKS
277P64
09/27/88
- 85.00
POMMER CO. INC.
MISC - - -- --
—10- 1139 - 000 -00
015592
6991
--
?I
85.00 s
'
1988 C OF EDINA CHECK , 3TER 10 -03 -86 GE 22
1
CHECK -.NO. -DATE AMOUNT VENDOR --1 TEN_DESOR_IP-T19N ACCOUNT NO. INV. 8 P.0_M MESSAGE
I •, 2
�. 277R 0
277R2
�. 277R2
�- 277R2
�. 277R2
I-
277R2
277R2
277R2
i
rr # ##
I "I
�.. 277R31
II
i
277R3
y 277R3
_277R3
v
277R3
277R3
277R3
277R3
I '
277R3
� n
�.I 277R3
i
_I 277R4
277R4
1 09/22/88 106.20 R 6 R SPECIALTIES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 28 -4248- 702 -70 9649 6909
- 1 0 fi_2
r rrr -CKS 10
1 09/22/88 180.95 RED WING SHOES LAUNDRY — 10- 4262- 301 -30 134817 5027 13
1 09/22/88 98.55 RED WING SHOES LAUNDRY 10- 4262 - 646 -64 134817 5027 ;4
- -- - -- -- - - - -- 279 - 50- « - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - --
ii
2 09/22/88 350.00 REM SUPPLIES EQUIP REPLACEMENT 10 -4901- 600 -60 ;o
-- ------ 350- .00 - --
3 09/27/88 76.30 REEDS SALES E SERV REPAIR PARTS 27- 4540 - 664 -66 185355 6639 22
7.6 -._3 0 + 27
24
25
+ rr #-CKS 226
- -- I
2e
5 09/22/88 28.80 RENTAL EQUIP S SALES CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 644 -64 9582
5 09/27/88 116.70 RENTAL EQUIP 6 SALES TOOLS 10- 4580 - 440 -44 9504 7079 30
5 .___09/26/_88 1_40_._09 RENTAL EQUIP 3_ SALES GENERAL SUPPLY 26- 4504 - 682 -68 9705 6861
285.50 +
34
r 35
rrr -CKS 36
09/26/88 25.84 RETAIL DATA SYS MN GENERAL SUPPLIES 50- 4504- 842 -84 2934 30
25.84 • 30
40
Al
# rr #-CKS 42
43
3 09/26/88 3,124.25 REX DISTR. INVENTORY 50 -4630- 822 -82 45
3 09/26/88 5,995.27 REX DISTR. INVENTORY 50- 4630- 842 -84 40
3 0.9/_251_88 4_382.70 REX DISTR. INVENTORY 50- 4630 - 862 -86 47
ae
13,502.22 + 40
50
# - - -- rrr- i,
53
5 09/22/88 11.75 RICHFIELD PLUMB d CO REPAIR PARTS 30- 4504 - 781 -78 4660 6513 '4
es
5 09/22/89__ — 11.75 — _RICHFIELD_PLUMB 6 CO SUPPLIES. 30-4504- 781 -78 4660 __6513 _ ee
5 09/22/88 11.75- RICHFIELD PLUMB 3 CO REPAIR PARTS 30 -4504- 781 -78 4660 6513
5 09/22/88 11.75- RICHFIELD PLUMB b CO REPAIR PARTS 30-4540- 781 -78 4660 6513
5 _09/22/88 11- 75.-___ RICHF_ IELD .- P_LUMB- 6- CO.- __- _- _REPAI -R- _PART$ 30- 4540 - 781 -78 4660 6513___ eo
11.75 + - - -- fit
e2
6?'
- - -- - — - -- -- -- rrr -CKS 64
es
7 09/26/88 50.00 RIDDLE CONTROL PROD. REPAIR PARTS 10 -4540- 540 -54 880905 6;•
rrr- KS 70
C „.
3 09/27/88 215.22 RLTEWAY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540- 560 -56 147368 7024 73
3 09/26/88 159.15 RITEWAY REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 146333 7016 75
- 6
� J
� J
1988 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
10 -03 -88
PAGE 23
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION___ - - -__
ACCOUNT NO. INV. N P.O.
A
MESSAGE
"
277R43
09/26/88
33.00-
RITEWAY
CREDIT
10 -4540- 560 -56
127202
277R43
09/26/88
295.14
RITEWAY
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -S6
143500
6622
,
636.51 #
F
» #» -CKS
mi
2
:77R49
0'
09/22/88
81.00
ROAD RESCUE
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
080343
6798
81.00 •
u�
# »» -CKS
14
277R79
09/22/88
-- - -
18.75
-
RTW INC.
INSURANCE
10- 4260 - 510 -51
- - --
18.75 «
,n i
# ## -CKS
zi
277R81
09/222/8$_
_ 240.61 - _ -_
_RUBENSTEIN__& ZIFF
COST_OF_COMMODITIES
23 -4624- 613 -61
116678
6988
240.61 «
- --
- -
#s e� #:►
# #» -CKS_
;�)
277803
09/226/88
33.33
S.T. ROBB
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 646 -64
47744
6692
3, 1,
277S03
09/227/88 _
- -_ 14.46
-S.T. ROBB
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 646 -64
47839
6869
r.
277S03
09/27/88
56.56
S.T. ROBB
_
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 647 -64
47927
7025
104.35 »
# »# -CKS
277S09
09/27/88
196.11
_ SCHAFER EQUIP CO
GENERAL
10 -4504- 314 -30
141971
7003
277509
09/26/88
63.90
SCHAFER EQUIP CO
TOOLS
10- 4580 - 646 -64
141784
6870
260.01 *
4.-
4
277510
09/27/88
31.50
SCHLOSSER
ART WORK SOLD
23- 3625 - 000 -00
31.50 #
+4r
--
— - -- -
»»» -CKS
-
277SIS
09/27/88
57.98
SEARS
TOOLS
10-4580- 440 -44
485071
57.98 #
,,
to
:.1
» »» -CKS
-• �
277S19
09/27/88
133.94
SEELYE PLASTICS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
40- 4504 - 801 -80
122422
6826
fib
277519
09/22/88
127.00
SEELYE PLASTICS
GENERAL SUPPLIES _
40 -4504- 803 -80
120399
6599
277S19
09/26/88
62.56
SEELYE PLASTICS
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 801 -80
121196
6614
•
277S19
09/22/88
589.49
SEELYE PLASTICS
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 803 -80
120614
6614
e
277519
09/22/88_ _
114.44 _
..__SEELYE PLASTICS
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 803 -80
119900
6533
4i
1,027.43 »
- - - -- --
-- -
277S20
09/26/88
2.56-
SEIDEL- ROXANNE
PROF SERVICES _,__..
30- 4201 - 781 -78
277S20
09/26/88
2.56
SEIDEL - ROXANNE
-..
PROF SERVICES
30- 4201 - 781 -78
277S20
09/26/88
256.00
SEIDEL - ROXANNE
PROF SERVICES
30- 4201- 781 -78
256.00 »
''
s» #sex
ss• -CKS
'' ..
77 ' ' --
-
1988 L O
OF EDINA C
CHECK STER 1
10-03-8, AGE 24
~
+�
cxscx N
oxTs' -__-Amoumc__
�--ACCOVN_
277o27 o
oy/uo/on 7
78.92 o
oxsnuIw WILLIAMS p
pAzm7 _
__ v
vo-*so4-343-3o y
ysoos »
»anw _
/^
urrazr o
ov/e»/on 7
78 .92 n
nxsnuIw WILLIAMS P
PAINT 1
10-45*4-3*3-30 y
ysoos 6
_ /
277n27 o
oy/ea/nn 7
78.92- n
nosnwIw WILLIAMS P
PAINT 1
10-4544-343-30 p
psnus a
aoo«
==-~
! |
***-oue
|"
277v3* o
-- ------- -
-'-- -- -
000ron��s rono n
nspxzw p
-----------'--- -
- - -
- -' -
- --�- ,
,"(
^.
277o34 o
op/ac/on 7
77.55 a
anorxoxLs pnno m
mspxzm p
p»m7n 1
10-4540-560-s6 1
184881 =
=
277"34
/
/c ^2 v
vvv/vv*LE rnno n
nspx�n p
p�mr V
V��s*0�� � �
277S34 0
09/22/88 7
76.26 S
SOUTHDALE FORD R
REPAIR P
PARTS 1
10-4540-560—S
186710
^~
c''v^y o
ov/cc/vu n
n.m/ m
mnoronALs ronn n
nsp«zn p
pAmrn 1
10-4540-560-s6 )
)osoae
,
-___ _-_-__ -
-- - 0-560-56
' -
277R34 0
09/22/88 4
48.19 S
SOUTHDALE FORD R
REPAIR P
PARTS 1
10-4540-560-56 1
1848.
`.
277v34 o
o,/cc,00 5
52.78 n
nnorxoxLs pnno m
mspxIm p
pAm7n 1
10-4540-560-s6 1
186815 |
|~'
- P
-|
! 2
277S34 0
09/27/88 /
//.as n
noorooALc__rnno R
REPAIR -
PARTS 1
10-*~^~-5^^--`'^~^^^~-- -
`.� 2
277S34 o
on/zz/no e
e*o.ys a
anorwnxLc pnmn m
mspazm p
pmnTn 1
10-4s40-560-56 ,
,nsoyo /
/"u
� 2
2,,^3* v
vv/c�/oo �
�y_____-_nvv/nna�s p
pnnn
pAnre
277s3* o
op/er/nn s
s
��----'-�-'------
`.� c
c''u^y v
vv/*c/ov 2
23.85 o
onorwo*Ls pomn m
mspxIm p
pxmTn v
vo-«soo-soo-sa v
vmss/c '
'~
.' e
e77s34 __'- o
oy/ez/an_--_'---_---_-^'n.«y_--____-'noorx D
DAL s- FORD _---_-REPAIR -
-�«w7 1
10-4540-560-56 1
185357
j.3 -
zrrss
* 0
09/27 /88 2
22 .38 n
nnuT*nALs rnno n
nspazn p
pAn7n v
vo os«n sao sa i
ioroo2----�---'--------a�
- �
^ =
=,,",° "
"v,c«,00 5
53.90 x
xvo/nu^LE rvwu w
wepxIn r
rxmrn 1
10-4S40-560-56 1
186708 '
'-
277S34 '
''' ^-' -~ ^
^~ -' ~
~~~'^~~^^ ^~~~
Ic
277^39 v
v,/c/,00 9
93.83 x
x/nAmI-nzCwxsL A
AnnumIrInw v
v
�
cma
'
ur �
�
`~
131.36
'
er /uy� o
ovrc'/ow z
zo n s
sr pmu� ouuw
o
osmsn«L S
SUPPLIES 1
10-4SO4-420-42 8
847966
^.
277a4s 0
09/27/88 8
8.45 S
ST. PAUL BOOK G
GENERAL S
SUPPLIES 1
10-4SO4-440-44 8
889313
277S45 0
09 /26/88 6
6. P
PAUL BOOK G
GENERAL S
SUPPLIES
�
847029
277S45 o
o �
� 1
�~ c
cna*s 0
09/27/88 1
10.44 S
ST. PAUL BOOK O
OFFICE S
SUPPLIES 1
10-4516-440-44 8
889118
erro*s _-'
'
277S45 v
vn/ee
-
--�-'-- -
-- -'- -'' -' -
-''- ^
670
o
oy/aa/no *
*s.,a S
Sr. PAUL on -
OFFICE S
SUPPLIES -
-- -�' '�� -� -
--'�-- -
-'-' a
arzo�s-____o n
_ -
- O
OFFICE S
SUPPLIES 2
27-4SI6-661-66 8
819282
|
urro�s o
_
o�9s S
ST. PAUL
ouou o
orrIos w
wuppLIsa 2
27-*sI6-661-66 -
-8473
�~ �
ao *
[�~
277os+ on/ue/oo 137.77 orwo o 7RIouws AovsnTI-J aI
233.61 *
_- ---- �_.�, -� 1.0 'lljlvfjfr�
_
~~_'.`,,. in '
M" M1147MMIMMIMMMMM �||~
°
=
'
1988 CITY
OF EDINA
CHECK REGISTER
10 -03 -88
PAGE 25
`
CHECK NO.
DATE
AMOUNT
VENDOR
ITEM DESCRIPTION___ -___
- ACCOUNT_NO.- _INV. -# P.O.
N
MESSAGE
,1
f
* ** —CKS
nI
4
277S67
09/22/88
6,083.34
STORE FRONT
SERVICES
10 -4201- 504 -50
1123
°
6,083.34_*
'I
^I
* ** —CKS
277S72
09/27/88
75.00
STREICHERS
GENERAL SUPPLY
10- 4504 - 430 -42
M53330
"�
1"
'
277572
09/27/88
15.90
STRETCHERS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 470 -47
M53121
277572
09/27/8$ _ -. -.._
- -_ _ 26.45
STREICHERS- -
GENERAL_SUPPLIES _
10- 4504- 470 -47
M52645
-- - - - - --
_
1 17
.35
e�
I,Q
* ** -CKS
"
277577
09/27/88
100.00
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10 -4248- 560 -56
68948
;;I*
277577
09/27/88 _
753.60
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
4449
7006
277.S7"7
09/26/88
22.80
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10-4248 - 560 -56
68012
277S77
09/22/88
3,366.83
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
CONTRACTED REPAIRS
10- 4248 - 560 -56
4320
6677
277577
09/27/88
_ _- 65.13
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540- SGO -56
69374
zo
277577
09/26/88
17.88
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
94160
'.
`
277577
09/27/88
61.72
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
95379
'
X31
277577
09/26/88 -
13.29 _
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS____ _ _
10 -4540- 560 -56
94283
3z
277577
09/26/88
6.12
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 560 -56
67799
"
277S77
09/26/88
3.16
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540 - 560 -56
94234
4,410.53
IJ I
277578
09/22/88
53.04
SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP
GENERAL SUPPLIES
26- 4504- 682 -68
344225
6528
'-`
277578
09/22/88
__ _ 142.87 _
_SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP
GENERAL SUPPLIES_
26- 4504 - 6_82 -68
351495
6678
_ .I
277578
09/26/88
109.93
SUBURBAN PLUMB SUP
GENERAL SUPPLY
40- 4504 - 801 -80
354602
6827
"
305.84 *
„I
as * *+c*
*a* -CKS
"I
277585
09/27/88
14.40
SUPERIOR PLASTICS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
40- 4504 - 801 -80
19384
6666
277585
09/22/88
362.71
SUPERIOR PLASTICS
GENERAL SUPPLIES
40- 4504 - 803 -80
19039
6666
`
277S8S
09/22/88
455.20
SUPERIOR PLASTICS
REPAIR PARTS
40- 4540 - 805 -80
18810
6418
,I
832.31
** *-CKS
'
277592
09/22/88
30.23
SYSTEM SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 440 -44
090564
7047
30.23
a *gas*
aaa -CKS
277596
09/27/88
80.00 _______-
_- SCHUENEMAN -AMY _
SERVICES__
27- 4201- 662 -16
0816
80.00
aar * **
aaa -CKS
277TO1
09/27/88
8.94
TANDY CONSUMER SERV.
REPAIR PARTS
10- 4540 - 520 -52
35637
6889
-
-- -- - 8.94 *
- -
--
-.
aaaaa*
**I-CKS
;
1988 L OF EDINA CHECK STER
CHECK NO.—DATE---- AMOUNT --VENDOR----
2771
2771
2771
2777
7
2777
2777
277T
2777
2777
2777
277T
2777
277T
2777
2777
2777
I 2777
277T
2777
2777
277U
10-03-SE iGE 26
11 TT
1; 1
!3
os
09/27/88
5.75.
TAYSTEE BAKING
CO.
CONCESSIONS.
5.75
7
***-CKS a
07
09/27/88
116.72
TEAM MARKETING
GENERAL SUPPLIES
30-4504-783-78
894
1.0
111
16-72
12
3
08
09/22/88
39.90
TARGET
OFFICE SUPPLIES
27-4516-661-66
34__9_0
***-CKS
11
09/22/88
770.00
TESSMAN SEED &
CHEM.
GENERAL SUPPLY
10-4504-301-30
146174
6438
121
11
09/27/88
11062-00
TESSMAN SEED &
CHEM.
GENERAL SUPPLY
10-4504-302-30
146801
6737
22, 231
�
11 ------09/22/88
300-0.0
TESSMAN-SEED &-CHEM.--REPAIR-PARTS
10-4540-520-52
146174
6438
24
11
09/22/88
300.00
TESSMAN SEED &
CHEM.
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540-640-54
146174
6438
21
11
09/27/88
94.18
TESSMAN SEED &
CHEM.
CHEMICALS
30-4564-782-78
148270
705I
26 27
11 - ----09/22/88
400-0.0-
TESSMAN--SEED- &
-CHEM---GENERAL—SUFY-
80
146174
6438----
2.
2,926.18
— ------- --
*oo-CKS
1
3 j
3 �.
3-1
35
14 09/27/88 321.12 TEXGAS CORP. GENERAL SUPPLIES 10-4504-301-30 6742
14
09/27/88.---321-..12------TEXGAS
-CORP.--
GENERAL_ -SUPPL I Es-
0- 50 - 4-31 4-30
6744__
14
09/27/88
219.19
TEXGAS CORP.
GENERAL SUPPLIES
10-4504-314-30
6743
-3
-31701
861.43
39
4.
***-CKS
41
42
20
.09/22/88---
537_00
T_HE_PRINT SHOP
--------PRINTING
23-4600-611-61
7615
6700
43
537.00
144
45
46
p* ----
***-CKS
4 ,
48
40
09/22/88
91.26
TOLL COMPANY
WELDING SUPPLIES
10-4610-560-56
221367
-4D
6499
51,
40
09/26/88--
—7.3.-01--TOLL
COMPANY,----
---WELDING-
SUPPLIES
10- 4610 - 560 - 56.434616
6951
2
40
09/27/88
21.94
TOLL COMPANY
TOOLS
27-4580-664-66
033076
-5
7043
63
40
09/22/88
58.14
TOLL COMPANY
GENERAL SUPPLIES
40-4504-803-80
032165
6795
55 4
mm
�57
***-CKS 51) so
42
09/26/88
216.83
TOOLS BY OLSEN
TOOLS
40-4580-801-80
12987
6676 61
42
09/27/88
13.50
TOOLS BY OLSEN
TOOLS
40-4580-801-80
13313
6756 62 03
230.33 •
64
65
t.
66
***-CKS 67�
50
09/26/88
37.74
TOWN & COUNTRY
DODGE
REPAIR PARTS
10-4540-560-56
40162
6930
37.74
es
7
mmm -CKS 7
7
08----09/122
/s
19.8_..65 a..65
UNIFDRI"-NL-LMITED—ON-I-F-QR-M--ALL
WANCE
30-4262-782-78
12470
7 7 1
11 TT
s4.
1988 CITY
OF EDINA
277W08 09/26/88
CHECK REGISTER
277W11 09/22/88_
10 -03 -88
PAGE 27
CHECK-NO.-DATE
" 277V43
AMOUNL_
VEND_OR—
DESCRIPTION
VEHICLE.- _- _._
ACCOUNT NO. INV. # Pt 0. #
PARTS
277V43
09/27/88
,MESSAGE
VERSATILE
VEHICLE
REPAIR
______ _ITEM
277V43
09/26/88
2250.00
198.65
+
LEASE
LINE
277V43_ -___
__09/- 2.7_/_8.8
196__31
3
VEHICLE
REPAIR
- ----------
- - - - -- ----
--- - - - - -- - -- - - - -
-- ----
- -- - --
- ------ - - - - --
- -- -" - -- -
- - - ' - - -14
+ ++ -CKS 3
'e
-1
7
- _277U1.4._
_09_/2.6/SS_
t5346
UNITED- ELECTRIC CORP
REPAIR
PARTS
40- 4540 - 802 -80
797186 6890
l-
153.46
+
011
'
II
+ ++ -CKS
13
277U25
09/27/88
187.50
UNIVERSAL MED SERV
FIRST
AID SUPPLY
10- 4510 - 440 -44
000565
,3
187
+
_50
+++–CKS
I,o
277VIS
09/22/88
387.30
VAN PAPER CO.
PAPER
SUPPLIES
10- 4514 - 520 -52
222974 6971
'zl
C'.
387.30
+
23 •
- -
++ » » »»
- -- -
- --
2
+++ -CKS 4I
2e•
n
".
277V35
_09/27/88
58.00_
_VAUGHNS_DUP.__ -___- _.___CABLE
TV
10- 2-149- 000 - 00_035418
2a
277V35
09/27/88
9.50
VAUGHNS OUP
CABLE
TV
10 -2149- 000 -00
36095
t."
67.50
198.36
19A_36 +
470.36
470.36 •
VOSS ELECTRIC SUP
GENERAL SUPPLY
10- 4540- 66S -66
10- 4540 - 665 -66
27- 4276- 665 -66 2115 6997
07– Aran– RRr -66
10 -4504- 630 -62 238843
U.U. GRAINGER CONTRACTED REPAIRS 28- 4248- 702 -70 204242 6905
+ ++ -CKS 3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
++ +-CKS 4
4
4
I;
13
+++ –CKS 1
_- 399..60__.__ ____W .—GORDON, SMITH -_ -__ GASOLI_NE_ _ 27- 4612 - 664 -66_ 1893 - 5636___.
399.60 + - -
ri 277W21 09/27/88 132.12 WARNER INC SUPPLY
�I
`is',�
11
- -- — —1 32 -.t 2
277W25 WASTE MANAGEMENT - SEE 277580
277441 09/27/88 345.32 WEST PHOTO
345.32 +
TOOLS
+++ -CKS
10- 4580 - 301 -30 327201 6944
+ ++ -CKS
PHOTO SUPPLY 10- 4508 - 420 -42 10351 6976
9 r
67 1
e3
ea
�as
X69 ,
57
— Be
69
1701 4
71
7
7
77 4 2
73
,
7
G 277V80 09/22/88
277W08 09/26/88
277W11 09/22/88_
�I
" 277V43
09/27/88__—
196.31-
_ VERSATILE
VEHICLE.- _- _._
-_- REPAIR
PARTS
277V43
09/27/88
196.31
VERSATILE
VEHICLE
REPAIR
PARTS
277V43
09/26/88
2250.00
VERSATILE
VEHICLE
LEASE
LINE
277V43_ -___
__09/- 2.7_/_8.8
196__31
VERSATILE
VEHICLE
REPAIR
PARTS
446.31 +
198.36
19A_36 +
470.36
470.36 •
VOSS ELECTRIC SUP
GENERAL SUPPLY
10- 4540- 66S -66
10- 4540 - 665 -66
27- 4276- 665 -66 2115 6997
07– Aran– RRr -66
10 -4504- 630 -62 238843
U.U. GRAINGER CONTRACTED REPAIRS 28- 4248- 702 -70 204242 6905
+ ++ -CKS 3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
++ +-CKS 4
4
4
I;
13
+++ –CKS 1
_- 399..60__.__ ____W .—GORDON, SMITH -_ -__ GASOLI_NE_ _ 27- 4612 - 664 -66_ 1893 - 5636___.
399.60 + - -
ri 277W21 09/27/88 132.12 WARNER INC SUPPLY
�I
`is',�
11
- -- — —1 32 -.t 2
277W25 WASTE MANAGEMENT - SEE 277580
277441 09/27/88 345.32 WEST PHOTO
345.32 +
TOOLS
+++ -CKS
10- 4580 - 301 -30 327201 6944
+ ++ -CKS
PHOTO SUPPLY 10- 4508 - 420 -42 10351 6976
9 r
67 1
e3
ea
�as
X69 ,
57
— Be
69
1701 4
71
7
7
77 4 2
73
,
7
G 277V80 09/22/88
277W08 09/26/88
277W11 09/22/88_
�I
198.36
19A_36 +
470.36
470.36 •
VOSS ELECTRIC SUP
GENERAL SUPPLY
10- 4540- 66S -66
10- 4540 - 665 -66
27- 4276- 665 -66 2115 6997
07– Aran– RRr -66
10 -4504- 630 -62 238843
U.U. GRAINGER CONTRACTED REPAIRS 28- 4248- 702 -70 204242 6905
+ ++ -CKS 3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
++ +-CKS 4
4
4
I;
13
+++ –CKS 1
_- 399..60__.__ ____W .—GORDON, SMITH -_ -__ GASOLI_NE_ _ 27- 4612 - 664 -66_ 1893 - 5636___.
399.60 + - -
ri 277W21 09/27/88 132.12 WARNER INC SUPPLY
�I
`is',�
11
- -- — —1 32 -.t 2
277W25 WASTE MANAGEMENT - SEE 277580
277441 09/27/88 345.32 WEST PHOTO
345.32 +
TOOLS
+++ -CKS
10- 4580 - 301 -30 327201 6944
+ ++ -CKS
PHOTO SUPPLY 10- 4508 - 420 -42 10351 6976
9 r
67 1
e3
ea
�as
X69 ,
57
— Be
69
1701 4
71
7
7
77 4 2
73
,
7
1988 OF EDINA
CHECK NO._DATE AMOUNT_
L 277W63 09/27/88
I,.
» » » » »*
277W66
09/27/88
I' 277W44
09/27/88
277W66 --
_- 277W44 - --
09/22/88
7
277W44
09/26/88
277W44
09/27/88
277W44
09/27/88
L 277W63 09/27/88
I,.
» » » » »*
277W66
09/27/88
277W66
09/27/88
277W66 --
-- 09/26/88
277W66
09/26/88
277W66
09/27/88
277W66 .__
- 09/27/88
277W66
09/27/88
CHECK .STER 10 -03 -8. AGE 28
.VENDOR-.---. _ _ITEM__DESCRIPT -1Q_N ACCOUNT NO. INV. N-_P_O. _# MESSAGE__
-
WILLIAMS
STEEL
18.65
WILLIAMS
STEEL
- -
- --
_STEEL. -
* ** -CKS
76.85
WEST
WELD
SUPPLY
CO.
WELDING
SUPPLIES
10 -4610- 560 -56
74872
6873
80__85
WEST-WELD-SUPPLY-CO.-----WELDING
48_..0.0!
TOTAL
GOLF COURSE FUND
SUPPLIES
10 =4610- 560 -56
74634.
100.34
WEST
WELD
SUPPLY
CO.
WELDING
SUPPLY
10- 4610 - 560 -56
--
73401
-6557_
6413
49.97
WEST
WELD
SUPPLY
CO.
WELDING
SUPPLY
10 -4610- 560 -56
74879
6873
65.01 - .__
_ -WEST
-WELD
SUPPLY
CO.__
.- WELDING
- SUP_FL_ES_._
-- .1_0._461.0.- 560 - 56_7.4269
-
_7019_
373.02 *
-- -
116.25 WIDERSTROM -ANN ART WORK SOLD
149.20
WILLIAMS
STEEL
18.65
WILLIAMS
STEEL
— 6...86
—_- WILLIAMS
_STEEL. -
20.54
WILLIAMS
STEEL
99.12
WILLIAMS
STEEL
..11.54_
WILLIAMS__STEEL__
21.00
61.57
WILLIAMS
STEEL
367.48 *
48_..0.0!
TOTAL
277W71 --- _0.9./_27L8.8 1 .136_50
1,136.50 r
277W81
09/22/88
9.00
WM
H MCCOY
277W81.___09/22/88
SUPPLIES
9_._00
WM_H__MCCOY
_
277W81
09/22/88
9.00
WM
H MCCOY
277W81.
09/22/88
21.00
WM
H MCCOY
9,214.75
- - -
48_..0.0!
TOTAL
GOLF COURSE FUND
GENERAL SUPPLY
GENERAL SUPPLY
____REPAIR-P_IRTS-
PARTS
TOOLS
TOOLS
TOOLS
23- 3625- 000 -00
10 -4504- 560 -56 138721
10- 4504 - 646 -64 139890
10- 4540 -540- 54_132587__
10- 4620- 560 -56 136899
40- 4580 - 801 -80 139254
40- 4580 - 801 -80 140012
40- 4580 - 801 -80 140012
10 -4201- 627 -62
GENERAL
SUPPLY
10- 4504- 314 -30
125953
6735
GENERAL_
SUPPLIES
10- 45_04_- 3_14 -30
127301
6672
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 314 -30
125101
4560
GENERAL
SUPPLIES
10- 4504 - 314 -30
124851
6509
277W84 09/22/88 665.00 WM H ZIEGLER CO INC CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10- 4248- 314 -30 363701 6815
277W84 09/27/88 694.70 WM H ZIEGLER CO INC CONTRACTED REPAIRS 10- 4248 - 314 -30 430501 6885
277W84 09/27/88____ ____185.03 _______WM H__ZIEGLER CO INC REPAIR PARTS 10- 4540 - 560 -56 C28963 6884
`i
1,544.73
* - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- — -- - - -- - -- --
135,250.67
FUND
10
TOTAL
GENERAL FUND
4,760.11
FUND
23
TOTAL
ART CENTER
—2,317,07 -----FUND
25
TOTAL___
CAPITAL FUND
1,316.29
FUND
26
TOTAL
SWIMMING POOL FUND
9,214.75
FUND
27
TOTAL
GOLF COURSE FUND
53_u266_15
FUND.-28—TOTAL—
RECREATION CENTER
352.05
FUND
29
TOTAL
GUN RANGE FUND
6,233.90
FUND
30
TOTAL
EDINBOROUGH PARK
rr•
* ** -CKS
rrr-
i' 12
3
a
e
v
,o
I"
,z
, 3
14
n
I' °�
,
7
I, e
21
22
24
z4
2s
e
2e 3x
3,
3
3.3
35
136
37
36
3 9
40
4,
3,
'ez
* *• -CKS s4
se
3E
* ** -CKS
mm
1988 CITY OF EDINA
�I
CHECK REGISTER
10 -03 -88 PAGE 29
k" _CHECK.NO.__- DATE__.___ -_ AMOUNT_ -__
— __VENDDR_ -_ . ITEM__DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT NO_ INV.
Y P.O. Y MESSAGE
I
t-243,178.54 e42,698.54
FUND 40 TOTAL UTILITY FUND
'
3
15,765.28
FUND 50 TOTAL LIQUOR_DISPENSARY- FUND__ _ _ _
I4
471,654.81
TOTAL
3
'
e
1,
1
10
1
- — - - - - - - -- — -------
-- --- '- ---- -- - - - - -- - '- -- --
J
15I
16I
- -- - - -
- _- - - -- - -' --- - - - ---
-- '-- --- ---- -- -- ---
-- 17
20 lei
to
�•
-
- - - - --- •
21
122
23
24I
25
2B
27
�20
x
31,
3
C
IJJ
34
37
36�-i
J,I40
141
a2
4344,
_ -_1'
145
1
' -- ---- —-
40
47 1
4el
- - -- — —
aD
50,
61
1
52I
I53/
56
150
• 150
161
62 1
eJ
6a
l65
�66,
6]
_
69
O
72.
lo 7
.
73
7
54
1