Loading...
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